love and therefore if you averre that to have been capable of farther intension you averre that the habituall grace of Christ was capable of farther intension and thus you see what the reason was that induced me to charge you with this opinion Doctor HAMMOND 6. First I said it not in those words which he undertakes to refute These are p. 258. of his Book thus set down by him This point may serve for confutation of a passage in Dr. H. against Mr. C. to wit That Christs love of God was capable of farther degrees 7. These words I never said nor indeed are they to be found in the Passage which he sets down from me and whereon he grounds them which saith he is this Dr. H. p. 222. In the next place he passeth to the inforcement of my argument from what we read concerning Christ himselfe that he was more intense in Prayer at one time than another when yet the lower degree was sure no sin and prepares to make answer to it viz. That Christ was above the Law and did more than the Law required but men fall short by many degrees of what is required But sure this answer is nothing to the matter now in hand for the evidencing of which that example of Christ was brought by me viz. That sincere Love is capable of degrees This was first shewed in severall men and in the same man at severall times in the severall rankes of Angells and at last in Christ himselfe more ardent in one act of Prayer than in another 8. Here the Reader finds not the words Christs love of God is capable of further degrees and when by deduction he endeavours to conclude them from these words his conclusion falls short in one word viz. further and 't is but this That the example of Christ will never prove D. H. his conclusion unlesse it inferre that Christs love of God was capable of degrees 9. This is but a slight charge indeed yet may be worthy to be taken notice of in the entrance though the principall weight of my answer be not laid on it and suggest this seasonable advertisement that he which undertakes to refute any saying of another must oblige himselfe to an exact recitall of it to a word and syllable Otherwise he may himselfe become the only Author of the Proposition which he refutes 10. The difference is no more than by the addition of the word further But that addition may possibly beget in the Readers understanding a very considerable difference 11. For this Proposition Christs love of God was capable of further degrees is readily interpretable to this dangerous sense that Christs love of God was not full but so farre imperfect as to be capable of some further degrees than yet it had And thus sure the Author I have now before me acknowledges to have understood the words and accordingly proposeth to refute them from the consideration of the all-fulnesse of habituall grace in Christ which he could not do unlesse he deemed them a prejudice to it 12. But those other words which though he finds not in my papers he yet not illogically inferres from them that Christs love of God was capable of degrees more intense at one time than at another are not so liable to be thus interpreted but only import that Christs love of God had in its latitude or amplitude severall degrees one differing from another See magis minus all of them comprehended in that all-full perfect love of God which was alwaies in Christ so full and so perfect as not to want and so not to be capable of further degrees 13. The Matter is cleare The degrees of which Christs love of God is capable are by me thus exprest that his love was more intense at one time than at another but still the higher of those degrees of intensnesse was as truly acknowledged to be in Christs love at some time viz. in his agonie as the lower was at another and so all the degrees which are supposed to be mentioned of his love are also supposed and expresly affirmed to have been in him at some time or other whereas a supposed capacity of further degrees seemes at least and so is resolved by that Author to inferre that these degrees were not in Christ the direct contradictorie to the former Proposition and so that they were wanting in him and the but seeming asserting of that want is justly censured as prejudiciall to Christs fulnesse Here then was one misadventure in his proceeding JEANES 1. He that saith that Christs love of God was more intense in his agonie than before affirmeth that his love of God before his agonie was capable of farther degrees than yet it had but you affirme the former and therefore I doe you no wrong to impute the latter unto you The premises virtually containe the conclusion and therefore he that holds the premises maintaineth the conclusion I shall readily hearken to your seasonable advertisement that he which undertakes to refute any saying of anothers must oblige himselfe to an exact recitall of it to a word and syllable but notwithstanding it I shall assume the libertie to charge you with the consequences of your words and if I cannot make good my charge the shame will light on me 2. If there were any mistake in supplying the word farther it was a mistake of charity for I was so charitable as to thinke that you spake pertinently to the matter you had in hand I conceived that your scope in your treatise of will-worship was to prove that there be uncommanded degrees of the love of God that those large inclusive words thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart with all thy soule c. do not command the highest and most intense degree of the love of God so that a man may fulfill this command and yet there may be roome or place for farther and higher degrees of the love of God Now this proposition Christs love of God was capable of degrees which you confesse to be not illogically inferred from your papers will never reach this point unlesse you understand the word farther and therefore your censure of my supplying the word farther as a misadventure in my proceeding is groundlesse Dr HAMMOND 14. But this is but the proemial part of my Reply there is a more materiall part of it still behind which may yet seeme necessary to be added viz. to mind him of what he well knowes the distinction between habits and acts of vertues or graces and that love the Genus y doth equally comprehend both these species and that his discourse of all-fulnesse belonging to the habituall grace of Christ I speake distinctly of another matter viz. of the degreess of that grace discernable in the severall acts of it JEANES The distinction between the habits and acts of virtues or graces I very well know but that love as a genus doth equally comprehend the habit and act of love is a
ardent as fervent as is according to Gods ordinary power possible unto the humane nature doth necessarily belong to the heaven happinesse of men The Scotists place the very formality of happinesse solely herein and Suarez with others think it essentiall unto happinesse though he supposeth the essence of happinesse not to consist wholly or chiefly in it And for the rest of the Thomists who hold that the essence of happinesse stands onely in the beatificall vision of God why even they make this actuall most intense love of God a naturall and necessary consequent of the beatifique vision By this that hath been said it is evident that whereas you averre that the inward acts of Christs love of God were lesse intense at one time than another for so you affirme in saying they were more intense at one time than at another you deny Christ to be happy and blessed at those times wherein his inward acts of love were thus lesse intense and that this is propositio malè sonans harshly sounding in the eares of Christians that are jealous of their redeemers honour will I hope be ingeniously confessed by your selfe upon a review of it Adde hereunto that the Schoolemen generally consent as unto a proposition that is piously credible that the happinesse of Christs soule did even during the whole time of his abode here farre surmount that of all the Saints and Angells in heaven but if the inward acts of his love of God were lesse intense at one time than another the blisse of his Soule would have come farre short of that of the lowest Saint in heaven for the actuall love of the lowest Saint was not is not more intense at one time than another but alwaies full and perfect and therefore uncapable of further and higher degrees The third and last argument is fetched from Christs impeccability it was impossible for Christ to sinne but if the inward acts of his love of God had been lesse intense at one time than at another he had sinned for he had broken that first and great commandment thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart with all thy Soule with all thy mind with all thy might and strength Deut. 6.5 Matth. 