A26976:186
Of the immortality of mans soul, and the nature of it and other spirits.…
Of the immortality of mans soul, and the nature of it and other spirits. Two discourses, one in a letter to an unknown doubter, the other in a reply to Dr. Henry Moore's Animadversions on a private letter to him, which he published in his second edition of Mr. Joseph Glanvil's Sadducismus triumphatus, or, History of apparitions by Richard Baxter.
London: printed for B. Simons, 1682
OF THE NATURE OF SPIRITS: › Section 29-31: Ad SECT. XXIX, XXX, XXXI.
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.
Ad SECT. XXIX, XXX, XXXI.
§ 1. YOU say your definition is more informing than defining a Spirit by Fire, viz. [a Spirit is an immaterial substance endued with Life, and the faculty of Motion] and virtually containing in it Penetrability, and Indiscerpibility] Ans. 1. Your definition is common, good and true, allowing for its little imperfections, and the common imperfection of mans knowledge of Spirits. The same things need not be so very oft repeated in answer to ⟨p. 81⟩you: but briefly I say; if by Immaterial you mean not [without substance] it signifieth truth: but a negation speaketh not a formal essence. 2. Spirit is itself but a Metaphor. 3. Intrinsical, endued with Life, tells us not that it is the form: Qualities and proper accidents are intrinsical. 4. The [faculty of motion] is either a tautology included in life, or else if explicatory of life, it is defective; or if it distribute Spirits into two sorts, vital and motive, it should not be in the common definition. 5. No Man can understand that the negative [Immaterial] by the terms, includeth Penetrability and Indiscerpibility. 6 You do not say here that they are the form, but elsewhere you do: and the form should be expressed, and not only virtually contained as you speak. 7. They are not the form, but the Dispositio vel conditio ad formam. 8. If such modalities or consistence were the form, more such should be added which are left out. 9. Penetrability and Indiscerpibility are two notions, and you should not give us a compound form. 10. Yea you compound them with a quite different notion, [Life and the faculty of motion:] which is truly the form, and is one thing, and not compounded of notions so different, as Consistence and Virtue ⟨p. 82⟩or Power.] 11. You say Life intrinsically issues from this immaterial substance: But the form is concreated with it, and issues not from it.
§ 1. YOU say your definition is more informing than defining a Spirit by Fire, viz. [a Spirit is an immaterial substance indued with Life, and the faculty of Motion] and virtually containing in it Penetrability, and Indiscerpibility] Ans. 1. Your definition is common, good and true, allowing for its little imperfections, and the common imperfection of mans knowledge of Spirits. The same things need not be so very oft repeated in answer to