Uniformity in Human Doctrinal Ceremonies, Errata – Commentary
The moſt conſiderable Eſcapes of the Printer in the Letters, &c. And in the Reply to Dr. Hammond.
Firſt in the Letters.
PAg. 2. l. 13. r. in all. p. 7. l. 6. r. papers. p. 8. l. 20. r. foreign. p. 18. l. 30. r. eſſential to the nature of man. l. 34. r. ſubjectivis. p. 29. l. 13. r. much leſſe. p. 23. l. ult. r. or of their nature. l. 42. r. continuet. p. 34. l. 12. dele â. l. 14. r. naturall body ſhall. l. 30. r. a ſpiritual body. P. 36. l. 6. r. ſcomme. p. 37. l. 19 r. conſecutivè. p. 42. l. penult. r. yet you think p. 47. l 10. r. in my abſence. l. 34. r. indifferent and rational Reader.
Secondly in the Reply unto Dr. Hammonds Vindication, &c.
p. 5. l. 41. r. prohibit, p. 6 l. 33 r. improbable, p. 8 l. 42. r. appoſito. p 9. l. 1. r. a place. p. 15. l. 26. r. it is p. 22. l. penult. r. then all▪ p. 25. Marg. two laſt lines r. initiantur. p. 26. l. 17. r. alas. p. 28. l. 41. r. tem…erari. p. 39. l. 22. r. had been. p. 38. l 2. r. from his. p. 39. l. 4. r. demones. p. 41. l. 13. r. aditum. p. 42. l. 36. r. foreign. p. 47. l. ult. r. arguments. p. 50. l. 12. r. variae. p. 54. l. 48. r. foreign p. 55. l. 16. r. thoſe. p, 56. l. antepenult, r. as diſtinct. p. 59. l 37. r. ſuch kind of. p. 61. l. 21, 23. r. try. l. 35. r. ſix Gommandements. p. 62. l 27, r. as with what. p. 71. l. 32. r. autem. p. 72. l. 24. r. legis, p. 78. l. 15. r. uniformly. ibid from l. 18. uſque ad l. 36. there is made a part of Dr. Hammonds Vindication, which is a quotation out of Ames his Diſp. about Hum. Ceremon. p. 481, 482, and ſhould be placed in the Marg. againſt l. 39.] l. 41. r. they will. p. 80. l. ult. r. Churches. p. 83. l. 28. r. fecerint.
Some Advertiſements to the Reader.
I Shall in a word acquaint thee with the relation & pertinency of theſe two foregoing Debates unto the reſt of the Book. The Letters have an apt connexion with the Tract of Original Righteouſneſſe. And the Reply unto Dr. Hammond may be referred unto the Treatile concerning the indifferency of humane actions; and indeed it was the Doctors unjuſt charge of me, and Ames, with the denyal of things Indifferent, that occaſioned that Treatiſe. Theſe two pieces have layne a long time by me (as can be atteſted by divers Gentlemen, and Miniſters, unto whom they have long ſince been communicated) But I was perſwaded by the Book-ſeller to deferre the publication of them, until a Second Part of the Mixture of Scholaſtical and Practical Divinity was ready: And that had been long ſince extant, if Sickneſſe, with other private croſſes, together with the publique troubles and diſtractions of the times, had not hindred: He hath alſo prevailed with me, to reſerve for a Third Part, all my future Replyes, unto all ſuch as have, or ſhall write againſt me. OnelyOnly I ſhall in part alter this reſolution touching the Nameleſſe Author of the Defence of Doctor Hammonds foreign, not that I think it meritorious of any ſerious conſideration; for 'tis fraught, all along, with ſuch reviling, boaſting, and inſulting language, as is every way unſuitable unto the gravity of a Divine, the ingenuity of a Scholar, the charity, meekneſſe, and humility of a Chriſtian; nay the morality of a man. An ingenuous and good natur'd Pagan, would highly ſcorne to treat an Adverſary with ſuch incivilities, as he doth me. But becauſe ſome, who are of the ſame perſwaſion with the Author in other particulars, have triumphed, and inſulted in this his doughty work, as unanſwerable; I ſhall therefore, as ſoon as that which is now under my hands (viz. An Expoſition upon the 7th. of the Romans) is finiſhed, addreſſe my ſelf unto the examination thereof. I am ſo charitable as to think, that Dr. Hammond hath ſo much of Chriſtianity, ſo much of a Miniſter, of a Scholar, of a Gentleman in him, as not to accept, or approve of this Thraſonical and Vain-glorious Second. And if the Doctor diſowne him, I might paſſe him by with ſilence, and a juſt neglect. But if the Doctor ſhall judge, that 'tis but juſtice, to chaſtiſe with ſcoffs, calumnies, and reproaches, ſo contemptible a perſon, as my ſelf, for daring to diſſent from him, and to repreſent the reaſons of my ſaid diſſent, though in a calme and modeſt way: I ſhall then appeale unto all the world, how unagreeable this is unto that humility and moderation, for which the Doctor is generally famed. To irritate the Doctor againſt me, this