22.37 Mark 12.30 Luk. 10.27 For this commandment enjoyneth the most intense actuall love of God that is possible an actuall love of him tanto nixu conatu quanto fieri potest i. e. as much as may be what better and more probable glosse can we put on that clause thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy strength or might 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then thou shalt love him with thy uttermost force and endeavour sutable hereunto is that interpretation which Aquinas giveth of those words thou shalt love the Lord with all thy heart i. e. saith he ex toto posse tuo with as high a degree of actuall love as thou art able to reach unto Deus est totaliter diligendus potest intelligi ita quod totalitas referatur ad diligentem sic etiam Deus totaliter diligi debet quia ex toto posse suo homo debet diligere deum quicquid habet ad dei amorem ordinare secundum illud Deuter 6. Diliges dominum deum tuum ex toto corde tuo 2 da 2 dae q. 27. art 5. But now Christ man had in him as great abilities for the actuall love of God as Adam in Paradise as the Saints and Angels in heaven for an all-fulnesse of the grace and virtue of love dwelled in him and therefore if the inward acts of his love were lesse intense at one time than another then somtimes when he actually loved God he did not love him as intensly as ardently as fervently as he could he did not love him with all his might and strength ex toto posse suo and so consequently he fulfilled not all righteousnesse for his obedience unto this commandment would have been by this your opinion imperfect and sinfull which but to imagine were blasphemy But you will be ready to tell me that you have prevented this charge by that exposition of those large inclusive words thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart with all thy Soule c. which you have given in your treatise of will-worship which I shall transcribe and briefly examine Once more if it be objected that what ever is thus performed is commanded by those large inclusive words thou shalt love thy God with all thy heart with all thy Soule c. nothing being of such latitude as that the with all should not contain it I answer that that phrase denoteth two things only 1. Sincerity of this love of God as opposed to partiall divided love or service 2. The loving him above all other things and not admitting any thing into Competition with him not loving any thing else in such a degree Treat wil-worsh p. 24. Here you barely dictate that that phrase Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart with all thy Soule c. denoteth onely those two things you mention whereas your reader hath just reason to expect a confirmation of what you say 1. Because this very answer is the shift of Papists in severall controversies between them and us Bellarm Tom. 2. De monachis lib. 2. cap. 13. Tom. 4. de amissione gratiae Statu peccati lib 1. cap. 12. c. And was it not fit that you should acquaint us what those cogent reasons were that necessitated you unto this compliance with Papists 2. Those protestants that have dealt in the controversies betwixt us and the Papists have proved this your sense to be too narrow and with-all have given another exposition a Nimirùm huc tandem res redit ut sciamus ita imperari nobis amorem Dei ut nullus sit amoris gradus intra summum cui quisquam debeat acquiescere summum autem dico non tantum comparatè ad res alias quae sub amorem cadunt sed etiam quidem praecipuè comparatè ad nos ipsos ut nè ultrà possimus amare Ita enim verè totum cor erit tota anima mens tota vires omnes c. Chamier Tom. 3. lib. 11. cap. 16. sect 22. of the words which they have confirmed and vindicated from the exceptions of the Papists Now of all this it had been equitable for you to have taken notice and not to have troubled your reader with that which hath been so abundantly refuted by Protestant pens But to take a sunder this answer into its parts The phrase denoteth 1. sincerity of this love of God as opposed to partiall divided love or service Unto this I shall reply 1. In the words of Ames unto Bellarmine Bellar Enervat Tom. 2. p. 154. Hoc aliquid est sed non totum quod his verbis praecipitur tum enim illi etiam qui minimum gradum verae charitatis quamvis tepidi fuerint hoc preceptum perfectè
Doctor HAMMOND his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or A greater Ardency in Christ 〈◊〉 love of God at one time than another PROVED TO BE VTTERLY IRRECONCILEABLE With 1. His fulnesse of habituall grace 2. The perpetuall happinesse and 3. The impeccability of his soule By HENRY IEANES Minister of Gods Word at Chedzoy in Somerset-shire OXFORD Printed by HENRY HALL Printer to the UNIVERSITY for THOMAS ROBINSON 1657. Doctor HAMMOND 1. I Was very willing to hearken to the seasonable advice of many and to wholly withdraw my selfe à foro contentioso to some more pleasing and profitable imployment but discerning it to be the desire of the Author of the Booke intituled A mixture of Scholasticall and Practicall Divinity that I should reply to his examination of one passage of mine against Mr Cawdrey I shall make no scruple immediately to obey him not only because it may be done in very few words but especially because the doctrine which he affixeth to me seems and not without some reason to be contrary to the truth of Scripture which I am to looke on with all reverent submission acquiesce in with captivation of understanding and so not assert any thing from mine owne conceptions which is but seemingly contrary to it 2. The proposition which he affixes to me is this That Christs Love of God was capable of further degrees and that he refutes as a thing contrary to that point a truth of Scripture which he had in hand viz. The dwelling of fulnesse of all habituall Grace in Christ 3. By this I suppose I may conclude his meaning to be that I have affirmed Christs Love of God meaning thereby that habituall grace of divine Charity to have been capable of further degrees so as that capacity of further degrees is the deniall of all-fulnesse of that habituall grace already in him 4. And truly had I thus exprest my selfe or let fall any words which might have been thus interpretable I acknowledg I had been very injurious not only to the verity of God but also to my own conceptions and even to the cause which I had in hand which had not been supported but betrayed by any such apprehensions of the imperfection of Christs habituall graces 5. This I could easily shew and withall how cautiously and expresly it was fore-stall'd by me But to the matter in hand it is sufficient that I professe I never thought it but deem it a contrariety to expresse words of Scripture in any man who shall think it and in short that I never gave occasion to any man to believe it my opinion having never said it in those words which he sets up to refute in mee never in any other that may be reasonably interpretable to that sense JEANES Whereas you terme your compliance with my desire that you should reply unto me Obedience I looke upon it as a very high Complement for what am I that my desire should have with you the authority of a Command and shall not be so uncharitable as to thinke it a scoffe though some of my friends have represented it to me under that notion but suppose it were meant in way of derision yet this shall abate nothing of my gratitude for your reply which is a favour and honour of which I willingly confesse my selfe to be unworthy The best testimony I can give you of my thankfulnesse is to assure you that if in the exceptions which you shall condescend to returne unto this paper you can prove that I have done you any injury you shall find me very ready to make you satisfaction But if on the contrary you shall fayle in such proofe I hope you will be so much a friend unto the truth as to retract your mistake You acknowledg that to affirme that Christ's habituall love of God was capable of farther degrees is a contrariety to expresse words of Scripture Now this proposition which you thus disclaime is the naturall and unavoidable sequele of that which you in this your reply § 21 confesse to be your opinion to wit that the inward acts of Christ's love were more intense at one time than another and this I shall make good by an argument which I shall submit unto your severest examination Intension remission are primarily per se only of qualities so that an action is not capable of degrees of intension and remission but secondarily and mediante qualitate in regard of that qualitie which it produceth or from which it proceedeth ratione a Collegium Compl. De generat corrupt disp 4. qu. 5. §. 