« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
(quam ipse (Deus] & statuit, & principaliter efficit) non quidem dependentià caus alitatis utpote avzımios sed dependentiâ quadam relationis, uti Patrem à filio dependere, ut sit Pater, nemo sanis, opinor, negaverit. Nec obstat quod sequitur. Ipse nam Deus determinavit se hoc sic facturum, & homines ad finem (prout novit justitiam, misericordiam & sapientiam suam decere) dispositurum.
THESIS III. Hinc multo minus ex prævisâ fide ; hæc enim medium est ad fruitionem Dei qui finis est : idcirco non antecedit intentionem finis ut conditio.
ANNOTATIONES. 1. Aliud est “ Prævisa fides," & " ex eâ” : aliud “ Præscientia fidei,” & “ secundum eam.” (1 Pet. i, 2.) Fides nam est "actus officii nostri:” Præscientia “ actus perfectionis Divinæ.” « Ex” causam, “ Secundum" ordinem notat.
“ Ex præscita fide, tanquam causâ, dependere Dei intentionem finis seu præmii nostri,” negamus; “ fieri SECUNDUM præscientiam,” cum sanctá scriptura affirmamus.
2. Finis hic, scilicet ad Deum unio fruitioque, (cum perfecti. onum divinarum, viz. misericordiæ glorificatricis pariter et glo. riosæ, reliquarumque manifestatione plenissima conjunctus) intelligitur vel ut finis ex consilio voluntatis nude consideratas, de quo hîc non quæritur ; vel quasi judicialiter, et politice, ut præmium et merces ex beneplacito Dei miserentis, mero, libero, absoluto, et independente, omnesque causas secundas antegrediente manans, et certis legibus promissa; at ex Dei veracitate et constantia, legum seu conditionum harum observatoribus præstanda. Hoc modo recte, secundum s. scripturam, Voluntatis et Consilii Divini declaratricem, affirmatur, fidem etiam in Dei intentione (præscitam, nondum præstitam) præmii et mercedis adeplionem antecedere.
TRANSLATION. pally effects,"—not by a dependence of causality, because it is “ without cause," but by a certain dependence of relation : Thus, I am of opinion, no rational person will deny, that a Father depends on his Son in order to his being a Father. Nor does the inference (at the close of the Thesis) injure this position : For God has determined, that he will in this manner perform this act, and that he will dispose man to sthe accomplishment of the same end, accordiug to the knowledge which he possesses respecting what is most suitable to his own Justice, Mercy and Wisdom.
THESIS III. “ Hence, much less is it from faith foreseen ; for this is a means to the enjoyment of God, who is the End: Therefore the end, as a cundition, does not precede the intention.”
ANNOTATIONS. 1. “ Faith FORESEEN" and "from faith foreseen," is one thing : “ The FOREKNOWLEDGE of faith," and “ according to that foreknowledge,” is another. (1 Peter i, 2.) For FairU is an act of our duty; PRESCIENCE or Fore. knowledge is an act of Divine Perfection. “ From faith foreseen" marks the CAUSE ; *. According to faith foreseea” marks the ORDER. We deay, that God's intention of the end or of our reward depends UPON faith foreseen, as upon the cause ; but we afirm, with the sacred scriptures, that it is formed ACCORDING TO the Divine Prescience or Foreknowledge.
2. This end, (union with God and the fruition of him) when joined with the fullest manifestation of the Divine Perfections,-that is, of his mercy which glorifies and is at the same time rendered glorious, and of his other TRANSLATION. perfections,-this end, when thus conjoined, is understood, (1.) either as the End nakedly considered through the counsel of his will, about which end there is no question in this place; Or, somewhat in a judicial and prlitical sense, as a reward and recompence emanating from the mere, free, absolute and independent good-pleasure of a merciful God, which is antecedent to all second causes : This reward is promised by certain laws; but, through the veracity and constancy of God, it will be conferred on those [only] who observe these laws or conditions. In this manner according to the Sacred Scripture, which is the declaration of the Divine Will and Counsel, it is rightly affirmed, that, “ even in God's intention, faith precedes the obtaining of the recompence and reward;" for it is foreseen, though not then performed.
3. Notandum authorem sibi non satis constare in fine Dei intentionis assignando, quem interdum scipsum respicere intendentem, interdum hominem intentum indicat.
