5. But to prove this, you say, the proof of any Proposition in a Syllogism, is in order to the proof of the Conclusion: and so the sealing of any Proposition is in order to the sealing of the Conclusion: Reply; The first is true. 1. But what is this to the matter? Is it all one to prove it and to be in order to prove it, to seal it and to be in order to the sealing of it? Is the Conclusion proved on the proof of one Proposition? No: therefore according to your own arguing, neither is it sealed by the sealing of one Proposition. 2. That the sealing of one Proposition is in order to the sealing of the Conclusion, I deny. 1. It may be a single Proposition that is sealed, not standing as part of a Syllogism: as this, I Give Christ and Life in him to you all that will Accept him. 2. If it be supposed part of a Syllogism, it is enough sometime that the Conclusion be cleared or confirmed, or we enabled infallibly to gather it, by the sealing of one Proposition: but it is not necessary that it be the very sealing of the Conclusion, to which the sealing of that Proposition doth tend. When a Landlord hath sealed a Lease to his Tenant, he hath sealed this Proposition, If A. B. well and truly pay such Rents, he shall quietly enjoy such Lands: suppose the minor to be, But A. B. doth or will well and truly pay such Rents: suppose this minor Proposition either false or uncertain, will you say then that the sealing of the major was in order to the sealing of the Conclusion? No: the Conclusion is Absolute, therefore A. B. shall enjoy such Lands: but the Proposition sealed is Conditional. It is enough that it secure his Right, if he pay his Rent, and that it enable him infallibly so to conclude, while he performs the conditions, though it tend not at all to seal the Conclusion. We seldom use seals to Syllogisms: and not to Conclusions as such, or eo noimne, because a major or minor Proposition is proved: though the thing sealed may be to other uses made part of a Syllogism.
5. But to prove this, you say, the proof of any Proposition in a Syllogism, is in order to the proof of the Conclusion: and so the sealing of any Proposition is in order to the sealing of the Conclusion: Reply; The first is true. 1. But what is this to the matter? Is it all one to prove it and to be in order to prove it, to seal it and to be in order to the sealing of it? Is the Conclusion proved on the proof of one Proposition? No: therefore according to your own arguing, neither is it sealed by the sealing of one Proposition. 2. That the sealing of one Proposition is in order to the sealing of the Conclusion, I deny. 1. It may be a single Proposition that is sealed, not standing as part of a Syllogism: as this, I Give Christ and Life in him to you all that will Accept him. 2. If it be supposed part of a Syllogism, it is enough sometime that the Conclusion be cleared or confirmed, or we enabled igfallibly to gather it, by the sealing of one Proposition: but it is not necessary that it be the very sealing of the Conclusion, to which the sealing of that Ptoposition doth tend. When a Landlord hath sealed a Lease to his Tenant, he hath sealed this Proposition, If A. B. well and truly pay such Rents, he shall quietly enjoy such Lands: suppose the minor to be, But A. B. doth or will well and truly pay such Rents: suppose this minor Proposition either false or uncertain, will you say then that the sealing of the major was in order to the sealing of the Conclusion? No: the Conclusion is Absolute, therefore A. B. shall enjoy such Lands: but the Proposition sealed is Conditional. It is enough that it secure his Right, if he pay his Rent, and that it enable him infallibly so to conclude, while he performs the conditions, though it tend not at all to seal the Conclusion. We seldom use seals to Syllogisms: and not to Conclusions as such, or eo noimne, because a major or minor Proposition is proved: though the thing sealed may be to other uses made part of a Syllogism.
