is but cobweb learning in your conceit but we thinke that these cobwebs are strong enough to catch such flyes as you and indeed there is more substance in these cobwebs then in your Astronomicall dreames and phansies 4. What you say of other knowledge That is depends upon conjectures and uncertainty is most true of your Astronomicall Booke wherein I have found nothing but suppositions may-bee's conjectures and uncertainties 5. Whereas you say That man had os sublime a face to looke upward that he might be an Astronomer You are deceived it was that hee might be a Divine for the starres were made not that he should doate upon them in idle speculations and niceties full of uncertainty but that by their light and motion he might be brought to the knowledge of Divinity which your self in your subsequent discourse is forced to acknowledge But take heed you play not the Anatomist upon these celestiall bodies whose inward parts are hid from you in the curious and needlesse search of them you may well lose your selfe but this way you shall never finde God 6. Whereas you say That Astronomy serves to confirme the truth of the holy Scripture you are very preposterous for you will have the truth of Scripture confirmed by Astronomie but you will not have the truth of Astronomie confirmed by Scripture sure one would thinke that Astronomicall truths had more need of the Scripture confirmation then the Scripture of them And indeed all Learning beside the Scripture is but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Theodoret saith that is meere contention and strife of words not to be reconciled Let us not then spend that time in vaine and needlesse speculations which we should imploy in knowing God and in working out our salvation with feare and trembling For it is life eternall to know God in Christ in respect of which excellent knowledge the Apostle accounted all things but drosse and losse Moses was a great Astronomer yet he reckoned the knowledge of this and of all the Egyptian wisdome but detrimentum stultitiam but losse and foolishnesse in respect of the knowledge of holy Scripture saith Saint Ambrose Astronomers with Martha are busie about many things but the Divine with Mary hath chosen the better part which shall never betaken from him How small was the store of gold and silver which the Hebrewes brought out of Egypt in comparison of that wealth which under Solomon they had in Jerusalem so small and meane is all humane knowledge compared to the Scripture for whatsoever learning is nought it is condemned here whatsoever is profitable it is to be found here and more abundantly in the wonderfull height and depth of Scripture then any where else saith Saint Austin Let it then be our delight Nocturna versare manu versare diurna still to be meditating in this holy Law of God that like trees planted by the river side wee may fructifie in due season And as Alexander did carry about him Homers Iliads in the rich cabinet of Darius even so let the holy Scripture be still our Vade mecum and in the cabinet of our heart let us lay it up as Mary did the words that were spoken of Christ. I may say of Scripture as the Apostle said of Christ Whither shall we goe from thee thou hast the words of eternall life Thus briefly and by snatches being with-drawne and distracted with many other businesses have I answered your Booke which I undertooke partly out of the considence I have of the truth of our side partly to vindicate my owne credit partly to satisfie my friends and lastly to excite others whose abilities exceed mine to maintaine and defend the truth of our opinion and to explode the contrary as false which in time may prove dangerous and pernicious to Divinitie FINIS l.g. Meta. 5.4 Cont. Lansbergium l. tsect 1. c. 20. * Plin. li. 2. cap. 65 August de civit li. 16. cap. 9. Macrob. in som. Scipionis li. 2. c. 5. Lactanti de falsá Sapien. li. 3. cap. 24. l. Categ c. 10. Iob. 42.3 Lactan. de fals i Sapi. lib. 3. cap. 3. Aug. ad Lau. li. 1. cap. 10. Lact. li. 3. ca. 3. defal Sap. Cont. Carpentar Sect 2. c. 10. Aug. l. 7. de Civit. c. 35. Theod. ser. ad Grac. infid Plin. l. 30. c. 1. Decivit Dei l. 7. c. 35. Tertul. l. de Anim. c 28 29. Vide Laertum l. 8. de viit Phil. O. 5. Solin c. 16. Cic. 4. Tuscul. Litius Dec. 1. l. 1. Plutarch in Numa Mercure Francois An. 1633. Vincent Lyr. adver Hares Vincent ibid. Cont. Lansbergum L. 8. De Genes ad lit c. 1 c. 2. L. 1. De Genesi ad liter c. 21. Lib. quast E. vang in Mat. 4. 12. Lib. de utilit sâ—edend c. 1. Le Mercure Franc. an 1633. In Gen. ad Fteram De verbis Domini Ser. 18. In Isai. c 19. Psal. 19. Eccles. 1. Josh. 12. 14. In cap. 2. Spharajaero Bâ—se Geor. 4. AEn 10. Esay 38. 8. 2 King 20. 11. De Civit. lib. 21. c. 8. Vide in Iosuam Munster Lyram c. 2 Chr. 32. 31 De civit Dei l. 21. c. 8. L. 2. Chron. l. 1. Prooem Philes sacr De Genes ad liter l. 2. cap. 16. Psal. 148. De civitat l. 11. cap. 34. Hexam l. 2. cap. 3. De Genes ad lit l. 2. cap. 6. Gen. 15. 5. Psal. 147. 4. Ier. 35. 22. Inc. 1. sphae De civit Dei l. 16. c. 23. August ibid. Rev. 4. Psal. 125. Cons. Lansberg l. â— sect 1. 6. 9. Iob 23.8 9. De cognit ver vitae c 6. Hom. 8. in Ierem. Epist. 59. ad Aritum Sect. 1. c. 6. Sect. 1. c. 1,4,5 Prov. 8.5 10.8 Eccles. 1.13 16 17. 8. 5. Odyss 1. 1 Pet. 3.4 Secund. Sec. 9.4 artic 2. Oportet intelligentem speculari phantasmata Arist. Lib. d corde Esay 59. 5. Exercit. 201 Psa. 58.4,5 AEn 5. 7. In Psal. 57. 67. Pinge duos angues Histor. Indicar l. 3. c. 3. Iob 37.9 22.17 Pro. 25.29 Iohn 3. 8. In Psal. 134 Eccles. 1.7 1 Cor. 15. lib. 1. Od. 34. Act. 4. Psal. 29. Iob 26.14 lib 4. Fast. in Apparen In Caten Comitoli in Iob 9. Cont. Lan the. l 1. sc. 1. c. 7. Rerum divinarum humanarumque cognitio Serm. 2. ad Grac. infid Resp. ad Qu. 93. Hexamer li. 1. cap. 6. Psal. 104.2 Isa. 40.22 De Genes ad liter l. 2. c. 9. August In Psal. 104. Hier c. 3. ad Ephes. Iob 8.8 Prov. 8.29 Ier. 5.22 Psal. 104. Du Eartas 3. Day 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Barbara Pyramidum sileat miracula Memphis Martial Perseverantia consisetuimis amisit admirationem De Trin l. 3. c. 2. c. 5. c. 6. Virgil. l. 4. Geor. Eccles. 1.4 2 Pet. 3.5 1 Chr. 16.30 Psal. 93.1 96.10 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 habitor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 habito Psal. 90.2 Prov. 3.19 2. Chro. 1.4 Ps. 119.90 Ps. 104.5 Psal. 98.3 Luke 2. 51.6 Iob. 9.6 c. 1. sec. 2. Apol. c. 47. Philip. 2. L. 7. Inslie c. 7. De hamartigenia Satyr 2. Irenaeus l. 5. c. 31. Psal. 139. Amos 9. Esay 14,13 14,15 An. 6 Pliny Prov. 26. 4. Contra Lansberg Luke 12.56 L. 4. De trin In Prooem in Xenoph. L. 3 c.c De fals sapiens Serns 1. De side Iob 38.5 Verse 22. L. 1. sec. 1. c. 1. L. 1. sec. 1. c. 1. L. 1. Sec. 1. c. 5 AEn 11. AEn 1. De teros motu L. 1. c. 3. 4 5 c. De bello Iudaico 7. c. 12 Natural quaest 1.7 c. 6 L. 1. sec. 1. c. 6 Isa. 60.20 Rev. 10.6 Rom. 8. Iovis arcanis Minos admissus L. 2. sec. 1. c. 1. De Coelo l. 2. c. 10. Lib. 1. de Anima Serm. 1. De F. de L. 1. De Officus De Doctrina Christian. L. 2.6.41
about a hundred years before Pythagoras who live about the time that Brutus was Consul who drove out the Kings as Solinus witnesseth and Tullie Livie saith that he flourished in the time of Servius Tullus Neither doth Plutarch affirme that Numa was scholar to Pythagoras but because their institutions were much alike it was supposed by some saith he that Numa had familiarity with Pythagoras It is true that Numa built a round Temple not in reference to this opinion of the Earths motion as you dreame for he was not of this opinion but in reference to the roundnesse of the world as Plutarch saith And he placed the Vestall fire in the middle not to represent the Sunne in the center of the world that is your glosse but to represent the site of the elementary fire which he conceived to be in the midst of the world 7. Sure Brag is a good dog with you for you tell us that there is scarce any of note or skill who are not Copernicus his followers and more there are of his opinion then all the rest put together and yet you tell us but of one Cardinall Cusanus and sixe more to avoide tediousnesse But in this you speake by the figure Antiphrasis by contraries You name but one Cardinall on your side and within three leaves after you tell us of two Sessions of Cardinalls on our side who condemned this opinion are not twelve more then one and shall not the judgement of so many be preferred to one How many more can you picke out of the whole Colledge of Cardinalls that were of your opinion beside Cusanus who was knowne to be a man that affected singularitie But I think you looked through a multiplying glasse when you concluded from the induction of five Copernicits that there were more of his opinion then all the rest put together Are you not like him who thought that all the ships and goods that came into the Pyreum were his owne And yet of these five which you muster up for