A26976:217
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
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.
§ 3. But you say, [It's only materia & forma logica.] To which I answered before. That's but to say, It is notio secunda, which if it be not fitted ad primam, or ut signum ad rem significandam, it is false. And we suppose you to mean to speak truly and aptly. If you should mean neither materia ex qua, nor in qua, but circa quam, so Form may be Matter.
§ 4. You say, [Nor is the Form adjoined in a Physical Sense to the Matter, unless where the Form and Matter are Substances really distinct.
Ans. 1. I believe not this to be true: If it be, then only Compounds have Form and Matter; but I think Simples have Matter and Form, that are not two Substances but one. As I have oft said, Dr. Glisson after others most subtly laboureth to prove it of every simple Substance, that its Matter and Form are not compounding parts, but Conceptus inadaequati: If the Intellect compound and divide its ⟨p. 93⟩own Conceptions that maketh not a real Composition of two Substances in the objects, but as the Scotists call it, of two Formalities, or Conceptus objectivi: which if you will call a Logical Composition or Intellectual, if you explain it, the matter is small. But besides that Earth, Water and Air have their Matter and differencing Forms, which are not two Substances, so hath Fire in a more noble sense if it be material: And by your Application of the word [Physical] you seem to extend it to Spirits: And if so, I am past doubt that the Substance and Form of Spirits are not two distinct conjoined Substances.
Ans. 1. I believe not this to be true: If it be, then only Compounds have Form and Matter; but I think Simples have Matter and Form, that are not two Substances but one. As I have oft said, Dr. Glisson after others most subtilly laboureth to prove it of every simple Substance, that its Matter and Form are not compounding parts, but Conceptus inadaequati: If the Intellect compound and divide its