A26883:3869
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.
B. I doubt here again is a Controversy about words. I will speak to you as to one that would know the truth. 1. De re, as to the Controversy. 2. As to the meaning of the Text. I. Let us here consider, 1. What it is to Differ 2. What are the causes of such difference? I. To DIFFER is nothing but to be dissimile, unlike. Dissimilitude or Difference is a Relation. This Relation (as Ockam truly and largely showeth) is nothing extra intellectum, besides its fundamentum, subjectum & terminus, the Absoluta. II. Difference then being a Relation is the dissimilitude of divers persons compared. Here the natural numerical difference of persons, and abundance of other differences are presupposed. And it is the Difference between a Believer and an Unbeliever, the Penitent and Impenitent as such, that we have to consider of. Now here are two Subjects differing, and in each one, if not two differences from the other: So that here are two, if not four several Relations of dissimilitude between them. 1. Paul is a Believer; by which he differeth 1. From Nero as a Privative Unbeliever. 2. As a Positive Unbeliever. On the other side Nero 1. as a privative Unbeliever: 2. and a positive, differeth from Paul. Now every one of these Differences or dissimilitudes have a several cause. 1. The fundamentum of both Paul's differences from Nero are hi• own Faith; and the Termini are Nero's Privative and Positive unbelief. 2. The fundamenta of Nero's difference from Paul are his Privative and Positive unbelief, and the Termini are Paul's Faith to both. Now if the question be, what doth Constitutive make Paul differ from Nero, it must be answered Paul's Faith and Nero's unbelief. For dissimilitude resulteth from the one compared with the other. And if both had been Believers there had been no difference. And so were this the question, there were no difficulty in it at all. But the meaning of the question is not of the constitutive cause of the dissimilitude, or the fundamentum, but of the efficient cause of that fundamentum, or else of the diversifying Dispositiv Receptiva. Now supposing that Faith and Unbelief are the constitutive differencing causes; the efficient causes of both must be sought as the Ratio discriminis, and not of one only. ⟨p. 181⟩Quest. 1. What is the cause (efficient) of Nero's unbelief? Ans. His own will or wicked heart. Quest, 2.
B. I doubt here again is a Controversie about words. I will speak to you as to one that would know the truth. 1. De re, as to the Controversie. 2. As to the meaning of the Text. I. Let us here consider, 1. What it is to Differ 2. What are the causes of such difference? I. To DIFFER is nothing but to be dissimile, unlike. Dissimilitude or Difference is a Relation. This Relation (as Ockam truly and largely sheweth) is nothing extra intellectum, besides its fundamentum, subjectum & terminus, the Absoluta. II. Difference then being a Relation is the dissimilitude of divers persons compared. Here the natural numerical difference of persons, and abundance of other differences are presupposed. And it is the Difference between a Believer and an Unbeliever, the Penitent and Impenitent as such, that we have to consider of. Now here are two Subjects differing, and in each one, if not two differences from the other: So that here are two, if not four several Relations of dissimilitude between them. 1. Paul is a Believer; by which he differeth 1. From Nero as a Privative Unbeliever. 2. As a Positive Unbeliever. On the other side Nero 1. as a privative Unbeliever: 2. and a positive, differeth from Paul. Now every one of these Differences or dissimilitudes have a several cause. 1. The fundamentum of both Paul's differences from Nero are hi own Faith; and the Termini are Nero's Privative and Positive unbelief. 2. The fundamenta of Nero's difference from Paul are his Privative and Positive unbelief, and the Termini are Paul's Faith to both. Now if the question be, what doth Constitutive make Paul differ from Nero, it must be answered Paul's Faith and Nero's unbelief. For dissimilitude resulteth from the one compared with the other. And if both had been Believers there had been no difference. And so were this the question, there were no difficulty in it at all. But the meaning of the question is not of the constitutive cause of the dissimilitude, or the fundamentum, but of the efficient cause of that fundamentum, or else of the diversifying Dispositiv Receptiva. Now supposing that Faith and Unbelief are the constitutive differencing causes; the efficient causes of both must be sought as the Ratio discriminis, and not of one only.