your defence there was one even the chiefest and of longest experience to wit Galileus who fell off from you being both ashamed and sorry that he had been so long bewitched with so ridiculous an opinion which was proved to him both by Cardinall Bellarmine and by other grave and learned men that it was contrary both to Scripture Divinitie and Philosophie therefore Galilie on his knees did abjure execrate and detest both by word and writ his errour which you maintaine and promised with his hand on the holy Evangil never to maintaine it againe the other five are men of no great note except in your Bookes 8. You advise us out of Aristotle and Ptolemy to speake that which is most likely to entertaine that which is most agreeable to reason to frame such suppositions of Heaven as be most simple and you tell us that Rheticus and Keplar wish that Aristotle were alive againe But your advice is superfluous and their wish is ridiculous for we speake and intertain that which is most reasonable if we do not prove it that we may amend our errour Our suppositions of Heaven are not so simple as could be wished but we were better content our selves with them then move the earth with you for that is ex fumo in flammam to leap out of the frying-pan into the fire Now to wish Aristotle alive or to thinke that he or Clavius would ever be of your opinion are meere dreames and phancies And though Clavius had found that Ptolomies Hypotheses had not beene so exact as should be yet he would not have beene so mad as to beleeve the Earths motion and the Suns rest And though some have fallen off from Aristotles and Ptolomies opinion to Copernicus that will but little help your cause for in all professions there have ever been some unconstant and giddy-headed men many have fallen off from Christianity to Mahumetisme from Calvinisme to Anabaptisme will you condemne therefore their former professions so some have revolted from Copernicus to Ptolomie You challenge then too great a priviledge when you say that none who having bin once setled with any strong assent on your side that have afterwards revolted from it besides that it is false there was never any profession that could brag of such a priviledge not Christianity the best of all professions And though some men reject that opinion in which they were nursed and have approved for truth and now embrace your absurd Paradox which is condemned in the Schooles yet it will not follow that yours is the righter side for will you say that because many Christians become Turks and Jews many Orthodox men have become Arians Nestorians Eutychians Macedonians that therefore these Heretickes were in the right There are too many wavering Spirits shaken like reeds and carried about like clouds with every winde of doctrine unsetled and instable in all their wayes You tell us that most of those opposers of your opinion have been stirred thereunto either by a partiall conceit of their owne inventions for every one is affected to his owne brood or by a servile feare in derogating from the ancients authoritie or opposing of Scripture Phrases or by judging of things by sense rather then by reason Answ. The first of these reasons will be retorted upon your selfe for the partiall conceit of your owne inventions and the affection you carry to your own brood have made you fall off from that ancient and universall truth to embrace an errour and this was it that moved Copernicus to oppose Ptolomie Alphonsus and the other famous Astronomers Therefore Tycho did not oppose Copernicus to make way for his owne Hypothesis as you say but to maintaine that truth which had so long continued in the world As for your second reason I answer that we should not without extraordinary and urgent cause derogate from the authority of the ancients much lesse from the meaning of Scripture phrase which the Church of God from the beginning hitherto hath delivered to us neither doe we adhere to the meaning of Scripture phrase out of a superstitious feare of the supposed infallible Church as you say but out of a filiall feare to the true Church our Mother the ground and pillar of truth If wee heare not the voice of this Mother we cannot have God for our Father A wise son honoureth his father but he is a foole that will despise his mother Why should we thinke that you or Copernicus can better understand the Scripture phrase then the Church of God from time to time hath done this was the proud conceit of Nestorius that he onely understood the Scripture phrase as Vincentius complaines of him That which you call the new Creed of Pius the Fourth that no man should assent unto any interpretatione of Scripture which is not approved by the ancient Fathers is indeed the old Creed of the Church as Vincentius sheweth let us no wayes no wayes
will be counted idle and none of the Planets But that the Earth may be a Planet is as true as that the Sun may be a burning stone that there may be a man in the Moon that there may be an infinite number of Suns and worlds that the Stars and Planets may have had their first originall and being from the Earth which have been the extravagant conceits of giddy headed Philosophers But I remember what Aristotle saith of some may-bees or possibilities 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which may be may not be and never shall be and so the Earth may be a Planet that is it neither is not ever shall be a Planet But now let us leave your title and examine the substance of your following Discourse The CONTENTS of this Book CHAPT I. IN the Preface and first Chapter is shewed 1. The vanity and falshood of this new opinion 2. The Fathers concerning their judgement of the Antipodes cleared and vindicated and the Philosophers condemned 3. Job defended and explained 4. Pythagoras deciphered and his opinions condemned 5. Some Pythgoreans touched and censured Numa was not of this new opinion nor Pythagorean 6. This opinion hath few followers and how condemned by the Colledge of Cardinals 7. What is to be thought of those who have revolted from the truth of our opinion 8. The Church the Scripture sense and reason must be beleeved in this point of the earths stabilitie c. 9. This new opinion how and when an heresie CHAP. II. 1. Wee must beleeve the Scripture not our owne phansies 2. The Scripture never patronizeth a lye or an errour nor doth it apply it selfe to our capacity in naturall things though it doth in supernaturall mysteries 3. We must sticke to the literall sense when the Scripture speaks of naturall things 4. Some particular Scriptures vindicated from our adversaries false glosses as namely Psal. 19 of the Suns motion like a Gyant and Bride-groom of the ends of heaven and of his heat Eccles. 1. of the Suns rising and setting Jos. 12. of the Suns standing still of the midst of heaven how over Gibeon and how no day like that Isa. 38. of the Suns returning ten degrees of the greatnesse and meaning of this miracle neither known to the Gentiles The testimony of Herodotus concerning this CHAP. III. 1. The Scripture doth not speake according to vulgar opinion when it calls the Moone a great light for so it is 2. Nor when it speakes of waters above the Heavens for such there are 3. Nor when it calls the Starres innumerable for so they are 4. Nor when it mentions the circumference of the bâ—asâ—n Sea to be thirty cubits and the diameter tenne for so it was Why the lesser number is sometime omitted 5. Nor in saying the earth is founded on the waters which is true 6. The right and left side of heaven how understood and how the heaven is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and of the Intelligences 7. The Scripture speaketh properly in attributing understanding to the heart The Galenists opinion discussed 8. Of ova aspidum and the Vipers egges how understood 9. The Aspe or Adder how hee stops his eare 10. Of the North and South winde in Scripture 11. The Sun shall be truely darkned the Moon turned to blood and the starres shall fall c. 12. Of the windes whence they come c. 13. The sea the onely cause of springs 14. The thunder is truly Gods voice 15. The 7. Stars CHAP. IIII. 1. Many Philosophicall points are handled in Scripture 2. The heavens how round in the opinion of the Fathers 3. Wee must have a reverend esteem of the Fathers 4. How the seas not overflowing the land may be esteemed a miracle 5. The works of Nature may be called miracles CHAP. V. Divers Scriptures vindicated from false glosses as Eccles. 1. 4. by which is proved the earths immobility and heavens motion 2. How the earth is eternall and renewed 3. The Scripture speaketh not plainly and ambiguously in the same place 4. The Scripture useth Metaphors 5 How the earth stands out of the water 2 Pet. 3. 5. by which its immobilitie is proved 6. What is meant 1 Chron. 16. 30. c. by these words The world is established c. 7. What is meant Psal. 90. 2. by the earth and the world 8. How the heavens Prov. 3. 