11. n. 4◠Scheib Metaph. l. 2. c. 12. num 35.36 termini or ratione principii The intension and remission of actions therefore must be proportioned unto that of those qualities which they regard either as their termes or principles now you acknowledge in terminis that the inward acts of Christs love were more intense at one time than at another and hereupon it undeniably and unavoidably followeth that either the terminus some quality that was the product of these inward acts of love or else the principium some qualitie that was the principle of them was more intense at one time than at another If you say that the terminus some quality that was the product of these inward acts was more intense at one time than another why then first you must tell us what this quality is and in what Species of quality it is placed it cannot with any colour of probability be ranked under any other of the foure species of quality than the first and if it be put there it must be either dispositio or habitus now dispositio is such an imperfect and inchoate a thing as that I am very loath to think so dishonourably of my Saviour as to ascribe it to him If you make it an habit then you will run upon that opinion which you disowne for it can be no other than a morall habit and therefore in Christ it must be a vertuous gracious habit To affirme therefore that this quality was more intense at one time than at another will be by just consequence to affirme that a gracious habit in Christ was more intense at one time than another 2 Entia non sunt multiplicanda sine necessitate and therefore I shall reject this quality è numero entium unlesse you can by convincing arguments prove a necessity of asserting it I am not ignorant that it is a common opinion that omnis actio habet terminum but how it failes in immanent actions you may see if you will vouchsafe to stoope so low in Schieblers Metaphysicks l. 2. c. 10. t. 3. ar 3. pun 1. If you take the other way and say that the principle the quality producing these inward acts of Christs love of God was more intense at one time than at another why then you grant that which you seeme to deny for the principle of them is nothing else but the habituall grace or habit of divine
thing which I confesse that I am yet to learne and if it be a matter of ignorance in me you must blame my Mr Aristotle for he hath misguided me herein He tels me lib. 1. top c. 15. n. 11. that if a word be predicated of things put in severall predicaments that then it is homonymous in regard of them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now the habit of love is in the predicament of Quality the act of love in the predicament of Action and hereupon I cannot but conclude that the predication of love concerning the habit and the act is onely equivocall and consequently love no genus to them No genus can equally comprehend those things which do differ toto genere and are therefore termed primo diversa rather then differentia but now such are the habits and the acts of the love of God and therefore love as à genus doth not equally comprehend them as it's species Dr HAMMOND 15. This distinction I thought legible enough before both in the Tract of Will-worship and in the Answer to Mr Caw 16. In the former the Refuter confesseth to find it pag. 259. reciting these words of mine It is possible for the same person constantly to love God above all and yet to have higher expressions of that love at one one time than another Where the expressions at one time and at another must needs referre to the severall acts of the same all-full habituall love JEANES The distinction which you thought legible enough before in your tract of will-worship in which you say that I confesse to find it is such a distinction between the habits and acts o◠love as that love equally comprehends them both as species Now I utterly deny that there is any such distinction in those words of yours which I recite It is possible for the same person constantly to love God above all and yet to have higher expressions of that love at one time than another and the reason of this my deniall is because love as a genus doth not comprehend the expressions of love equally with the habit 1 Nothing can as a genus be equally predicated of things put in severall predicaments but the habit of love and expressions of love are put in severall predicaments therefore love as a genus doth not equally comprehend them both 2 The habit of love is formally and intrinsecally love the expressions of love that is as you expound your selfe § 21 the outward expressions of the inward acts of love are termed love only by extrinsecall denomination from the inward acts of love and therefore love doth not as a genus equally comprehend the habit and the expressions of love Raynandus in Mor discip dist 3. N. 144. make smention out of Gab. Biel of a distinction of love into affective and effective and what is this effective love but the effects and expressions of love but now that he doth not take this to be a proper distribution of a genus into it's species appeareth by what he saith out of the same Author concerning the division Effectivum dicit ipsum illius à moris eliciti effectum Translato quippe causae nomine ad effectum is dicitur amare effectivè qui non ostentat in fertilem ac sterilem amorem sed cum se dat occasio erumpit in fructus dignos amoris Quam esse admodùm impropriam amoris divisionem fatetur Gabriel quia amare propriè est in solâ voluntate tanquam in subjecto ea autem productio effectuum amoris in aliis facultatibus cernitur estque actus transiens non immanents volunt at is 3 No one word can as a genus equally comprehend the efficient and the effect the habit of love is the efficient cause and the sincere and cordiall expressions of love are the effect therefore love is not predicated of them equally as a genus 4 That which is predicated properly of one thing and tropically of another cannot equally comprehend them both as a genus but love is predicated properly of the habit of love tropically viz. Metonymically of the expressions of love by a metonymie of the efficient for the effect therefore love as a genus cannot equally comprehend them both D. HAMMOND Onely I guesse not what temptation he had to choose that expression which he there makes use of viz. That there D. H. minceth the matter and speaketh more cautelously adding that what he there saith is nothing to the matter now in hand Whereas 1. those of Will-worship being the First papers written on that subject are sure very pertinent to ascertain him of the meaning of the latter written in defence of them JEANES That your first papers written on this subject are very impertinent to ascertaine me of the meaning of your latter is easily discernable unto any man that will compare both together however I shall offer unto your consideration two reasons to prove the impertinency of them for that purpose 1 In your first papers you speak only of the expressions of love i.e. as you interpret your selfe the outward expressions of the inward acts of love in your latter papers you speak of love it selfe now the outward expressions of love are termed love only extrinsecè denominativè participativè from the inward act of love as some say the imperate acts of the will are said to be in this sense only free or voluntary 2ly That your first papers are very short in explaining the meaning of your latter is apparent by this your reply wherein you extend the love of God which you affirme to be capable of degrees beyond the outward expressions unto the very inward acts of love Dr. HAMMOND And 2ly the early cautelous speaking there might have made further latter caution unnecessary JEANES I had thought that in polemicall writings it had still been needfull for a man to continue on his caution for otherwise he may expose himselfe unto blowes and knocks which he never dream't off Earely cautelous speaking is no salvo unto after unwarinesse Dr. HAMMOND And 3ly I could not be said to mince which to vulgar eares signifies to retract in some degrees what I had said before and againe speak more cautiously when that was the first time of my speaking of it JEANES I am very loath to enter into a Contest with so great a Critick touching the meaning of a word however I shall adventure to say thus much that a man may be said to mince a matter and speak more cautiously at the first time of speaking of it than afterwards at a second time of speaking of it neither shall I be beaten from this mine assertion by your bare and naked affirmation that to mince to vulgar eares signifieth to retract in some degrees what hath been said before for I appeale to both vulgar and learned eares whether or no we may not say truly of divers erroneous persons that in the first broaching of their errors they mince the matter and speak more
