A26883:2105
Richard Baxter's Catholic theology plain, pure, peaceable, for pacification of the dogmatical word-warriors who,…Richard Baxter's Catholick theologie plain, pure, peaceable, for pacification of the dogmatical word-warriours who,…
Richard Baxter's Catholic theology plain, pure, peaceable, for pacification of the dogmatical word-warriors who, 1. by contending about things unrevealed or not understood, 2. and by taking verbal differences for real,Richard Baxter's Catholick theologie plain, pure, peaceable, for pacification of the dogmatical word-warriours who, 1. by contending about things unrevealed or not understood, 2. and by taking verbal differences for real,
London: printed by Robert White for Nevill Simmons, 1675
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.
§. 12. He addeth [If the will need not Gods motion to its Act in specie, it is either in genere entis, or in genere morris. The first cannot be said: For the special Nature includeth the General and more. And the species in genere morris are no species of acts, but only accidents of humane acts, and that only by extrinsic denomination as ⟨p. 41⟩tooth Law,] &c. Answ. 1. The vanity of arbitrary Logical notions, is a wood for you to hide the matter in. You are not able certainly to define what physically specifieth an Action, and what not. To say that one is the species of an Act, and the other is but an accident and no species, is but to say that you will say what you list. We use to say that Acts are specified by their objects: And so when objects differ specie physica vel morali, the acts do so. But when the question is with Judas, shall I betray my Master or not? with another, shall I be perjured or not? with another, shall I commit this Adultery or not? with another, shall I pray in season or out of season? to another, shall I love God or the creatures more? shall I will or not will this? shall I will it or nill it? &c. Here you are so much at liberty that you may please your self with saying, that to betray and not betray, to forswear and not to forswear, to love more or less in degree, &c. are physical species of entity, and so make physical species of Action. But I will not say that non agere & non ens is a species of Entity physical: Nor do I believe that we need Gods Influx ad non agendum as such.
§. 12. He addeth [If the will need not Gods motion to its Act in specie, it is either in genere entis, or in genere moris. The first cannot be said: For the special Nature includeth the General and more. And the species in genere moris are no species of acts, but only accidents of humane acts, and that only by extrinsick denomination as to⟨p. 41⟩the Law,] &c. Answ. 1. The vanity of arbitrary Logical notions, is a wood for you to hide the matter in. You are not able certainly to define what physically specifieth an Action, and what not. To say that one is the species of an Act, and the other is but an accident and no species, is but to say that you will say what you list. We use to say that Acts are specified by their objects: And so when objects differ specie physica vel morali, the acts do so. But when the question is with Judas, shall I betray my Master or not? with another, shall I be perjured or not? with another, shall I commit this Adultery or not? with another, shall I pray in season or out of season? to another, shall I love God or the creatures more? shall I will or not will this? shall I will it or nill it? &c. Here you are so much at liberty that you may please your self with saying, that to betray and not betray, to forswear and not to forswear, to love more or less in degree, &c. are physical species of entity, and so make physical species of Action. But I will not say that non agere & non ens is a species of Entity physical: Nor do I believe that we need Gods Influx ad non agendum as such.