19. are established and the Moon and Starres Psal. 89. 37. c. 9. How the heavens 2 Sam. 22. 8. bath foundations 10. What are the pillars of heaven in Job 10. of the ends sides and corners of the earth in Scripture 11. What is meant Isa. 51. 6. by the planting of the heavens 12. How the earth is established 13. What Job meanes by the earth moved out of its place CHAP. VI. 1. The earth is in the middle and center of the world and why 2. Hell is in the center or middle of the earth 3. The earth lowest and basest how 4. Every thing is made questionable by some 5. Aristotle defended 6. The earth is in the center because in the midst of the equinoctiall Horizon c. 7. The imagination must be conformable to the things not these to it the vanity of imagininary circles 8. Astronomers reproved and their vanity shewed chiefly about the bignesse of the stars 9. The earth is the least cirle therefore the center how understood CHAP. VII 1. The Starres have not their light because the Sun is in the center nor hath the Sun lesse light being out of it 2. Why the Earth in the center 3. The Sun is not the center because the Planets move about him 4. The center is not the most excellent place neither are the best things next it or in it 5. There is an harmony amongst the Starres though the Sun be not in the center CHAP. VIII 1. How the eye is deceived and how not and that if the earth moved we should see it 2. Motion and rest how the objects of the eye and of the common sense 3. If the earth moved the clouds would but seeme to move as well as the sunne 4. How the eye can be deceived in the motion of a lucid body 5. The naturall motion of the foundation cannot keep buildings from falling 6. The heavens fitter for motion then the earth 7. Rugged bodies not fittest for motion 8. The sight hindred by the motion of the subject medium and object 9. One simple body hath but one naturall motion proved 10. Essentiall properties more chiefly in the whole then in the parts the earth is heavy in its owne place how bignesse how a hinderance to motion of the earths ineptitude to a swift motion 11. The magneticall qualities of the earth a fiction 12. Similitudes no prooses the seas ebbing and flowing what 13. The whole earth moveth not because the parts move not round 14. Absurd phrases and the spots about the sunne censured 15. That the earth turnes about the moone is ridiculous 16. Some observations to prove
saith he depart from that sense which our holy Fathers and predecessours have maintained And againe whatsoever saith he the Catholique Church hath of old retained that onely shall a true Catholique maintaine and beleeve therefore he shewes that it is the trick of Heretickes to delight in novelties and to reject and despise old doctrines Us profanis novitat bus gaudeant antiquitatis scit a fastidiant If then the Jesuites in reverence to the Churches authority and to the ancient Fathers doe oppose this opinion they deserve commendation and so did these Cardinals that called it in and punished the defenders of it Thirdly you say that we judge of things by sense rather then by reason but indeed you have no reason to say so for although that sensitive things such as the Earths stability and Sunnes motion are to be judged by sense yet we have many reasons for us whereby we judge it must be so as I have shewed heretofore But I confesse we judge not by your reasons because they are but shadowes of reason and no way satisfactory neither doe we so tie the meaning of Scripture to the letter of it as you say but that we give freedome to raise other senses whether allegoricall tropologicall or anagogicall so they be not repugnant to faith and good manners But in historicall things Saint Austin tells us that we must chiefly adhere to the literall sense and it is a Maxime in the Schooles that we must not reject the literall sense which is not contrary agendis aut credendis to the Creed or the Law neither is it unlawfull to conclude Philosophicall points from the letter of Gods word seeing there is but one truth in Divinitie and Philosophie But to conclude Philosophicall points flat contrary to the letter of divine Scripture as you doe is too much boldnesse therefore I will speake to you in the words of Saint Austin writing of the Philosophers of his time Quicquid de tuis voluminibus his nostris literis contrarium protuleris an t aliqua facultate oftendamus aut nulla dubitatione credamus esse falsissimum Your assertion of the Earths motion is contrary to the letter of the Scripture therefore we doubt not to say is it most false As for our ignorance of your Astronomicall grounds it is excusable seeing your owne ignorance is the cause of it how can the Scholar know if the Master be ignorant himselfe of these Principles which he undertakes to teach or knowes not which way to make them intelligible How can the blinde lead the blinde Non obtusa adeo gestamus pectora We are not so dull but we can understand other Principles but yours being Chimaera's fictions non entities having no other ground but your owne phansie cannot informe our understandings which have entities for their objects 9. No councell hitherto say you have censured this opinion for an Heresie Answ. The Church by her councells doth not presently censure Heresies she knowes best her owne times and seasons and reasons too The Physician doth not alwayes in the beginning of a disease prescribe purging physicke 2. From the Churches forbearance to censure an Heresie you must not conclude the nullitie of an Heresie for the Heresies of Arius Macedonius Euryches and Nestorius were Heresies before they were censured by the four generall Councells And the Church saith Saint Austin suffers and beares with many Heretickes so long as they doe not pertinaciously maintaine nor maliciously to the disturbance of the Church spread abroad their falshoods Quod si fecerint tune pollantur Many are Heretickes in sore Coeli which are not in foro Ecclesie and he is not onely an Hereticke which denieth an Article of the Creed but he also that gain-sayeth any plaine place of Scripture The broacher or maintainer of any false and new opinion is an Hereticke saith Saint Austin 3. Either you have not read or have not observed the censure of Galilies opinion by the councell of Cardinals who not onely call it a false opinion erroneous in the faith a doctrine contrary to the holy Scripture but also in plaine tearmes they call it Heresie 4. When you say that Fromundus calls it a rash opinion bordering upon Heresie that Paul the Third was not so much offended at Copernicus when he dedicated his booke to him that the Fathers of Trent call Epycicles and Eccentrickes but fictions these are such weake helps to support your cause that if you leane on them they will prove no stronger then reeds or cob-webs if I should insist on them I should but discover your weaknesse in alledging of them And likewise your instancing of Shonbergius who importunately begged the Commentaries of Copernicus was is not rather out of curiosity to see how he could defend such an absurd Paradox then out of true affection to embrace it So Herod desired to see Christ I doubt not but many will desire to see your booke of this subject which I dare presume will never be of your opinion Lastly where as you say It is absurd not to assent to any thing in naturall questions but what authority shall allow of I say it were both absurd and dangerous for mens soules and the peace of the Church if men were suffered to assent to any absurditie against Scripture sense reason and the Churches authority CHAP. II. 1. Wee must beleeve the Scripture not our own phansies 2. The Scripture never patronizeth a lye or an error nor doth it apply it self to our capacity in naturall things though it doth in supernaturall mysteries 3. Wee must stick to the literall sense when the Scripture speaks of naturall things 4. Some particular Scriptures vindicated from our adversaries false glosses as namely Psal. 19 of the Suns motion like a Gyant and Bridegroome to the ends of heaven And of his heat Eccles. 1. Of the Suns rising and setting Josh. 12. Of the Sunne standing still of the midst of braven how over Gibeon and how no day like that Esay 38. Of the Sunnes returning tenne degrees of the greatnesse and meaning of this miracle whether knowne to the Gentiles The testimony of Herodotus concerning this IT were happy for us say you if we could exempt Scripture from Phisophicall controversies And I say It were happy for us if all Philosophicall controversies could be decided by Scripture or if men would be so modest as to rest contented with Scripture phrases and expressions of such Philosophicall points as are mentioned there But what hope is there to end controversies when many are so wedded to their own phansies that neither will they yeeld to Scripture except they may have leave to interpret them nor to reasons except they may have leave to forme them nor will they trust their own senses but will captivate and enslave them also to their groundlesse imaginations The Scripture tells us in plaine tearmes the Earth is immoveable our senses doe assure us and many reasons which I have heretofore alledged induce