cautelously than afterwards when they are fleshed and incouraged with successe Dr. HAMMOND 17. Mean while it is manifest and his own confession that there these were my words and those so cautious that this sense of the words which he undertakes to refute could not be affixt on them And this I should have thought sufficient to have preserved my innocence and forstalled his Vse of Confutation JEANES Suppose that in your tract of will-worship these were your words and withall that they were so cautious that this sense of the words which I undertake to refute could not be affixt on them yet this is nothing at all unto the purpose and contributes nothing to the clearing of your innocence and forestalling my use of confutation and the reason hereof is very evident because that which I undertook to refute was affixt by me not on these your so cautelous words in your tract of will-worship but on a passage in your answer to Mr. Cawdrey Indeed I censured those your words in themselves impertinent unto your matter in hand and withall proved them to be so But if you had gone no farther then these words you should not have heard from me touching this subject for time is more pretious with me than to wast it in medling meerely with the impertinencies of any mans discourse Dr. HAMMOND 18. But the answer to M. C. which occasioned it was I think as cautious also 1. In the words recited by the Refuter viz. that Christ himselfe was more ardent in one act of prayer than in another 2. In the words following in that answer but not recited by him viz. that the sincerity of this or that virtue exprest in this or that performance is it we speake of when we say it consists in a latitude and hath degrees where the this or that performance are certainly Acts of the virtue consisting in a latitude and the having degrees viz. in that latitude no way implies him that hath virtue in that latitude viz. Christ to want at present and in that sense to be capable of farther degrees 19. I am willing to look as jealously as I can on any passage of my own which falls under any mans censure and therefore finding nothing in the words set down by him as the ground of the Refutation which is any way capable of it I have reviewed the whole section and weighed every period as suspicioously as I could to observe whether I could draw or wrest that consequence from any other passage not recited by him 20. And I find none in any degree liable except it should be this in the beginning of the Sect. Where setting down the argument as it lay in the Tr. of Will wor. I say t is possible for the same person which so loves God i. e. with all the heart to love him and expresse that love more intensely at one time than another as appeared by the example of Christ 21. And if this be thought capable of misapprehension by reason of the and disjoyning love from the expressions of it and so the expressions belonging to the acts the love be deemed to denote the habituall love I must onely say that is a misapprehension for that by loving with all the heart in the first place I certainly meant the sincere habit of Love by love in the latter place the inward acts of love and by the expressions of love the outward expressions of those inward acts and oâ— those acts onely I speak and of those expressions when I say they are more intense at one time than another JEANES I shall here briefly represent unto you that which made me think you guilty of detracting from the all-fulness of Christs habituall grace and referre you for confirmation here of unto what I have said in the beginning of this my discourse The undeniable consequence of what you say in answer unto Mr. Cawdrey is as I have proved that Christs love of God was capable of farther degrees Now hereupon I thus reasoned in my mind you were to be understood either of the habit or of the inward act of love for as for the outward expressions of love it is without dispute that they cannot be said to be love properly but only by a trope if you should have said that you spake of the habit of love then you would have expresly impugned the all-fulnesse of Christs habituall grace and if you should say as you now do that you meant the inward acts of love why then I concluded that you would even hereby implyedly and by consequence have opposed the perfection of Christs habituall grace because the intension of the inward acts of love proceedeth from the intension of the habit of love and is therefore proportioned unto it but of this more fully in the place above mentioned Thus having shewed you what invited me unto my use of confutation I shall passe over the three other sections which you your selfe I presume would have spared if you had been privy unto that which I now acquaint you with Dr. HAMMOND 22. The word love as I said is a genus equally comprehending the two species habituall and actuall love and equally applicable to either of the species to the acts as well as the habit of love And so when 〈◊〉 say love is capable of degrees the meaning is cleare The genericall word â—ove restrained to the latter species is considered in respect of the â—cts of love gradually differenced one from the other is in that reâ—pect capable of degrees both inwardly and in outward expressions that â—ct of love that poured out and exprest it selfe in the more ardent prayer was a more intense act of love than another act of â—he same habituall love which did not so ardently expresse it â—elfe JEANES That love is not a genus equally comprehending habituall â—nd actuall love as its two species I have already proved by â—his argument because they are in severall predicaments â—abituall love in the predicament of qualitie and actuall in the â—redicament of action There are I know divers great Philosoâ—hers and Schoolemen that make all immanent acts and conseâ—uently all inward acts of love to be qualities they are say â—hey only grammaticall actions not metaphysicall actions in â—he predicament of action but this opinion is untrue in 〈◊〉 selfe and no waies advantageous unto your cause in â—and 1. It is untrue in it selfe and to confirme this I shall offer 〈◊〉 your consideration two arguments out of Scheibler which â—earely prove immanent acts to be true proper and â—redicamentall actions in the predicament of Action 〈◊〉 universum id sine incommodo potest dici actio quod sufficit 〈◊〉 constituendam causalitatem efficientis Atqui dantnr causae â—ficientes quibus non convenit alia causalitas quam que 〈◊〉 actio immanens Ergo actio immanens vere est actio â—ropositio patet quia praedicamentum actionis ponitur ad â—candam causalitem efficientis causae in genere entium ut â—ipra
