_MADAM,_
You will cease to wonder, that I am not altogether capable to
understand your _Authors_ opinions in Natural Philosophy, when you do
but consider, that his expressions are for the most part so obscure,
mystical and intricate, as may puzzle any brain that has not the like
Genius, or the same Conceptions with your _Author_; wherefore I am
forced oftentimes to express my ignorance rather, then to declare to
you the true sense of his opinions. In the number of these is his
discourse of a _Middle Life_,[1] _viz._ That _the qualities of a
middle life do remain in things that are transchanged:_ For I cannot
understand what he means by a middle life; whether it be a life that
is between the strongest and weakest, or whether he means a life
between the time of production and dissolution, or between the time of
conception and production; or whether he means a life that is between
two sorts of substances, as more then an Animal, and not so high and
excellent as an Angel; or whether he means a middle life for places,
as neither in Heaven nor in Hell, but in Purgatory, or neither in, nor
out of the world, or any other kind of life: Wherefore I'le leave this
Hermaphroditical or neutral life to better understandings then mine.
Likewise I must confess my disability of conceiving the overshadowing
of his _Archeus_, and _how it brings this middle life into its first
life._ For concerning Generation, I know of none that is performed by
overshadowing, except it be the miraculous conception of the blessed
Virgin, as Holy Writ informs us; and I hope your _Author_ will not
compare his _Archeus_ to the Holy Spirit; But how a middle life may
be brought again into the first life, is altogether unconceivable to
me: And so is that, when he says, that the _first life of the Fruit
is the last of the seed_; for I cannot imagine, that the seed dies
in the fruit; but, in my opinion, it lives rather in the fruit, and
is numerously increased, as appears by the production of seed from
the fruit. But the most difficult of all to be understood, are his
_Ideas_,[2] which he makes _certain seminal Images, Formal Lights,
and operative means, whereby the soul moves and governs the body_;
whose number and variety is so great, as it transcends my capacity,
there being _Ideas_ of Inclination, of Affection, of Consideration or
Judgment, of Passion, and these either mild, or violent, besides a
great number of Archeal and forreign Ideas. Truly, _Madam_, I cannot
admire enough the powerful effects of these Ideas, they themselves
being no substances or material Creatures; For how that can pierce,
seal, and print a figure, which hath neither substance nor matter, my
reason is not able to comprehend, since there can be no figure without
matter or substance, they being inseparably united together, so, that
where figure is, there is also substance, and where substance is, there
is also figure; neither can any figure be made without a substance.
You may say, Ideas, though they are not material or corporeal beings
themselves, yet they may put on figures, and take bodies when they
please: I answer, That then they can do more then Immaterial Spirits;
for the Learned say, That Immaterial Spirits are Immaterial substances;
but your _Author_ says, that Ideas are no substances; and I think it
would be easier for a substance to take a body, then for that which is
no substance: But your _Author_ might have placed his Ideas as well
amongst the number of Immaterial Spirits, to wit, amongst Angels and
Devils, and then we should not have need to seek far for the causes of
the different natures and dispositions of Mankind, but we might say,
that Ill-natured men proceeded from Evil, and Good-natured men from
Good Spirits or Ideas. However, _Madam_, I do not deny Ideas, Images,
or Conceptions of things, but I deny them onely to be such powerful
beings and Principal efficient Causes of Natural effects; especially
they being to your _Author_ neither bodies nor substances themselves.
And as for the _Figure of a Cherry_, which your _Author_ makes so
frequent a repetition of, made by a longing Woman on her Child; I dare
say that there have been millions of Women, which have longed for some
or other thing, and have not been satisfied with their desires, and
yet their Children have never had on their bodies the prints or marks
of those things they longed for: but because some such figures are
sometimes made by the irregular motions of animate Matter, would this
be a sufficient proof, that all Conceptions, Ideas and Images have
the like effects, after the same manner, by piercing or penetrating
each other, and sealing or printing such or such a figure upon the
body of the Child? Lastly, I cannot but smile when I read that your
_Author_ makes a _Disease proceed from a non-being to a substantial
being_: Which if so, then a disease, according to his opinion, is
made as the World was, that is, out of Nothing; but surely luxurious
persons find it otherwise, who eat and drink more then their natural
digestive motions can dispose; for those that have infirm bodies,
caused by the irregular motions of animate matter, find that a disease
proceeds from more then a _non_-being. But, _Madam_, I have neither
such an _Archeus_, which can produce, in my mind, an Idea of Consent
or approbation of these your _Authors_ opinions, nor such a light that
is able to produce a beam of Patience to tarry any longer upon the
examination of them; Wherefore I beg your leave to cut off my discourse
here, and onely to subscribe my self, as really I am,
Madam,
_Your humble and_
_faithful Servant._
[1] _Ch._ called _Magnum oporter_.
[2] Of the Ideas of Diseases.