wit That is true which is affirmed by divine authority rather then that which is guessed at by humane infirmity For there he speakes of Philosophicall points which seeme to be contrary to Scripture but you are mistaken when you say that God descends to our capacity in naturall things and conformes his expressions to the mistake of our judgements as he doth apply himselfe to our apprehensions by being represented like a man There is infinite oddes betweene God and naturall things wee that are corporall cannot understand spirituall things much lesse that infinite Spirit but by familiar expressions yet such as doe in some sort represent his attributes to us as he is said to have eyes hands c. by which are signified his knowledge operations c. But for naturall things there was no such necessity because naturall men by natures light are able to understand naturall things so wee know what a circular motion is and if the Earth did truely move we should as soon apprehend the motion of it as we do the Suns motion therefore there was no need why God should descend to our capacity in affirming an untruth because wee cannot understand the Earths motion God then doth not conforme his expressions to the errour of our judgements for our judgements doe not erre in this but he speakes according to the truth of the thing which wee judge and apprehend as it is We apprehend the fire to be hot if you were of an opinion that it were cold which you may as well maintaine as the Earths motion you would doubtlesse tell us that the Scripture in saying the fire is hot applies it selfe to the vulgar errour or mistake of our judgements thus you may make the Scripture to serve you for defence of any absurdity by using such a subterfuge and running into such a starting hole 4. You examine those particular Scriptures which are urged to prove the Suns motion and you tell us that they are spoken in reference to the appearance of things and the false opinions of the vulgar and in the 75. pag. of your Booke you say it is a frequent custome for the holy Ghost to speake of naturall things rather according to appearance and common opinion then the truth it selfe I would 1. know if this consequence be Logicke the holy Ghost speakes of naturall things according to appearance frequently and of some ergo continually and of all or particularly of this to wit the Earths immobility The Scripture oftentimes speakes of God according to mens opinion and capacity as that he is angry that he repents c. Ergo the Scripture speaks still of God thus and so when the Scripture sayes that God is a Spirit or just or infinite or eternall that may be understood if your Logicke be good according to opinion or appearance this will prove a dangerous kind of reasoning 2. Why doth not the holy Ghost tell us in plaine tearmes that the Earth moves if it doth move what end hath hee to tell us that it is immoveable Is it because we are not capable to understand such a high mysterie that is ridiculous For is it a greater mysterie then Christs Incarnation Resurrection Ascension c. which are set downe in plaine tearms but indeed it is no mysterie it 's easie to understand the Earths motion if it did move Or is it because the holy Ghost would not give offence to the world in telling them plainly that the Earth moved being an opinion so repugnant to sense and reason Then doubtlesse he would not have told us that the Sun and Moone stood still at Ioshua's command or that the Sea was divided by Moses Rod and those other miracles of holy Writ as much repugnant to sense and naturall reason as the Earths motion is the holy Ghost useth not to hide or mince the truth for feare of offending men 3. There is great oddes betweene asseverations and allusions betweene the affirmation of a truth and an allusion to a fiction The Scripture speaking of perverse men that will not heare Gods word alludes to the fiction as you call it of the adder stopping his eare ergo when the Scripture speakes of the Earths immobility it speaks according to common opinion A goodly consequence as if you would say the Scripture speakes figuratively of Christ when it calls him a Lamb a Doore a Vine ergo when the Scripture speakes of the beheading of Iohn Baptist it speakes according to common opinion if there be no better Logicke taught in the Universities of the Moone we will never send our Sons thither 3. It is a rule in Saint Austin that we should expound Scripture as the Saints have expounded it before us Quomodo bac verba intellexerunt Sancti sic utique intelligenda sunt But name me that Saint that ever expounded these Scriptures which speake of the Heavens motion and of the Earths immobilitie according to appearance and common opinion Of St. Austins minde was the sixth generall Councell prohibiting any man to interpret Scripture otherwise then the Lights and Doctors of the Church have hitherto expounded them by their writings which Canon is confirmed in the eleventh Session of the third Lateran Councell 5. The ancient Fathers warne us that we doe not deviate or depart from the literall sense of Scripture so long as no absurdity doth follow thereupon now no absurdity doth follow upon the literall sense of the Earths immobilitie but upon your sense and exposition many absurdities follow therefore we must not depart from the literall sense 6. Where the holy Ghost speakes obscurely and figuratively in one place hee doth in another place open himselfe in plaine tearmes as Saint Hierome observes but speaking of the Earths immobilitie he useth still the same phrases neither doth he explaine himselfe otherwise in any one place which doubtlesse hee would have done if he had meant otherwise then hee spoake 7. I absolutely deny that the holy Ghost speakes of naturall things otherwise then in truth and reality and not as you say according to common opinions As for your expositions of these Scriptures which are for us and your instances against our opinion they are wrested and false and impertinent and of no soliditie as we will shew by our answer or reply to each of them severally 1. It is usuall with you to cut your throate with your owne sword and to bring passages against your selfe for you would prove that the Scripture speakes of the Heavens motion in reference onely to the Vulgars false opinion because The Sunne is in his glory like a Bridegroome and in his motion like a Gyant I answer if the Sunne be in his motion like a Gyant then sure the Sunne hath motion for how can that which is not be compared to that which is Similitudes cannot illustrate non entities 2. If the Sun were not a glorious creature David had not compared his glory to without motion he had not compared his motion to the motion
a vulgar opinion to say that the Sunne is in the midst of Heaven then all the chiefe learned both in Divinitie Philosophie and Poetrie speake as the Vulgar doe for they use the same phrase hence came the word Meridian Meridies Mid-day Mid-night If the Sunne were not every day in the midst of Heaven how should the Artificiall day be divided into equall parts Therefore Clavins tells us that the Meridian is called by Astronomers the midst of Heaven the line of the midst of Heaven c. And the Prince of Poets speakes both of the Sunne and Moone in the midst of Heaven Iam medium Phoebus conscenderat igneus orbem Phoebe Noctivago curra medium pulsabat Olympum 5. I would know of you if all Vulgar opinions be false That I hope you will not say If then the Vulgar speake sometime truth why may not the Scripture speake truth with the Vulgar or why should truth be of lesse esteeme because vulgar it should be otherwise for Bonum quo communius eo meliús It is ridiculous to think with you that the Sun was over Gibeon only in appearance and vulgar conceit For indeed the Sun was truly over Gibeon although he was no more over that then over other places Suppose you were in Pauls Church and divers others were there too is the roofe of that Church over your head only in appearance and vulgar conceit because it is over other heads as well as yours or because it is much larger then your head Or must that phrase be thought improper the roofe is over your head 2. The figure Eclipsis is frequent in Scripture when there some words wanting in a phrase which are to be supplied as 2 Sam. 6. 6. Vzza put forth to the Arke is understood his hand So 2 Chro. 10. 