disputatum explicando divisionem praedicamentorum â—t confirmatur quod actio sit adaequata causalitas effiâ—entis ut supra visum est lib. 1. c. 12. Assumptiopatet Nam â—mo absolutè est causa efficiens in quantum denominatnr â—dere aut intelligere Et tamen isti sunt actus immanenâ—â— That which is the causality of an efficient cause is y a true and predicamentall action in the predicament of actions but immanent acts are the causalities of efficient causes and therefore proper and predicamentall actions Deinde ad actus immanentes sunt potentiae activae sed potentiae activae sunt per ordinem ad veras actiones ergo actus immanentes sunt verè actiones Et si hi solum titulotenus sunt actiones Ergo etiam potentiae illae activae titulotenus sunt potentiae activae That which terminates and actuates an active power is a propeâ— and predicamentall action but every immanent act terminates and actuates an active power and therefore every immanent act is a proper and predicamentall action Met. lib. 2. cap 10. n. 27. You may perhaps slight Scheibler as a trivial author but I urge his reasons not his authority if you can answer his reasons you may speake your pleasure of him and oâ— me for alleadging of him But I can presse you with the authority of an author far greater than Scheibler our great Master Aristotle of whom you make somewhere in your writings â—â—â—norable mention he l. 10. Ethic. c. 3. tells us roundly that the oâ—perations of virtues even happinesse it selfe are not qualities 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but thesâ— are immanent acts therefore in his opinion immanent acts aâ—â— not qualities But secondly suppose this opinion were true iâ— it selfe yet will it no waies advantage your cause for the patrons of it rang immauent acts under the first species of quality and then they are either dispositions or habits If you say theâ— are dispositions as most of the above mentioned schoolemeâ— hold them to be against this I object that however theâ— may be so in other men yet they cannot be so in Christ for a disposition carrieth in it's notion inchoation and imperfection and therefore to attribute it unto Christ 〈◊〉 to throw an apparent dishonour upon him If you saâ— they are habits why then you cannot deny them to be gracioâ— habits and so you will fall upon that opinion of which in thâ— reply you so studiously endeavour to acquit your selfe viâ— that the same habits of grace in Christ may be more intense y at one time than another and consequently that his habituall grace was not alwaies full and perfect Dr. HAMMOND 23. I shall explain this by the Refuters own Confession The death of Christ saith he was an higher expression of Christs love of us than his poverty hunger or thirst To this I subjoyne that such as the expression was such was the act of inward love of which that was an expression it being certain that each of these expressions had an act of internall love of which they were so many proportionably different expressions And from hence I suppose it unavoidably consequent that that act of internall love exprest by his dying for us was superior to those former acts which onely exprest themselves in his poverty and so the same person that loved sincerely did also love and expresse that love more intensly at one time than at another which was the very thing I had said in another instance But this I have added ex abundanti more than the Refuters discourse required of me JEANES If you had repeated that which you call my confession full and intire as it lay in my book the impartiall and unprejudiced reader would soone have discerned that there was in it nothing that made for your advantage my words at large are these There may be a graduall difference in the expressions of the same love for degree Christs death for us was an higher expression of his love of us than his poverty hunger thirst c. and yet they might proceed from a love equally intense Now Sir have you said any thing to prove that they could not proceed from a love equally intense you seeme indeed most vehemently and affectionately to affirme that they could not but you must pardon me if I entertaine not your vehement asseverations as solid arguments as if they were propositiones per se notae Pray Sir review this section and put your argument into some forme if you can make good that it containeth any disproofe of what I have said unlesse begging of the question be argumentative you shall have my hearty leave to triumph over me as you please however untill then I shall take your words asunder and examine every passage in them D. HAMMOND To this I subjoyn that such as the expression was such was the act of inward love of which that was an expression yet being certain that each of these expressions had an act of internall love of which they were so many proportionably different expressions JEANES That each of these expressions had an act of inward love of which they were so many different expressions is an obvious truth but impertinent unto the matter in hand unlesse you can prove that they were of necessity equall in point of intension and the proofe of this you have not hitherto so much as attempted Dr. HAMMOND And from hence I suppose it unavoidably consequent that that act of internall love exprest by his dying for us was superior to those former acts which onely exprest themselves in his poverty and so the same person that loved sincerely did also love and expresse that love more intensly at one time than at another which was the very thing I had said in another instance But this I have added ex abundanti more than the Refuters discourse required of me JEANES From hence whence I pray if from the words immediately foregoing then your argument stands thus Every of these expressions had an act of internall love of which they were so many proportionably different expressions therefore that act of internall love exprest by his dying for us was superior to these former acts which onely exprest themselves in his poverty And here I must professe that the reason of your consequence is to me invisible and I shall never acknowledg your inference legitimate untill you drive me hereunto by reducing your Enthymeme unto a Syllogisme but perhaps there may be some mystery in the word proportionably and your meaning may be that these different expressions in regard of intension must be proportioned exactly unto their inward respective acts of love equall or paralell unto them and if this by your meaning then your argument is guilty of that fallacy which is called petitio principii It is my desire and purpose to have faire wars with you and my pen shall not drop a disrespective syllable of you but yet I am resolved to swallow none of your proofelesse
undertake to guesse but this I am sure of that at all other times he had sufficient causes grounds and motives to induce him to love God with as heightned degrees of Actuall love as the humane nature could reach unto he injoied the beatificall vision a cleare evident and intuitive knowledg of the divine essence that had in it all the fulnesse of goodness and so was an object infinitely lovely and amiable Now such an Object thus known thus seen challengeth such a measure of actuall love as that it leaveth no place for a farther and higher degree The Thomists generally maintaine that this most intense love of God is a naturall and necessary sequele of the beatificall vision necessary quo ad exercitium as well as quoad specificationem actûs now that which works naturally and necessarily works as vehemently and forcibly as it can Omne agens de necessitate necessariò agit usque ad ultimum potentiae suae therefore the inward acts of Christs love of God were alwaies as ardent and fervent as he could performe them and therefore some were not more intense than others for if we speak of a liberty of indifferency and indetermination he had no more liberty towards the intension of the inward acts of his love than he had towards the acts themselves Dr. HAMMOND 40. Of this I shall hope it is possible to finde some instances among men of whose graces it can be no blasphemy to affirme that they are capable of degrees suppose we a sincerely pious man a true lover of God and no despiser of his poore persecuted Church and suppose we as it is very supposeable that at some time the seas roar the tempest be at its height and the waves beat violently upon this frail brittle vessell may it not be a season for that pious mans ardency to receive some growth for his zeal to be emulous of those waves and poure it selfe out more profusely at such than at a calmer season I hope there be some at this time among us in whom this point is really exemplified if it be not it is an effect of want not fulnesse of love But I need not thus to inlarge It is not by this Refuter denied of the person of Christ and that is my intire 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in reference either to Mr. C. or to him the utmost that I undertook to demonstrate then or to justify now JEANES This Section your poore refuter had passed over as a digression had he not found himselfe named in the close of it it is not by this refuter denyed of the person of Christ I suppose the antecedent to the