First Reformed objection: the Molinist view lessens the efficacy of grace (1 Corinthians 4:7)
The Reformed teachers reject their view mainly because it lessens the efficacy of God's grace and gives free choice more than its due in the matter of salvation.
Scripture teaches that every good thing in us must be credited entirely to God's grace, as the Apostle says: 'What do you have that you did not receive?' On this teaching, however, the fact that a man is able to believe and love God is indeed owed to the helps of grace, which move and stir him to faith and love. But the fact that he consents to the grace that moves him and settles himself to believe and love God depends so much on his freedom of choice that it is not, properly, an effect of God's grace, since the consent often fails to follow when grace is given. God's grace could then be called only a condition of it, a cause without which it would not happen.
Latin
XXXVII. Eorum autem sententia hoc praecipue nomine a Scholae Reformatae Doctoribus rejicitur quod divinae gratiae efficaciam minuit, & libero arbitrio plus tribuit quam par est in salutis negotio. Etenim scriptura docente, quicquid in nobis boni est, in solidum divinae gratiae acceptum ferri debet; juxta illud Apostoli, Quid habes quod non accepisti? sed ex ista doctrina sequitur, quod homo possit credere & Deum diligere, tribuendum esse quidem gratiae auxiliis, hominem ad fidem & dilectionem moventibus & excitantibus, verum quod homo gratiae moventi consentiat & ad credendum & Deum diligendum sese determinet, sic a libertate arbitrii pendere ut gratiae divinae proprie effectus non sit, quandoquidem posita gratia consensus ille saepe non consequitur; & ita gratia divina dici potest tantum ejus conditio, vel causa sine qua non.