11. I with Scorpions is understood will chastise you So here Sun stand still in Gibeon is understood while we are fighting and so the words must be rendered Stand still whilest we are fighting in Gibeon for not onely the city but its territories where Ioshua's army was are called by the same name So Moon in the valley of Ajalon is understood goe not downe These words There was no day like that before it or after it you say are not to be understood absolutely but in respect of the vulgar opinion because there be longer dayes under the Pole Answ. Ioshua spoke not this with any reference to vulgar opinions but to the Climate in which he lived and where the miracle was shewed it was the longest day that ever was in those parts and what reason had he to except the dayes under the Poles being nothing to his purpose When Christ saith There be twelve houres in the day his words cannot be understood absolutely for there be more houres where the Horizon hath any obliquity and the higher the Pole is elevated above the Horizon the more houres have the dayes in Summer yet his words are true in sphera recta and in those Countreys that are under and neere the Line And what will you conclude from this that because these and such like phrases are not to be understood absolutely therefore this phrase the Sun moves is not to be understood absolutely But I will reply These phrases are true in respect of the Climate they were spoken of ergo this phrase also the Sun moves is true in regard of the Climate it is spoken of If then Judea be the place where the Earth is stable and the Sun moves your opinion is quite overthrown by the force of your own instance for if the Earth be immoveable in any Climate and the Sun moveable we have that which we desire it lieth on you to shew how and why the Sun should move there and not elsewhere why and how the earth moves here and not there 2. These words of Ioshua's perhaps have no reference to the length of the day although the vulgar Translation read it so but rather to the greatnesse of the miracle the Heavens hearkening to the voyce of a mortall man Ioshua acknowledgeth That never any such day was before or since that the Lord hearkned to the voyce of a man For so the Hebrew and Greeke read it 4. The Scripture saith That the Sun returned ten degrees in the dyall of Achaz this you will have to be understood of the shadow only So I perceive the Sun and the shadow light and darknesse is all one with you Take heed of the woe denounced against them that call light darknesse and darknesse light Why may you not in other places aswell as in this by the Sun understand the shadow as At Ioshua's command the Sun stood still that is the shadow stood Wee shall shine as the Sun that is wee shall be dark as the shadow 2. You mince the miracle and the power of God too much for is it not as easie for him to make the Sun goe back as to make the shadow returne Wherein is his absolute Soveraignty seen and his transcendent puissance but in the obedience of all creatures even of the Sun Moon and Stars to his commands St. Austin disputing against the Gentiles sheweth them That Nature is not the supreme guider of all things and hee instanceth in the standing and going back of the Sun His Argument had bin of no force had not the Sun moved at all as you think 3. If the shadow moved onely without the Sun then either that shadow moved it self which is ridiculous to think or it was moved by the motion of the dyall or of the gnomon and index of the dyall Now if the dyall or gnomon was moved by God or an Angel tell us where you read it Why might it not as well be turned about with a mans hand or by some engine and so this would have bin a suspected miracle or else the shadow returned according to the motion of some other luminous body so this were to multiply miracles needlesly for 1. that light must be created for that purpose 2. It must have a particular motion of its own 3. It must be a greater light then that of the Sunne otherwise the shadow had not beene discernible 4. It must either be united to some other light or else vanish all which was needlesse is it not safer then to adhere to Gods word from which when we wander we fall into many by-wayes And whereas you tell us That the miracle is proposed onely concerning the shadow I answer we are not to consider so much what is proposed as what was effected God useth to effect more then he proposeth and to performe more then he promiseth 2. You say There would have been some intimation of the extraordinary length of the day as it is in that of Ioshua I answer there was no such reason why the length of this day should be mentioned because this day was much shorter then Ioshua's in respect it fell out in the winter solstice whereas that of
that this miracle hapned when Hesiod flourished you faile in your Chronologie for Hesiod was above a hundred yeares before this miracle was effected if you will beleeve Gentbrard and the other Chronologers You are a wise Philosopher to tell us that the shadow as well as the heat and beames is the effect of the Sunne Can darknesse be the effect of light a privation is a defect not an effect if the shadow were an effect at all it should be the effect of the darke and condensate body but not of the luminous Take heed that the light which is in you be not darknesse for then how great will that darknesse be CHAP. III. 1. The Scripture doth not speake according to vulgar opinion when it calls the Moone a great light for so it is 2. Not when it speakes of waters above the Heavens for such there are 3. Nor when it calls the Starres innumerable for so they are 4. Nor when it mentions by circumference of the brasin Sea to be thirty cubits and the diameter tenne for so it was Why the lesser number is sometime omitted 5. Nor in saying the earth is founded on the waters which is true 6. The right and left side of heaven how understood and how the heaven is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and of the Intelligences 7. The Scripture speaketh properly in attributing understanding to the heart The Galenists opinion discussed 8. Of ova aspidum and the Vipers egges how understood 9. The Aspe or Adler how hee stops his eare 10. Of the North and South winde in Scripture 11. The Sun shall be truely darkned the Moon turned to blood and the starres shall fall amp c. 12. Of the Windes whence they come c. 13. The sea the onely cause of springs 14. The thunder is truly Gods voice 15. The 7. Stars IN this Proposition you goe about to shew us That the Scripture in naturall things conformes it selfe to our conceived errours and that it speakes of things not as they are in themselves but as they appeare And yet the testimony of Vallesius which you bring to help you overthrowes you for Whatsoever saith hee is in Scripture concerning Nature is most true as proceeding from the God of Nature from whom nothing could be hid If the Scripture expressions of naturall things be most true then they cannot agree with our erroneous conceits for truth and errour agree like light and darknesse and you confesse your selfe that all naturall points in Scripture are certain and infallible but in that sense say you wherein they were first intended and that is the sense that you give for you only are acquainted with the first intended sense of the holy Ghost and so wee must take it upon your bare word that that onely is the true sense which your side delivereth and I pray you what heresie may not be maintained by Scripture this way for heretickes will also say That all things in Scripture are true certaine and evident in that sense which was at first intended but when it comes to the point it is the sense which they themselves have invented obtruded The first instance which you bring for proof of your assertion is from the Moon which is called in Scripture One of the great lights and yet by infallible observation say you may be proved to be lesse then any visible starre Answ. Other Astronomers will prove as strongly as you can that Mercury is the least of all starres shall wee beleeve you or them 2. Though I should yeeld that the Moon were a small starre in bulk will it follow that therefore it is a lesser light Must the light be intended as the body is extended I have seen a fire yeeld lesse light then a candle Mercury which you say is bigger then the Moon hath not the hundreth part of that light which is in the Moon so that if Mercury and the Moon should change places yet the light of the Moon would not appeare much lesser nor the light of Mercury much bigger the eie which is the light of the body is not the clearer because the bigger there is not so much light in an Oxe eie as in an Eagle's Divines hold That the light which was created the first day was no other then the light of the Sun diffused over the hemispheare the whole hemispheare is much bigger I hope then the body of the Sun and yet the world I think was not more enlightened the first day then the fourth when that diffused light was contracted and compacted in a narrower compasse 3. To what end should there be so much light in each starre exceeding the light of the Moone They received their light not for themselves but for us except you will say there be innumerable worlds which