Libeller tels him, that I have publiquely bragged, that I have made him a Dunce. But I profeſſe, that this is a groſſe, and moſt unworthy untruth; and he can bring no witneſſes for it, but Knights of the Poſt. With the like falſhood, diſingenuity, and malice, he pretends, page 96. &c. that I contumeliouſly undervalue the Doctors Critical Learning, and make him to be but a petty Grammaticaſter, &c. And hereupon he ſpends near five pages, in an Apology for Criticks in general, and the Doctor in particular. And what I pray is the ground of this terrible accuſation? Why (forſooth) I ſaid, I am very loath to enter into a conteſt with ſo great a Critick, about the meaning of a word. Hereupon he inferres, that I make the Doctor to be but a whifling Grammarian; that I account a Critick but a Grammarian, and a Gramma…ian, but an empty Paedagogue: But that for theſe odious inferences there is no colour, or ſhadow in my words, will be quickly diſcern'd by every Freſhman. But ſuch looſe ſequels as theſe, are very rife, and thick in his Book. And of this, I doe not doubt, but I ſhall ſhortly, make ſo perfect a diſcovery, as ſhall give full ſatisfaction, touching the vaſt abilities of this our Mr. Thraſo, unto all impartial Readers, ſave ſuch whoſe underſtandings reach no further than Romances and Playes. His numerous Quotations out of the School-men, have induced ſome to admire him for his deep inſight into Scholaſtical Divinity. But let ſuch his Admirers confider, whether hee be likely to be ſuch a profound School-man, as they ſuppoſe him, who talkes of the Author of Collegium Complutenſe, as of a ſingle perſon, pag. 30. and queſtions whether Capreolus quote Aquinas only to refute him, as the latter School-men doe the former, pag. 341. whereas Capreolus was the profeſſed Champion of Aquinas: And his Book on the Sentences conſiſteth chiefly of collections out of Aquinas; and hereupon he is termed, Thomiſtarum princeps. Notwithſtanding then this Gentleman makes ſuch frequent Muſters of the Names of the School-men, as if he were Nomenclator to them, it is unto me very probable, that this is his firſt conſiderable voyage that he ever made into them; and that now too he hath travelled in them but by the Index. Three great advantages this our Libeller hath againſt me: Firſt, his Billingſ-gate Rhetorick, by which, 'tis not improbable, he hoped to tempt me into ſuch an outrageous fury, as his zeal for Doctor Hammond hath tranſported him with. But unto this I ſhal return nothing, but my pitty and prayers, that God would pardon, and heal this his diſtemper. The ſecond is, the concealment of his Name, for by this he hazards no credit; his pretence for it is, that I might not run into perſonal declamation. How lyable he is to perſonal defamation, I know not: But let him be never ſo obnoxious, he may be ſecure, and need not fear any ſuch uſage from me: For 'tis that which I ſhall ſtudiouſly decline in all conteſts whatſoever, though my Antagoniſt ſhould be a Papiſt, a Turk, a Pelagian, or a Socinian; for I know that perſonal invectives will betray the beſt cauſe unto jealouſies and ſuſpicions. And beſides, a man cannot throw dirt and dung in anothers mans face, but ſome of it will ſtick to his own fingers. A third artifice that he hath, is the ſwelling of his Book into ſo large a volume, as that may either wholly prevent, or much delay all Replication. My Refutation was printed about three years ſince in 40. pages, and his Defence is now come forth in 644. pages. Unto this tediouſneſſe I ſhall apply what Biſhop Hall ſpeaks of his Popiſh Opponent; Should I follow him in this proportion, He might expect an Anſwer in Toſtatus hides, whoſe first words ſhould be, Quis legit haec? Or if my patience would delay my Reply to the juſt paces of his Anſwer, this Volume of his would perhaps be vaniſhed into Grocers ſhops, for waſte paper, in thuris piperiſe cucullos, and would no more need anſwer, than now it deſerveth one. Againſt this his voluminouſneſſe I ſhall make uſe of this expedient; I ſhall conſult ſome learned and judicious friends, and deſire them faithfully and impartially to ſelect ſuch paſſages as they think material, and them onelyonly I ſhall examine. But I ſhall detaine thee, Reader, no longer. All that I have to deſire further of thee, is thy patience, that thou wilt ſuſpend a while thy cenſure, untill thou canſt hear what I can ſay for my ſelfe.
