A14350:104
The Common Places
The common places of the most famous and renowned divine Doctor Peter Martyr divided into four principal parts: with a large addition of many theological and necessary discourses, some never extant before. Translated and partly gathered by Anthony Marten, one of the sewers of her Majesties most honourable chamber.The common places of the most famous and renowmed diuine Doctor Peter Martyr diuided into foure principall parts: with a large addition of manie theologicall and necessarie discourses, some neuer extant before. Translated and partlie gathered by Anthonie Marten, one of the sewers of hir Maiesties most honourable chamber.
Imprinted at London : In Pater noster Rowe, by Henry Denham and Henry Middleton at the costs and charges of Henry Denham, Thomas Chard, William Broome, and Andrew Maunsell, 1583Imprinted at London : In Pater noster Rovve, by Henry Denham and Henry Middleton at the costs and charges of Henrie Denham, Thomas Chard, VVilliam Broome, and Andrew Maunsell, 1583
No title page in the transcription: set from the catalogue record.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Again Aristotle affirmeth, that there is no difference between the worthiness of faculties, whether they have work for their end, or whether they have action. For if a faculty should in that respect be counted more noble, because after the act it would leave a work: then would carpenters art be better than the art of civill profession, whereas felicity is ordained to be the end of civill profession, which felicity is no work, but an action: which would be most absurd, since nothing can be found better or more happy than felicity. And this also we showed before: neither is this doctrine weakened by that former distinction of ends, that otherwhile some are actions, and that other are sometime works.
Againe Aristotle affirmeth, that there is no difference betwéene the woorthines of faculties, whether they haue worke for their end, or whether they haue action. For if a facultie should in that respect be counted more noble, bicause after the act it would leaue a worke: then would carpenters art be better than the art of ciuill profession, whereas felicitie is ordeined to be the end of ciuill profession, which felicitie is no worke, but an action: which would be most absurd, since nothing can bée found better or more happie than felicitie. And this also we shewed before: neither is this doctrine weakened by that former distinction of ends, that otherwhile some are actions, and that other are sometime works.
But herein is a doubt, that when Aristotle gathereth a worthiness of every end by the nobleness of the faculty, what kind of demonstration this is. And we answer, that it is of the effects, or (as they commonly call it) of that which followeth. For in very deed faculties do draw their excellency and worthiness from their ends. 1Wherefore since they be made excellent by them, to try the excellency of the ends by the worthiness of the faculties, is to proceed from the effects to the causes, although this proposition is true, which way soever ye turn it. For as we say that the end of the better faculty is the better; so likewise we may say, that it is the nobler faculty which shall have the worthier end.