relative is in these words may it not be a season for that pious mans ardency to receive some growth for his zeale to be emulous of those waves and poure it selfe out more profusely at such than at a calmer season And then there be two things that you affirme that I deny not of the person of Christ 1. That a tempestuous time a time of affliction was a season for Christs ardency to receive some growth 2. That t was a season for his zeale to poure it selfe out more profusely at such than at a calmer season As for the first sentence a time of affliction was a season for Christs ardency to receive some growth if by ardency you understand the ardency of his love of God I deny that it did receive any growth for to ascribe growth unto it is to charge it with imperfection Charitas quamdiu augeri potest saith Austin profectò illud quod minus est quà m debet ex vitio est And I am very confident that besides this replyer no learned man either protestant or papist hath ascribed any such growth unto the ardency of Christs actuall love of God As for the second sentence that a tempestuous time a time of Christs affliction was a season for his zeale to poure it's selfe out more profusely than at a calmer season this is not I grant denied by me if by this more profuse pouring out of his zeale you only understand the outward expressions of his zeale but I cannot but extreamly wonder that you affirme this to be the utmost that you undertook to demonstrate to Mr. Cawdrey or to justify now against me c. For 1. in your answer to Mr. Cawdrey you affirme by consequent that Christs love of God was capable of farther and higher degrees but love is predicated of the outward expressions thereof only analogically analogiâ attributionis extrinsecae sicut sanitas dicitur de urina 2. In this your reply unto me you expresly averre that the inward acts of Christs love of God were more intense at one time than another Sect. 21. and I hope you have more philosophy then to confound the inward acts and the outward expressions of love That which hath herein occasioned your mistake is I beleeve a supposall that the inward acts of love and the outward expressions thereof are if they be sincere alwaies exactly proportioned in point of degree but this proposition hath no truth in it as you will soone find if you attempt the proofe of it who almost but may easily conceive how 't is very ordinary for the outward expressions of love to be gradually beneath the inward acts thereof he is no hypocrite in expressing his love that loveth inwardly more than he expresseth outwardly the degrees then of the inward acts of love may not only equall but also transcend the most sincere expressions of love It may be so in all men and I shall alleadge two reasons why in Christ the inward acts of his love were alwaies equally intense though the outward expressions thereof were gradually different The first reason agreeth unto Christ in common with other men Christ as man was alwaies obliged unto the most intense ardent and fervent inward acts of love of God but he was not alwaies obliged unto the most intense expressions of these inward acts the reason of the difference betweene his obligation unto the intension of the inward acts of his love and his obligation unto the intension of the outward expressions thereof you may fetch from what is said by Aquinas 2 da 2 dae q. 27. art 6. ad tertiam Nec est simile de interiori actu charitatis exterioribus actibus Nam interior actus charitatis habet rationem finis quià ultimum bonum hominis consistit in hoc quod anima Deo inhaereat secundum illud Psalmi mihi adhaerere deo bonum est Exteriores autem actus sunt sicut ad finem ideo sunt commensurandi secundum charitatem secundum rationem The second reason is peculiar unto Christ above all other men Whil'st he lived here upon earth he injoyed the beatificall vision and the naturall and necessary consequent thereof is a most intense actuall love of God and therefore the inward acts of his love of God were equally intense at all times but as for the outward expressions of these acts Christ had to them a proper freedome taking the word freedome for an active indifferency in sensu diviso and therefore they might be more intense at one time than another but of this you may if you please see further in Suarez in tertiam partem Thom dis 37. sect 4. where the question debated is quomodo voluntas Christi ex necessitate diligens deum in reliquis actibus potuerit esse libera Dr HAMMOND 41. And so I shut up this hasty paper hoping that he which invited and promised it a welcome in case it were given in a fair and Scholasticall way having nothing to accuse in it ' as to the first Epithet will abate somewhat in reference to the second and allow it a friendly though being unqualified it pretend not to a more hospitable reception JEANES Unto this your hasty paper as you call it I have given a deliberate answer and I hope it may contend with your reply for civility and fairenesse in carriage of the controversy between us As for the Scholasticallnesse of either paper it were a vaine thing for me to say any thing of it for we must be tried by the learned readers unto whom we both have by thus appearing in publique appealed and unto their judgment I shall contentedly submit my selfe And thus your refuter for the present takes his leave of you hoping when your more pleasing and profitable imployments shall permit to heare further from you in the meane time he shall rest Your most humble servant HENRY JEANES FINIS
dictates seeing you have entered the lists with me you must not think me irreverent and saucy if as the souldiers speak I dispute every inch of ground with you and be so bold as to call upon you for the proofe of whatsoever you assert touching that which is in controversy betwixt us Dr. HAMMOND 24. It now onely remaines that I consider whether this Refuter have in the processe of his discourse added any thing wherein I may be any whit concerned 25. And 1. saith he the falsehood of such an assertion is evident from the point there handled and confirmed the absolute fulnesse of Christs grace which by the generall consent of the Fathers and School-men was such as that it excluded all intensive growth 26. But to this the reply will be easily foreseen from the premisses that as the point by him handled and confirmed was distinctly the all-fulnesse of habituall grace in Christ so his proofs of it by the consent of Fathers and School-men belong still to that fulnesse of habituall grace 27. Witnesse one for all Aquinas â—â—r 3. qu. 7. art 12. ad secundum Licet virtus divina possit facere aliquid majus melius quà m sit habitualis gratia Christi non tamen though the divine power may make somewhat greater and better than is the habituall grace of Christ yet so 't is plain he speaks of the fulnesse of the habituall grace And ad tertium In sapientia gratia aliquis proficere potest dupliciter uno modo secundùm ipsos habitus sapientiae gratiae augmentatos sic Christus in eis non proficiebat Alio modo secundùm effectus in quantum aliquis sapientiora virtuosiora opera facit sic Christus proficiebat sapientiâ gratiâ sicut aetate quia secundùm processum aetatis perfectiora opera faciebat in his quae sunt ad Deum in his quae sunt ad homines One may increase in wisdome and grace two waies one way according to the habits of them increased and so Christ increased not another way according to the effects when any doth more wise and virtuous workes and so Christ increased in Wisdome and Grace as he did in age because according to the processe of his age he did more perfect workes and that both in things belonging to God and men also 28. And thus are the School-men understood by the Refuter himselfe in his producing their testimonies as appeares by the expresse words habituall grace p. 260. lin penult and holinesse and the Image of God in him p. 261. lin 13. And so 't is most cleare their consent belongs not even in his own opinion to the matter I had and have in hand no way denying but asserting a capacity of degrees among the acts of Christs love of God and the expressions of it JEANES 1. They that can so easily foresee this your reply may with as little difficulty foreknow the objection against it to wit that the intension of Christs actuall grace is exactly proportioned unto that of his habituall grace and therefore your deniall of the perpetuall all-fulnesse of Christs actuall