THESIS IV. Via ad finem istum exhibita homini fuit in statu primavo, quo viribus instruebatur idoneis, quibus Deo, si voluisset, potuit frui. Verum quia finitus, ideo mutabilis, et quia mutabilis, seducente diabolo descivit a statu illo : unde summi boni interrupta est adeptio. Iis tamen quos ad finem istum destinarat, ex misericordia reconciliari voluit Deus ; ita tamen ut simul justitia maneret illæsa : quare offensa satisfacere oportuit prius, quam in conditionem justitiæ restaurari. Quia vero hoc a nobis, quippe “ nullarum virium,” (Rom. v, 6,) effici non potuit: aut per alium effici oportuit, aut de reconciliatione nostra actum. Hoc autem quia perficere non debuit alius nisi homo, nec sufficere potuit nisi Deus : hinc Christus θεανθρωπος meiliator designatus ; qui redemptionem a peccatis virtute satisfactionis, et restaurationem virtute justitiæ procurans, reconciliationem impetravit iis quibus voluit Deus.
3. It is worthy of remark, that the author is not sufficiently consistent with himself in assigning the end of God's intention ; for be sometimes intimates, that the end has respect to himself as the person intending, and, at other times, that it has respect to man as the objeci intended.
THESIS IV. “ The way to this end was shewn to map in his primeval condition, by which he was furnished with such suitable strength or power as rendered him capable of enjoying God, if such had been bis own choice. But since man was a finite being, he was also mutable; and on account of this mutability, when he was seduced by the devil, he declined from that state: Aud thus arose an interruption in his obtaining the Chief Good. But it was the will of God to be reconciled through mercy to those whom he bad destined to this end ; yet in such a manner as not to suffer his justice to sustain any injury. Wherefore it was then necessary to render satisfaction for the offence, before man could be restored to a condition of righteousness. But since this satisTRANSLATION. faction could not be effected by us, because “ we were without strength," (Rom. v, 6.) it must either have been effected by another, or there was an end of our reconciliation. But because no one except A MAN ought to effect this, and because none but God could be sufficient for this, CHRIST, who was both God and man, was appointed Mediator. After this Mediator had procured redemption from sins by virtue of bis satisfaction, and restoration by virtue of his righteousness, he obtained reconciliatiou for those on whom it was the will of God to bestow it."
ANNOTATIONES. 1. Cavendum est, ne prima Theseos hujus verba temerè deglutiamus. Viam nam ad finem istum, Dei fruitionem (omni modo consideratum, scilicet ut fruitio etiam Christi Mediatoris existentis, et Judicis, Remuneratorisque futuri, ex misericordiâ, justitiâ temperata, includatur) non fuisse, homini in statu primævo exhibitam, nec in isto statu, viribus ad Deo, hoc modo considerato, fruendum hominem instructum fuisse, fidenter asserimus. Quod est Authoris nostri Newtoy fevdos.
2. Ut facile largiar (quod tamen vix quivis capit) “ hominem primævum ideo mutabilem quia finitum (quamvis finitum et mutabilem fuisse procul sit omni dubio) summique boni adeptionem ex ista suâ voluntariâ defectione, seducente diabolo, interruptam fuisse ;” non sic tamen, ut Christus, Mediator Judexque noster, sub istâ Summi Boni consideratione veniat: ne (ut cætera infi
ANNOTATIONS. We must beware not to receive the first words of this Thesis with too much rashness. We contidently assert, that “the way to this end was not exhibited to man in his primeval state,”-that is, the way was not shewn to the enjoyment of God, considered in every respect so as to include the enjoyment of Christ who then existed as Mediator, and who was afterwards to be the Judge and the Rewarder, through the Divine Mercy and Justice which were attempered together. We also assert,“ in that staie man was not furuished with strength or power to enjoy Ged considered in the manner which we have just described." -This is the first of our author's falsehoods.
2. I am ready to grant, what scarcely any one will comprehend, that the first man was therefore a mutable being because a finite one." (hough it is placed beyond all doubt, that he was both finite and mutable,) and that “ his obtaiving of the Chief Good was interrupied through this his own voluntary defection, and the seduction of the devil." Yet this coucession must be made so as not to let Christ our Mediator and Judge come into the consideration of this Chief Good; lest (omitting the mention of other infinite inconveniences,) 4. I consider the rest of the expressions concerning the satisfaction of Christ to be sound, with the exception of some toward the close which are involved in obscurity. Thus, the last phrase requires some animadversion : It states, that “ Christ obtained reconciliation for those on whom it was the
nita incommoda taceam) Christus noster in Adamo primævo,
per eos quos ad finem istum destinarat Deus," intelligi vult “absolutâ et precisa salvandi, seu ad summum finem perducendi, intentione destinatos,” non video ut seipsum sibi in eadem oratione reconciliet. Mox nam subjungit, “ iis ex misericordia reconciliari voluit Deus,” &c. † Sed cave, mi Parkere, ne ejusmodi absoluta ad finem istum destinatio reconciliationi dictæ repugnet, et universam Christi satisfactionis necessitatem, vel etiam utilitatem funditus evertat et aboleat. Quos nam ad finem istum destinarat (intellige absolute) Deus, iis certe jampridem erat reconciliatus, absque hoc, ut Christi interventu fieret satisfactio, et inde manans reconciliatio. Non insto ne asperior paulo videar.