An Explication of a paſſage in the Treatiſe of Things Indifferent, &c.
WHereas in the Treatiſe concerning the Indifferency of humane actions, pag. 54. as alſo in my Reply to Dr. Hammonds Vindication, &c. page 5. I layd down this for a Rule out of ſome School…men, viz. That betwixt things privatively oppoſite there's no medium, no middle, either of abnegation, or of participation, in capable ſubjects; I finde ſome to make a doubt concerning the latter, the middle of participation; for ſuch a medium (ſay they) is the dawning and twi-light betwixt light and darkneſſe; to have one eye betwixt ſight and blindneſſe; ſuch a medium is a diſpoſition unto a diſeaſe, betwixt health and that diſeaſe. But this doubt would ſoon vaniſh, if men would heed the limitations that are uſually given of it.
The firſt is, that there is not ſuch a medium of participation betwixt privative oppoſites, as there is in adverſis, in contrary qualities; for here, each of the extreams is poſitive and affirmative, verè ens, whereas in privative oppoſites, one of them is more non ens than ens.
A ſecond you have in Scheibler in his Topicks, c. 20. n. 72. having quoted a ſaying out of Plutarch, that non datur foreign, he referreth, for limitation, unto what hee had ſaid concerning the intenſion and remiſſion of privation, n. 43, 44, 45. There he layeth down this Canon, privatio non ſuſcipit magis & minus. Privations have no degrees, are not intended nor remitted. But this he tels us is to be underſtood of not partial privations, ſuch as thoſe now inſtanc'd in: for ſuch are privations onelyonly ſecundum quid; but of total privations, ſuch as blindneſſe, dumbneſſe, deafneſſe, death. Theſe are uncapable of degrees, and ſo likewiſe there can be no mixture, or coheſion of them. The ſame for ſubſtance we have in Aquinas, 1.2 ae q. 18. a. 8. ad 1 um. Duplex eſt privatio, quaedam quae conſiſtit in privatum eſſe: & haec nihil relinquit, ſed totum aufert: ut caecitas totaliter aufert viſum, & tenebrae luncem, & mors vitam; & inter hanc privationem, & habitum oppoſitum non poteſt eſſe aliquod medium circa proprium ſuſceptibile, Est autem alia privatio, quae conſiſtit in privari, ſicut aegritudo eſt privatio ſanitatis, non quod tota ſanitas ſit ſublata, ſed quòd eſt quaſi quaedam via ad totalem ablationem ſanitatis, quae f…er mortem. Et ideò talis privatio, cùm aliquid relinquat, non ſemper eſt immediate cum oppoſito habitu. The ſumme and ſenſe of this is, that privations and their habits are immediately oppoſite, if we ſpeak of privations in facto eſſe, not in fieri. Now that Aquinas here ſpeaks of medium participationis, is the Comment of Gregory de Valentia, Tom. 2 diſ. 2. q. 13. punct. 5. This advertiſement I thought fit to inſert, for the prevention of unneceſſary cavils: But yet I muſt confeſſe, that medium participationis was put into the rule ex abundanti, and contributes nothing to the matter in hand: So that the Reader, if hee pleaſe may leave it out; for the ſtreſſe of the proof lyes only upon this, viz. that betwixt things privatively oppoſite, theres no medium of abnegation in capable ſubjects. And this is affirmed ſo unanimouſly by all, as that I know not ſo much as one Diſſentient.
FINIS.