grace is a virtuall and implied deniall of the all-fulnesse of Christs habituall grace and how you are provided of an answer hereunto the event will shew It is not then so cleare as you pretend that the testimony of the Schoole-men belongs not even in mine own opinion to the matter you had and have in hand 2. As for that place you quote out of Aquinas it is plaine that therein by the effects of wisedome and grace are meant such as are outward for these are most properly termed works And besides an intensive increase in the inward acts of wisedome and grace would argue and presuppose an intensive increase in the very habits themselves 3. Whereas you say in the close of Section the 28 that the consent of the Schoole-men is no waies denying but asserting a capacity of degrees amongst the acts of Christs love of God i. e. of the inward acts thereof There will be little sense in your words in themselves and lesse pertinency unto the matter in hand unlesse your meaning be as you elsewhere expresse your selfe that the inward acts of Christs love of God were more intense at one time than at another and if this be your meaning I must needs assume the boldnesse to tell you that no such matter is visible unto me in any of the Schoole-men But perhaps you may meane such Schoole-men as such a Puny as I never saw or heard of however you cannot expect beleife untill you produce their testimonies And I shall entreat you to alleadge such as may be had in Pauls-church-yard or at least in the Library at Oxford Dr HAMMOND 29. Secondly he will heare the Doctors objection and consider of what weight it is Objection against what against the fulnesse of habituall grace in Christ sure never any was by me urged against it And he cannot now think there was The degrees of intensenesse observable in the severall acts of Christs love his praying more ardently at one time than another was all that I concluded from that text Luk. 22.44 and that is nothing to his habituall love JEANES That this objection was not intended by you against the fulnesse of Christs habituall grace upon your protestation I readily believe but that by consequence it reacheth it I thus make good That objection which is urged against the perpetuall allfulnesse perfection of Christs actuall love the inward acts of his love of God strikes against the perpetuall allfulnesse perfection of his habitual love because the degrees of the inward acts of his love of God are commensurate unto the degrees of his habituall love For they have no degrees at all but secundariò in regard of the habit of his love but now this objection is urged by you against the perpetuall all-fulnesse and perfection of his actuall love the inward acts of his love for it is brought to prove that the inward acts of Christs love were more intense at one time than another and a greater intension presupposeth remission and imperfection for intensio est eductio rei intensae de imperfecto ad perfectum as Aquinas very often Therefore this objection strikes against the perpetuall fulnesse and perfection of Christs actuall love of God and so consequently against the perpetuall fulnesse and perfection of his habituall love Dr HAMMOND 30. But even to this he is pleased to frame Answers though I hope his doctrine of the fulnesse of Christs habituall grace be no way concern'd in it and to these I shall briefly attend him as my last stage in this no very long voyage 31. And 1. saith he the vulgar translation renders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 prolixius and if this version be good then there is no place for the Doctors objection But though I seeke no advantage by that vulgar reading yet thinking it a duty of reverence to that version to
take leave civilly whensoever I depart from it wherein I have the suffrage of Protestants as learned in both the Languages Hebrew and Greek as any and that I may to the utmost observe the Refuters steps I shall not utterly reject it 32. T is certain 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth primarily signifie extension and that properly belongs to length and so the comparative 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to a greater degree of that length And if it be granted that it so signifie here there will yet be place equally for my conclusion 33. For in every act of Prayer be it but the shortest ejaculation sent out by Christ I suppose and my Refuter must not doubt of it there was some degree of ardency or intension And then sure according to the multiplying of those acts lengthening that prayer there must still in Christ I say not in every one of us be a proportionable multiplication of those degrees and so parallel to a greater length a greater intension JEANES The answer here is very easy and obvious the intension of the degrees of the inward acts of Christs love of God may be said to be greater either in regard of the number or in respect of the intensive perfection and excellency of those degrees according to the lengthning of Christs prayer there is a multiplying of inward acts of his love and proportionably a multiplication of the degrees of his love and consequently a greater intension of those degrees in regard of their number but not in respect of their intensive perfection or excellency For in Christ let them be never so much multiplied they may be and still are of an equall intensive perfection and excellency one is not more intense than another and so if this reading be retained there will be no place for your conclusion That the inward acts of Christs love are more intense at one time than another unlesse you will make intēsion to be a meere coacervation of hōo geneous degrees i. e degrees altogether like the absurdity of which you may see in Suarez Met. dis 46. Pet. Hurtado de Mendoza de Gener. Corrupt disp 5. § 6. Sir here I am very confident that you presumed very much on my ignorance otherwise you would never have gone about to have imposed upon me so poore and sorry a sophisme as is in the equivocation of the word greater which is easily discoverable by a fresh-man for that you your selfe should be ignorant of such an ordinary homonymy I am loath to harbour such dishonourable thoughts of your abilities in philosophy as to imagine Dr HAMMOND 34. This is cleare and I need not adde what else I might that the very multiplication of more acts of any virtue supposing it equally sincere in the habit and such is the length of prayer when it is in Christ is more valuable in the sight of God and that argues it more excellent than the smaller number of those acts would be and proportionably more abundantly rewarded by him who rewardeth every man not only according to the sincerity of his heart but also secundum opera according to the multiplied acts or workes the more abundant labour proceeding from this sincerity And so that will suffice for his first answer JEANES 1. This is an utter impertinency unto that which is in debate between us For suppose that the very multiplication of more inward acts of any virtue in Christ is more valuable in the sight of God and so more excellent than the smaller number of those acts would be yet this supposition will never bring you to this conclusion that one inward act of Christs love of God may be more intense than another and my reason is because in all these inward acts of Christs love of God and we may say the same of the inward acts of other virtues and graces there may be no graduall dissimilitude 2. A great part of the Schoolemen will tell you that the morall value of one single act of any virtue in Christ was infinite and in the multiplication of more acts there is but an infinite value now one infinite cannot be greater than another infinite in the same kind wherein it is infinite and hereupon they conclude that the multiplication of acts makes nothing in Christ unto an intensive addition of value the value of one act is intensively as great as that of more acts The first act of Christ saies Albertinus habet totam latitudinem intensivam valoris moralis ct si non adaequet totam latitudinem extensivam Corol. tom 1.150 n. 61. And of this you have a reason p. 145. this act is à personâ divinâ tanquam á forma intrinsecâ quae intrinsecè denominatur operans ab 〈◊〉 ipsâ operatione quae est in naturâ humanâ et ut sic est illimitabilis à conditionibus actûs Unto Albertinus I shall subjoine Suarez who speakes to the same purpose in tertiam par