must be enlightened aswell as ours but wee receive by many degrees more light from one halfe of the Moon then wee doe from all the starres together Surely God made nothing in vaine but in vain hath the starres so much light if man for whom they were made receive no sight nor benefit from this light 4. Astronomicall positions concerning the magnitude and heighth of each starre on which they ground their darke conjecture of light are toyes and fictions of their owne heads they make false Maximes and on these they build confused Babels of their owne conceits yeeld to them that they have the semidiameter of the earth and then Graeculus esuriens ad Coelum jusseris ibit Every smatterer will exactly tell you the height and bignesse of each starre Haud secus ac si oculo rubricam dirigat uno 5. I will tell you what St. Austine saith of this Question and of the Astronomers of his time Let them saith hee talk of heaven who have but small interest in heaven wee confidently beleeve that these lights are greater then others which the Scripture commends to be such Let them give us leave to trust our owne eyes it is manifest that they give more light to the earth then all the rest do c. The Scripture then and our owne senses assure us that these are the great lights If you say that each starre is a bigger light in it selfe then the Moon I will beleeve it when I see it or have talked with one of your world in the Moon who perhaps can informe us better then any reason you can bring to evince us 2. Wee grant that Moses tells us of waters above the firmament but we deny that this is in reference to an erroneous conceit as you say but rather wee hold That it is an erroneous conceit to forsake the true fountaines of knowledge to digge crackt cisternes to preferre any opinion to the plaine text of Scripture What a forced exposition is it to call clouds and raine below in the aire and which are oftentimes lower then the tops of hills to call these I say waters above the heaven of which the Psalmist speaks whereas these waters are so farre below
sea By the same reason if you were travelling and stopt by a river or lake you will conclude that the earth is upon that river or lake But your opinion is true in some sense for when we are stopt by the sea lake or river we get up into a boate or ship and then indeed earth is above water but I thinke you was asleep when this watrish reason dropt from your pen. I have already shewed how the earth is said to be upon the sea that is by the Hebrew phrase which wants comparatives that it is higher then the sea and that it is in some parts of it above the seas flouds and rivers that are in the concavities of the earth 6. You speake much of the right and left side of Heaven and dextro Mercurio you have conveyed a great part of your discourse out of Clavius without acknowledgement but quorsum perditio bac This waste of words might have been better spared as being impertinent For that place of Iob speakes indeed of the right and lest hand but not a word of heaven neither is there any right or lest sidein heaven nor needs there to be For the left side is more imperfect and weak then the right which cannot be said of heaven being an uniforme and every way perfect body And how can there be a right and left side where there is neither sense nor life nor distinction of organicall parts Therefore in trees and plants there is no right or left side though they have life much lesse can this be in heaven 2. Tell us what part of heaven doth the Scripture call right or left this I know you cannot tell 3. Though the Scripture should speak after the vulgar phrase in naming the right and left side of heaven doth it therefore follow that the Scripture speaketh so concerning the stability of the earth 4. Whereas you say That Aristotles opinion in this point is delivered upon wrong grounds supposing the Orbes to be living creatures and assisted with Intelligences I confesse that he calls the heaven 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as having a soule or spirit which he calls Intelligence we Angel by which the heaven is moved but he doth not hereby suppose the heaven to be a living creature for the Angels are not informing sormes of their Orbes but assisting When the Angel was in the poole of Bethesda and moved the water you will not inferre upon this that the poole was a living creature whatsoever is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 animatum that is hath a soule or spirit in it is not therefore a living creature for so you may say a paire of bellowes or winde instruments of musicke are living creatures for winde breath and aire are called sometimes soules 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or anima or animus is common to them all Quicquid ignes animaeque valent Phrygias audire animas are spoken of bellowes and musicall instruments so Phrygius cornus liquida canit anima And yet I will not deny but metonymically heaven may be called a living creature as being that which giveth life to living creatures or by Analogie it may be said to live in respect of the Angel which supplies the roome of a soule not in giving life but motion to it 5. It was no wrong ground in Aristotle to say that the heavens were assisted with Intelligences seeing they cannot move themselves being simple substances neither can naturall forme give such multiplicitie of motions as are in the heavens neither are they moved by other bodies for these bodies at last must be moved by spirits neither doe naturall bodies move naturally in their place but to their place now the heavens are in their place Of this opinion were not onely the Philosophers but also the Christian Doctors heavenly bodies are moved by the ministery of Angels saith Saint Austin Origen saith that the Angels have the charge of all things of earth and water aire and fire and perhaps Saint Hierome mistooke his meaning when he attributes to Origen this errour of assisting reasonable soules to the heavens he meant the Angels And Thomas by that Spirit that compasseth the world by its motion Eccles. 1. 6. understandeth an Angel It were strange to thinke that so many Angels should be assigned by God for the earth and for inferiour officers towards men and none should have the moving of the heavens but of the Angels moving their spheares I have spoken already against Mr. Carpenter 7. The Spirit you say applies himselfe to the common tenent generally received heretofore in attributing wisdome and understanding to the heart whereas reason and discursive faculties have the chiefe residence in the head Answ. 1. How know you that this was the generall tenent in Solomons dayes From what stories of these times have you had this The word heretofore must signifie the time before Solomon I doubt me if you should be put to it you could not prove that the opinion of the understandings residence in the heart was the common tenent in the world before Solomon but I perceive you would have it to be so because Solomon placeth understanding in the heart as if the Scripture set downe no positive Doctrines but what were common tenents whether true or false 2. The word heart here may signifie the soule or minde as it doth often in Scripture and in humane writings too the soule is called heart and the heart is called soule oftentimes So in Homer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 eating their soules that is their hearts with cares And in Plutarch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to be without reason or understanding vecordes and excordes are men whose minds are distempered So in Saint Peter By the hidden man of the heart is meant the renovation of the minde If then by the heart is understood the mind or soule you must needs grant that it is a tenent no lesse true then common that the understanding is in the heart whether you take it for a part or for a power or for a facultie of the soule 3. This was not a common tenent many yeares after Solomon for neither Empedocles nor the Epicures nor the Egyptian Philosophers nor the Arabians nor the Academicks held the understanding to be in the heart but some in the head some in the breast some in all the body Herodotus affirmed it to be in the ears Blemor in the eyes Strato in the eye-browes onely the Peripatetickes and Stoicks placed it in the heart 4. The holy Ghost attributes understanding to the heart not because it was a common but because a true tenent for howsoever Galen and his Sectaries hold the contrary yet it is certaine that the heart is the true seat of the understanding For 1. The will is in the heart therefore the understanding is there also such is the dependency of these two faculties the one from the other that the will is never without the understanding and indeed these two are but
