Mixture of Scholastical Divinity with Practical Part 2, Excerpt and reply 10
Dr. Hammond. sect. 16.
Now this being thus far explained, it is time to close with Mr: J. and mind him, what he cannot but know, that the decency which I said, implyed custome, is certainly another thing from natural decency, and hath place onelyonly in those things, the omitting of which doth not necessarily inferre indecency. That omission which necessarily infers indecency, infers it in all that ever did it, or shall omit it: We know in Logick that no proposition is necessary, which is not foreign, true in the whole species of all, and every one, and I leave it to his judgement, whether he think the Dr. and his party (i. e. Prelatists, I suppose) doe conceive, that Adam, (whether in, or out of Paradise) Noah in, or out of the Ark, &c. were obliged to pray in Surplices under pain of indecency? And so (in his other instance) that John Baptist, that Christ, or (because the Text saith that he baptised not, but his Disciples) that those Disciples, euen before the death of Christ, might not baptise any without the sign of the Crosse, but under the same penalty?
Jeanes.
Natural decency is a branch, nay the principal branch of that decency commanded by the Apostle, and therefore I could not think it excluded by you; but withal, I must conclude your interpretation of the Apostle, to be very … and defective, when you said the clear importance of the Apostles words was, Let all things be done according to custome; I was so foolish to suppose that you meant this clear importance of the Apostles words, was also the full importance of them, neither can you assign any reason, why I should think otherwise.
But that, I see, which so much stumbleth you, is the word necessarily, concerning which I hope you are satisfied by what I have already said, and therefore I shall only adde this one thing, that necessarily hath two acceptions.
1. In regard of an absolute necessity.
2. In respect of an Hypothetical necessity arising from some extrinsecal circumstance or condition. Now, I … not restrain it unto either of these senses, but take it abstractively in such a latitude, as that 'tis appliable unto either of the significations according unto the nature of the things spoken of: the omission of natural … infers undecency necessarily, in regard of an absolute necessity; the omission of civil undecency, insers undecency necessarily onelyonly ex Hypothesi: and that inference of indecency which is only necessary ex Hypothesi, is more than an inference thereof, which is fallacious, or at the most but probable; and if we speak of this necessity, it is very false which you say, that that omission which thus necessarily inferres undecency, inferres it in all that ever did, or shall omit it.
But you say that, we know in Logick, that no … is …, which is not de omni true in the whole species of all and every one.
Unto which I answer, that he who hath any tolerable knowledge in …, … that what you say is to be limited onelyonly unto that necessity which is scientifical and demonstrative; for to say nothing of such propositions as are necessary onelyonly hypothetically, there are divers propositions absolutely in themselves …, setting aside all outward circumstances and conditions, which are not … de omni.
1. I shall instance in divers particular propositions, as, Quaedam … est …: … corpus est mixtum.
2. In several negative propositions, as, nullus spiritus est corpus: nullus lapis est …. Now these are necessary propositions, because of an immutable truth, and they are not de omni: For,
1. A particular proposition is not de omni, but de aliquo: And then 2. a negative proposition is not de omni; for de omni is opposed unto that which is foreign de nullo.