Thom. Tom. 1. disput 4. sect 4. pag. 49. Plura opera Christi sunt quidem extensivè plura merita intensivè tamen non est plus valoris in multis quam in uno ut si essent plures calores infinitè intensi essen◠quidem plures non tamen efficerent unum intensiorem par◠ratione si in uno opere Christi quod successivè per partes fiebat partes cum toto comparemus intensivè tantus valor erat in quâlibet parte sicut in toto opere in uno momento sicut in longo tempore quia forma à quà erat valor tota erat in toto tota in singulis partibus Dr HAMMOND 35. But then 2. Saith he suppose we stick unto our own transtation yet the place may fairely be so interpreted as that it may no waies advantage the purpose of the Doctor For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 more earnestly may be considered in reference unto either the object unto whom he prayed God or the matter against which he prayed the evills with which he conflicted in his agony 1. Then saith he he did not in his agony pray more earnestly than at other times if we consider his prayer in reference unto the object unto whom it was God The religion and inward worship of his prayer was for degrees alwaies alike equal His trust and dependance upon God love of zeal and devotion towards God from which all his prayers flowed were not at one time more intense than at another But now 2. He prayed more earnestly in his agony than at other times in regard of the matter against which he prayed the evills which he encountred with which if they were not greater then those that he deprecated in the former prayer v. 42. yet at least they made a greater impression upon his humane nature for they put him into a bloody sweat Being in an agony he prayed more earnestly his sweat was as it were drops of blood falling down to the ground 36. These are the words of his second answer and they
are in the second part the very distinct confession of all that I pretend in this matter and therefore I need not make any reflections on the first part of them For whatsoever or how great soever the occasion of the increase of his intension was which I am willing to believe proportionable to the degree of the intension a very weighty occasion that thus inflamed his ardency yet still 't is confest that on this occasion he now prayed more earnestly than at the other times that which now approached made a greater impression on his humane nature which what is it but a proofe of the point by me asserted that Christ himselfe was more ardent in one act of prayer this in his agonie than in another 37. As for the greatnesse of the occasion so profestlie great as to cast him into that prodigious sweat falling 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as it were drops of blood that may testifie but it cannot prejudg the ardency which was occasioned thereby 38. T was not in Christ he will easily suppose with me as it is oft discernable in many of us that those which really have no sincerity of love or zeal to God can yet like the Marriners in the tempest by some pressing fear or danger be awaked to but formall and be they never so loud but hypocritically zealous prayers 39. The ardency in Christ was sincere ardency accompanied with acts of love and trust of the same temper and the heightning it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was an addition of degrees to that act of ardency and so of prayer and proportionably of love and trust in God above either what there was or what there was occasion for at other times JEANES 1. First you pretend in Sect. 21. of this your reply that the inward acts of Christs love of God were more intense at one time than another Now this is not contained expresly nor can it by any logick be inferred from the words of the second part of my second answer that he prayed more earnestly in his agony than at other times in regard of the matter against which he prayed c. and therefore this second part of my second answer is not the very distinct confession of all that you pretend in this matter and therefore notwithstanding them you must make reflections on the first part of my answer or else you will never reply thereunto 2. That the ardency in Christ was a sincere ardency is not doubted of all the question is what ardency it was in Christ that was heightned there was as I plainly intimated in my answer a twofold ardency in Christs prayer one regarding God unto whom he prayed and this was seated in the acts of love and trust tanquam modus in re modificatâ Another respected the matter against which he prayed and the res modificata of this ardency was the acts of feare of and greife for those evills with which he encountred I readily grant the heightning of this latter ardency so that there was in his agony an addition of degrees unto his feare of and greife for those evils against which he prayed above either what there was or what there was occasion for at other times but as for the former ardency regarding God and placed in the inward acts of his love of God c. that was uncapable of further heightning for his actuall love of God was in termino as they say was alwaies at the highest and most intense and this I shall not barely dictate but prove by three arguments which I present unto you to be examined as rigidly as you please 1. The all-fulnesse and perfection of Christs habituall grace 2. His perpetuall and uninterrupted happinesse 3. His impeccability 1. The first argument which hath been already so fully insisted upon is the all-fulnesse and perfection of Christs habituall grace the habits of all graces and virtues in Christ were alwaies full and perfect most intense and not capable of farther or higher degrees and therefore so were the inward acts of those graces and virtues too and particularly the inward acts of the habituall grace of divine charity The consequence of this Enthymeme hath been already sufficiently proved and therefore I shall add nothing for further confirmation of it but the testimony of some few Schoole-men Aquinas as Capreolus quotes him lib. 1. dist 17. qu. 2. fol 306. hath this passage Nihil inquit aliud est qualitatem augeri quam subjectùm magis participare qualitatem Non enim aliud est esse qualitatis nisi quod habet in subjecto ex hoc autem ipso quod subjectum magis participat charitatem vehementius operatur quia unumquodque operatur in quantum est actu Aquinas thought you see that a greater vehemency in the operations of love argued a greater participation in the subject of the habits of love And againe secundâ secundae qu. 24. art 4. ad tertium Similiter charitas essentialiter est virtus ordinata ad actum unde idem est ipsam augeri secundum essentiam ipsam habere efficaciam ad producendum ferventioris dilectionis actum Unto this I shall adde a third place out of Aquinas quoted by Capreolus lib. 3. dis 27 28 29 30. pag. 209. Cum actus habitus speciem habent ex objecto oportet quod ex eodem ratio perfectionis ipsius sumatur Objectum autem charitatis est summum bonum igitur perfecta charitas est quae in summum bonum fcrtur in tantum in quantum est diligibile The habit of love is then perfect when t is carried towards God as the cheife when God is loved so farre forth as he may be loved to wit by a creature when God is not loved thus intensely the habit of love as Aquinas thought was imperfect With Aquinas also Scotus accords l. 3. dis 13. q. 3. Possibile est animā Christi habere summam gratiam ergo summam fruitionem Consequentia probatur quia actus naturaliter elicitus ab aliquâ formâ aequatur in perfectione illi formae Unto these two great Schoole-men I shall adde the testimony of a Philosopher of great subtilty and repute Pet. Hurt de Mendoza De An. dis 16. sect 8. p. 672. Intensio actus secundi supponit aequalem intensionem in actu primo cum actus secundus supponat primum A second argument is drawn from the perpetuall and uninterrupted happinesse of Christ it is resolved both by Aquinas 3 a.q. 34. art 4. Scotus lib. 3. disp 18. and their followers that Christ in regard of his Soule was even here in this life from the very first moment of his conception all his life long unto his death perfectus comprehensor and therefore he injoyed in his soule all that was necessary unto heaven happinesse and I find learned Protestants herein consenting with them now t is the unanimous opinion of the Schoole-men that a most intense actuall love of God an actuall love of God for degrees as high as