fiat aqua Elementalis. Helmont. in Aura vitali._]
I know that the chief of these Chymists represent, that though the
Distinct Substances into which they divide mixt bodies by the Fire,
are not pure and Homogeneous; yet since the four Elements into which
the _Aristotelians_ pretend to resolve the like bodies by the same
Agent, are not simple neither, as themselves acknowledge, 'tis as
allowable for the Chymists to call the one Principles, as for the
Peripateticks to call the other Elements; since in both cases the
Imposition of the name is grounded only upon the Predominancy of that
Element whose name is ascrib'd to it. Nor shall I deny, that this
Argument of the Chymists is no ill one against the _Aristotelians_.
But what Answer can it prove to me, who you know am disputing against
the _Aristotelian_ Elements, as the Chymicall Principles, and must not
look upon any body as a true Principle or Element, but as yet
compounded, which is not perfectly Homogeneous, but is further
Resoluble into any number of Distinct Substances how small soever. And
as for the Chymists calling a body Salt, or Sulphur, or Mercury, upon
pretence that the Principle of the same name is predominant in it,
That it self is an Acknowledgment of what I contend for; namely that
these productions of the Fire, are yet compounded bodies. And yet
whilst this is granted, it is affirm'd, but not prov'd, that the
reputed Salt, or Sulphur, or Mercury, consists mainly of one body that
deserves the name of a principle of the same Denomination. For how do
Chymists make it appear that there are any such primitive and simple
bodies in those we are speaking of; since 'tis upon the matter
confess'd by the answer lately made, that these are not such? And if
they pretend by Reason to evince what they affirm, what becomes of
their confident boasts, that the Chymists [Errata: Chymist] (whom they
therefore, after _Beguinus_, call a _Philosophus_ or _Opifex
Sensatus_) can convince our Eyes, by manifestly shewing in any mixt
body those simple substances he teaches them to be compos'd of? And
indeed, for the Chymists to have recourse in this case to other proofs
then Experiments, as it is to wave the grand Argument that has all
this while been given out for a Demonstrative One; so it releases me
from the obligation to prosecute a Dispute wherein I am not engag'd to
Examine any but Experimentall proofs. I know it may plausibly Enough
be Represented, in favour of the Chymists, that it being evident that
much the greater part of any thing they call Salt, or Sulphur, or
Mercury, is really such; it would be very rigid to deny those
114