Cætera de satisfactione, sana existimo, nisi quod quædam in fine sint obscura, et phrasis ultima “reconciliationem impetravit (Christus) iis, quibus voluit Deus” animadvertenda. Quid
† En Sublapsarium! Vide quæ ad Thes. 10 de “ suprapositis fundamentis” notari.
TRANSLATION. Christ our Lord, after being reckoned in Adam while he retained his primitive state of innocency, should afterwards fall with us in him, and connect himself with original sin, or should be accounted guilty of it by God tbe Father. The satisfaction which Christ rendered to Divine Justice, and all onr salvation, must in this case be necessarily involved in one common destruction. That Christ made such satisfaction, it is impossible for any one to deny without a breach of his own principles, except he be a person who believes all God's intentions to be absolute.
3. If by the phrase "those whom he had destined to this end,” our author wishes us to understand “ those who are destined by an absolute and precise intention, to be saved or to be conducted to this Chief End,"—I do not percrive in what manner he can reconcile himself to himself in the very same sentence. For he immediately suhjoins, “ It was the will of God to be reconciled through mercy to those," &c.t But, my Parker, stand on your guard, lest such an absolute destination should be contradictory to the reconciliation which had been previously mentioned, and should entirely subvert and destroy the universal necessity of Christ's satisfaction, or even its utility. For, undoubtedly God had long before been reconciled to those whom he had absolutely "destined to this end," without any satisfaction being made by the intervention of Christ, or without any of that reconciliation which enanates from it.—But I do not pursue these arguments, lest I should seem to manifest too much severity.
Beholl here a Sub-lapsarian! I refer the reader to my annɔtations on the tenth Thesis, concoming " the founlations which are placed above."
nam pro quibus voluit Deus ut impetraret? Pro lapsis et perditis omnibus ? Non opinor dicturum te cum s. scripturis. Pro Reprobis ? Nequaquam. Pro Electis ergo? Fieri non posse, aut esse superfluum videri potest, si absolute et præcise ad finem summum a Deo prius destinentur, quam in Christum ponantur credituri, imo quam Christus satisfecisse, aut in satisfactionis pretium destinari dicatur.
THESIS V. Hinc quotquot reconciliandi fuerant, propter Christi merita reconciliari oportuit: proinde ut applicetur reconciliatio, merita Christi applicanda prius. Applicandi vero homini cum sint qua intellectu ac voluntate prædilo, propterea ut ab ipso (SCAL., ex. 307, sect. xxvii, lin. 2,) recipienda, applicanda sunt. Hinc fædus Dei cum electis emergit, se recipientibus Christum reconciliatum iri. Conditio a parte Dei, reconciliatio est, in qua tamen debitor non nobis est Deus, sed sibi, qui seipsum negare non potest. Ea etiam finis ipse hominis est, non quidem quoad rem alius a fruitione Dei; relatione solum distinctus interruptionis pravia. Conditio vero a parte nostra est Christi receptio: conditio autem non ut ab homine dispensatore actus hujus, sed ut in homine quid ad reconciliationem prærequisitum.
TRANSLATION. will of God to bestow it."-For whom then was it the will of God to obtain this reconciliation ?-Was it for all those who had fallen and destroyed themselves? I do not think, that you will speak thus, with the holy scriptures.-Was it for the Reprobate ? By no means.-Was it then for the Elect? It was impossible for this to be done; or it may seem to be superfluous, if God absolutely and precisely destined the elect to the Chief End before they were considered as afterwards believing in Christ, and even before Christ is said to have rendered satisfaction, or to be destined for the price of satisfaction.
THESIS V. “ Hence, as many as had to be reconciled, must have been reconciled on account of the merits of Christ: Therefore the merits of Christ must be first applied in order to the application of the reconciliation. But since they are to be applied to man in reference to his being endo ned with an understanding and will, they must therefore be applied as to be received by him. (SCALIG. Exer. 307. $ 27. lin. 2.) Hence arises God's covenant with the Elect, who betake theinselves to Christ for the purpose of being reconciled. Ou God's part the condition is, reconciliation ; yet in it God is not a debtor to us but to himself, since he caunot deny bimself: That (reconciliation) also is the end of man, not differing as to substance from the enjoyment of God; it is distinguished from it, solely in relation to the previous interruption. But on our part the condition is, the reception of Christ; yet this is a condition not as if From man the dispenser of this act, but as being in man a certain pre. requisite to reconciliation."