a powerfull voice it is to shake the hearts of the proudest Atheists even of Caligula himselfe and to teach the most perverse Epicures that there is a God in heaven who ruleth and judgeth the earth No eloquence prevailed so much with Horace as this when hee was parcus Deorum cultor an Epicure it made him renounce his errour retro vela dare by which the Gentiles acknowledged there was a supreme God whom they called Iupiter and that hee had the power of thunder qui fulmine concutit orbem qui foedera fulmine sancit So the same Virgil acknowledgeth that the thunder made the people to stand in awe of God an te Genitor cum fulmina torques Nec quicquam horremus c. By this God moved the hearts of the Romanes to use the Christians kindly when by thunder hee overthrew the Marcomans and the Christian Legion from thence was called The thundering Legion It is his weapon with which hee fights against wicked men and which hee flings 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 against perjurers as Aristophanes saith all the thundering disputations of Philosophers and the small sparkes of light or knowledge which they have of naturall causes are but toyes they are no better then glow-wormes What is the croaking of frogs to the cracking of thunder or the light of rotten wood to lightning in the aire Therefore in spight of all Naturalists let us acknowledge with David that it is the Lord that maketh the thunder that this voice of the Lord breaketh the Cedars and divideth the flames of fire and shaketh the wildernesse c. Besides the thunder is called Gods voice as the winde Gods breath by an Hebraisme as tall Cedars and high mountaines are called the Cedars and Mountaines of God the voice of God is as much as if you would say an excellent voice Then whatsoever Naturalists affirme peremptorily of the thunder I will with Iob and David acknowledge God to be the onely cause and will aske with Iob The thunder of his power who can understand Quis tonitrus sonum aut quemadmedum oriatur explicandis rationibus assequi possit saith Symmachus on these words of Iob. 15. The constellation called the 7. Starres are found you say by later discoveries to be but six What if I should grant you this and more too then you desire to wit that of old they were accounted but six of some So Ovid Dicuntur septeno sex tamen esse solent So Aratus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And generally the Poets held that though Atlas had seven daughters called Atlantides from him yet one of them to wit Merope or as others say Electra hides her face but divers others hold there be seven to be seen And S. Basil tells us in plain termes that there are seven stars of these and not six as some think but let there be seven or but six what is this to your purpose Mary that the Scripture Amos 5.8 speakes of seven starres according to common opinion being but six in Galilies glasse but indeed the Scripture speaks neither of six nor seven but of a certaine constellation which the Seventy Interpreters leave out as a thing unknown to them Symmacbru and Theodotion interprete 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the old Latine hath it Arcturus which is a starre in Bootes behinde the taile of the great Beare in English we call them Seven starres and to mine eyes they seem to be so many But if in Galilies glasse there be but six it 's no wonder for you tell us elsewhere That the better the glasse is the lesse will the starres appeare It is not like then that so small a starre can be seen through it Let therefore the number of 7. remaine it is a sacred nnmber numero Deus impare gaudet CHAPT IIII. 1. Many Philosophicall points are handled in Scripture 2. The heavens how round in the opinion of the Fathers 3. Wre must have a reverend esteem of the Fathers 4. How the seas not overflowing the land may be esteemed a miracle 5. The works of Nature may be called miracles HEre you tell us of Learned men which have fallen into great absurdities whilst they have looked for the grounds of Philosophy out of Scripture which you shew by the Iewish Rabbines and some Christian Doctors Ans. As it is vanity to seek for all Philosophicall grounds in the Scripture so it is stupidity to say there be no Philosophicall grounds or truths to be found in Scripture whereas Moses Iob David Solomon and other Penmen of the holy Ghost have divers passages of Philosophy in their writings as I have shewed heretofore of divers constellations out of Iob and why may not Philosophicall truths be sought for out of Scripture seeing Philosophy is the contemplation or knowledge of divine and naturall things both which are handled in Scripture divine things principally naturall things in the second place that by naturall things we may come to the knowledge of Divinity and by this to the attainment of eternall felicity Therefore in Scripture is recorded the creation the cause qualities and effects of the creature that by these we may come to the knowledge of the Creator If the Gentile Philosophers had not found much Philosophy in Scripture they had never conveighed so much out of it as they did into their Philosophicall books as Theodore sheweth The idle opinions of many Philosophers which are grounded neither on sense nor reason as yours of the Earth's motion are not to be sought for in Scripture but Philosophicall truths which are grounded on either or both may be sought and found there and whatsoever idle conceits the Jewes have had of Scripture or their idle fables which they have grounded on it concerne us not they were a giddy headed people given over to a reprobate sense groping at noone day having their hearts fat and their eyes blinded that they may not see their seeking for Philosophicall truths in Scripture was not the cause of their foolishnesse for few or none of them were addicted to the study of Philosophy but their owne voluntary blindnesse pride stubbornnesse and contempt of Christ the internall and essentiall Word of God are the causes of their ignorance in the externall Word so that they having forsaken the truth follow lyes But as for the Christian Doctors they have not exposed themselves to errours by adhering to the words of Scripture but you are fallen into grosse errors by rejecting the words of Scripture These which you count errours are truths as That the Sun and Moon are the greatest lights That there are waters above the firmament That the starres are innumerable as wee have already shewed As for the roundnesse of the heaven though the Fathers doubt of it yet they doe not absolutely deny it Iustine Martyr doth but aske the question Whether their opinion may not be true which hold the roundnesse of the heaven St. Ambrose saith that it is sufficient for us
to know that God hath placed the heaven over us like a vault and stretched it out like a curtaine or skin St. Chrysostome whom Theodoret and Theophylact doe follow deny the roundnesse of heaven as it hath relation to our climate or habitation for so the heaven is indeed as the Scripture saith a vault or skin so that albeit the whole heaven being considered with the whole earth be round yet being considered with reference to parts or climates of the earth it is not round Or wee may with St. Austine so understand the word vaults or curtaine or skin that these tearms may stand well enough with the roundnesse of heaven si sphaera est undique camera est if it be sphericall it is a round vault pellis in rotundum sinum extenditur a skin may be made round or sphericall for a round bladder saith hee is a skin so then neither the word vault skin canopy or tabernacle are words repugnant to the roundnesse of heaven neither have you such reason to insult over the Fathers as if absolutely and peremptorily they had denyed the roundnes thereof For S. Austine sheweth that the stretching out of heaven like a skin is mentioned onely to shew the power of God and with what facility hee made the heavens with more ease then wee should extend a skin and St. Hierome saith that the opinion of the earths roundnesse is the most common opinion agreeing with Ecclesiastes So when the Fathers say that the earth is founded on the seas c. they doe but follow the Scripture phrase which how to be understood wee have already shewed and will touch it againe anon 3. Suppose these were errours yet you must not take advantage from some errours in the Fathers to lessen their credit in other things they were but men and had not the perfection of knowledge which is in Angels called therefore Daemones and Intelligentiae St. Bernard saw not all things we should be sparing in raking into their errours in uncovering of their shame and like flies delighting in their soares But yet you cannot obtain your purpose in ripping up of their errours for it will not follow the Fathers erred in denying the sphericall figure of the heaven c. therefore they erred in denying the motion of the earth must it follow that because S. Cyprian erred in the point of rebaptization therefore no credit must be given to him in affirming Christs incarnation and I pray what great error