Pareus: Bellarmine's question is slippery; which freedom does he mean?
David Pareus sets out the Protestant teaching this way. Taking up the question as Bellarmine frames it, 'whether man after the fall of the first man truly has free choice in the things that pertain to salvation', he calls the question slippery and sophistical.
'For,' he says, 'it is unclear what freedom of choice for divine actions he means: freedom from compulsion, from physical necessity, from brute determination, which we readily grant; or freedom from bondage to sin, that is, from the necessity of sinning that comes from vice, or from dependence on God's motion, which cannot be claimed for man in the state of sin without blasphemy.' On Bellarmine, book 6, On Grace and Free Choice, chapter 8.
Latin
XXIV. Sic Protestantium doctrinam exponit David Paraeus. Nam proposita quaestione quam format Bellarminus, sitne homo post lapsum primi hominis vere liberi arbitrii, in iis rebus, quae pertinent ad salutem, dicit quaestionem illam lubricam & Sophisticam esse, quia, inquit, obscurum est quanam arbitrii libertatem ad divinas actiones velit, an a coactione, a Physica necessitate, a bruta determinatione: qua libertas ultro a nobis datur: an vero a servitute peccati, seu necessitate peccandi ex vitio, vel a dependentia motionis divinae: qua homini in statu peccati absque blasphemia arrogari non potest. In lib. 6. Bellar. de Grat. & lib. arbitr. cap. 8.