A second part of The mixture of scholasticall divinity, with practical, in several tractates: wherein some of the most difficult knots in divinity are untyed, many dark places of Scripture cleared, sundry heresies and errors refuted ... Whereunto are annexed, several letters of the same author, and Dr. Jeremy Taylor, concerning Original Sin. Together with a reply unto Dr. Hammonds vindication of his grounds of uniformity from 1 Cor. 14.40. By Henry Jeanes, minister of Gods Word at Chedzoy in Somersetshire.

The words being analized, and expounded, are in the next place cleared 〈◊〉〈◊〉 two 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in∣ferences of Papists.

The first, That Concupiscence is not sin.	325, 326
The second, That there are venial sins.	326, 327
One observation pitched upon: That eve∣ry mans lust or 〈◊〉〈◊〉, is the princi∣pal cause of his temptations unto sin.	327
The point deduced from the Text, is briefly explained, confirmed, and applyed.
1. For Explication, two distinctions 〈◊〉〈◊〉,
The first, Of an immediate, and medi ate cause of temptation.	327
The second, Of an universal, and parti∣cular cause of temptation.	327, 328
2. The Confirmation hath two parts.
1. That our own lust is a cause.	328, 329
2. That 'tis a principal cause of tempta∣tion unto sin, because it tempts, 1. In∣ternally. 2. Esfectively. 3. Perpetually.	329
3. The uses that are to be made of this Point, are
Of Information.	Of Reprehension.	Of Exhortation.
1. Of Information, and they are three.
1. We may hence learn what a great dif∣ference there is betwixt the temptations of lapsed man unto sin, and the temptations of our first Parents unto the first sin.	329, 330
2. We may hence be instructed, what a wide 〈◊〉〈◊〉 there is betwixt our tempta∣tions unto sin, and the temptations of Christ.	330, 331
3. We may from the causality, or influ∣ence of lust, infer its obliquity against Pa∣pists, Socinians, and Dr. Taylor.	331, 332