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.

Dr. Hammond. sect. 17.

Nay, 'tis already past question, that Mr. J. in his first argument against my dictate (as he calls it) saith, that the light and law of nature is also a rule of 〈◊〉〈◊〉, and so not onely custome: And if so, then custome is a rule of decency also, and not only the law and light of nature, and where 〈◊〉〈◊〉, and not the light of nature is the rule, there the omission of that doth not necessarily inferre indecency. And of such decency a∣lone it is evident that I spake, on the head of Uniformity (and could not speak sense, if I spake, either of any other, or of the generall notion of decency, which is competible to any other) and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 thence it follows demonstratively that of that decency of which I spake (though not of that, of which it is certain I spake not) still custome is the onely rule of decency.

This therefore I hope may serve in answer to his first charge, that of my timidity, that I dared not say what I said not; together with a view of his concession of the truth of what I did say, and the wary limitation of that concession.

Jeanes.

1. I called your assertion, viz. Custome is the onely rule of decencie, a dictate, and shall call it so still, untill you can prove it, and when you bring any solid proof of it, abstracted from your 〈◊〉〈◊〉, for limitations I cannot call them, I shall be contented to be your vassal.

2 You seem to 〈◊〉〈◊〉, that in the things you speak of, custome, and not the light of nature is the role, but this is very false; for custome is mensura pas∣siva, as well as activa: When it is a rule of decency, it is first measured and re∣gulated

by the light of nature, and without such regulation it is no rule of de∣cency in any matter whatsoever; for custome hath not the force of a law 〈◊〉〈◊〉 sit rationabilis, that is agreeable unto the dictate of right reason and the law of Nature; the law of Nature then is still the principal rule of decency, speake of what decency you will or can, and custome is but a rule subordinate thereunto, and to be examined thereby.

3. If you speak of such decency alone, the omission whereof doth not ne∣cessarily inferre undecency, in respect either of an absolute, or 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ne∣cessity, you doe not speak of that decency which the Apostle commandeth; for that the Apostle should command such a decency, in the omission of which, men onely boldly affirm, or meerly opine there is 〈◊〉〈◊〉, and cannot make good such an affirmation or opinion, by any other than sophistical, or at the best, but probable arguments, me thinks should not sink into the head of any rational man.

Yea, but you say, that you could not speak sense, if you spake either of any other, or of the generall notion of decency which is competible to any o∣ther.

Suppose I grant this, what then? this argument is of little prevalency with me, who am in this particular your Antagonist; for though I acknowledge and admire your great parts and learning, yet I think it not onely possible, but pro∣bable for you, or any other, though never so great a scholar, to speake nonsence in opposition of the truth.

2. It is evident and certain that the Apostle spake of the general notion of decency, which is competible unto natural decency, and from thence it fol∣lows demonstratively, that if it be so certain, that you speak not of this de∣cency, it is as certaine that your glosse of the Apostles' 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and maimed; for it leaves out what is chiefly meant by it, but of this before.