was this in them to conclude from manifest places of Scripture that the seas not overflowing the land is a miracle and that they are restrained by the speciall power of God I grant that all seas are not higher nor so high as some lands but it is manifest that the sea in some places is much higher then the land as the Hollanders and Zelanders know and that their lands are not overwhelmed with the sea in a storme is a miracle and the finger of God is to be seen in restraining of them which seas when hee is angry with the inhabitants hee lets loose sometimes to the overthrow of townes and villages Camposque per omnes Cum stabulis armenta trahunt In the dayes of Sesostris King of Egypt it was by measure and observation knowne that the Red-sea was much higher then the land but we need not goe so farre the coast of our owne Island in divers places being lower then the sea will prove this to be true where we may daily see Gods power in curbing the violence of that furious creature For the Eternall knowing The Seas commotive and unconstant flowing Thus curbed her and 'gainst her envious rage For ever fenc'd our flowry mantled stage So that we often see those rowling hills With roaring noise threatning the neighbours fields Through their owne spite to split upon the shoare Foaming for fury that they dare no more 5. Why then may not this be called a miracle whereas many strange yea ordinary effects of nature are called miracles Plato called man the miracle of miracles and David saith that fearfully and miraculously he was made Doe not you know that Diana's Temple the Egyptian Pyramides and the rest of those stupendious buildings were called the seven miracles of the world not only Gods extraordinary works above nature but also his ordinary works in nature are miracles though they be not so accounted saith Saint Austin because we are so used to them For as it was a miracle to turn water into wine in Cana of Galilee so he saith that miracle is seene daily for who drawes the moisture or water from the earth by the root into the grape and makes wine but God That Gods finger is to be seen in every worke of nature the Poet doth acknowledge Deum namque ire per omnes Terrasque tractusque maris coelumque profundum A miracle is so called because it excites admiration and doe we not admire Gods power in earth-quakes prodigious births thunders lightnings and in the Eclipses of the great Luminaries therefore Saint Austin checks the vanity of Philosophers who went no higher in the contemplation of these naturall effects then to naturall causes not looking unto God the supreme cause of all Hence then it appeares that the Fathers are not mistaken in attributing the not over-flowing of the sea to a miracle howsoever as your figure sheweth the sea may seem to be and yet is not higher then some lands Neither is there any contradiction in Scripture though sometime it make the sea higher then the land and sometime lower for so it is according to the diversity of coasts and because of much moisture and water found in the bowels of the earth and in that it is encompassed with the sea it may be said that the earth is founded on the waters therefore no man can be deceived in concluding points of Philosophie from expressions of Scriptures as you say but from the misunderstanding of Scripture for what is true in Philosophie cannot be false in Divinitie for in subalternall sciences there can be no repugnancy CHAP. V. Divers Scriptures vindicated from false glosses as Eccles. 1. 4. by which is proved the earths immobility and heavens motion 2. How the earth is eternall and renewed 3. The Scripture speaketh not plainly and ambiguously in the same place 4. The Scripture useth Metaphors 5. How the earth stands out of the water 2 Pet. 3. 5. by which its immobilitie is proved 6. What is meant 1 Chron. 16. 30. c. by these words The world is established c. 7. What is meant Psal. 90. 2. by the earth and the world 8. How the heavens Prov. 3. 19. are established and the Moon and Starres Psal. 89. 37. c. 9. How the heavens 2 Sam. 22. 8. hath foundations 10. What are the pillars of heaven in Job 10. of the ends sides and corners of the earth in Scripture 11. What is meant Isa. 51. 6. by the
planting of the heavens 12. How the earth is established 13. What Job meanes by the earth moved out of its place YOu would faine here overthrow those Scriptures which shew the immobilitie of the earth 1. That place of Ecclesiastes one generation cometh and another passeth but the earth standeth for ever You say That it is not the purpose of this place to deny all kinde of motion to the whole earth but that of generation and corruption But I say that it is neither the purpose of this place to deny the motition of the earth nor to affirme the motion of the sunne for why should he either deny the one or affirme the other which no man doubted of or called in question his drift is to prove the vanity of mankinde from the stability of the earth and motion of the sun windes and waters thus man is inferiour to the earth because the earth is firme stable and immoveable whereas man abideth not in one stay but cometh forth like a flower and is cut downe he flyeth like a shadow and continueth not Or as it is here he cometh and goeth so that coming going are motions to which man is subject and are opposite to the immobilitie of the earth The Antithesis then or opposition here is not between the substance of man and of the earth for man in respect of his substance is permanent as well as the earth if either we consider his soule or his body according to the first matter but the opposition is between the qualities outward estate and life of man and the immobilitie of the earth so that the standing of the earth must be meant either of its permanency or immutabilitie or immobilitie not the first for man as I said is not inferiour to the earth in permancie not the second for the earth is subject as all sublunary things are to mutability and changes therefore the third which is the earths immobility must needs be understood And if Solomon had thought otherwise to wit that the earth moved and the sun stood still he would have said The sunne standeth for ever the earth ariseth and the earth goeth downe c. But for all his knowledge he was ignorant of this quaint piece of Philosophie Againe he proves mans vanity from the motion of the sunne windes and waters though they move and are gone for a while yet they returne againe but man being gone returnes no more so that man hath neither the stability of the earth but passeth away and being past hath not the power to returne againe as the sunne winde and waters doe It is plaine then that the standing of the earth is opposed to its locall motion and to the motion of men coming and going but it were ridiculous as you say to inferre that the earth is immoveable because permanent for the mill and ship may be permanent and yet move this illation is none of ours we say it is immoveable because Solomon here sayes so for he saith it standeth and if standing be motion then the earth moves It is more safe for us to say That the earth is immoveable because Solomon saith it stands then to say it is moveable because the word standing may signifie permanency or abiding As for the motions as you cal them of generation and corruption from which you free the earth they are not indeed motions but mutations Metus est à termino positivo ad terminum poserivum You checke the Jewes for collecting the earths eternity from the word Legnolam albeit I know that this word doth not alway signifie eternity but a long continuance of time yet that the earth is eternall à posteriori I thinke you will not deny except you will tread in some new way of your owne different from that both of ancient and modern Divines who affirme with the Scripture That there shall be a new earth but new in qualities not in substance a change of the figure not of the nature of the forme not of the substance a renovation of that beauty which is lost by man but no creation of a new Essence so that the Jewes might justly inferre from Solomons words that the earth is eternall or stablished for ever You snap at Mr Fuller for urging that these words of Solomon must be all understood literally and not some of them in reference to appearance but without cause for can the same Scripture with one breath blow hot and cold At the same time speake plainly and ambiguously in the same sentence have a double meaning The Scripture which is plaine and simple is farre from double dealing Will any thinke that when Solomon saith There be three moveable bodies the Sun Windes and Rivers that there are indeed but two and that the Sun moves not but in appearance that is moves not at all This is to make the Scripture indeed a nose of wax for what may I not interpret this way Christ fed the people with five barley loaves that is with foure loaves for one was a loafe but in appearance Three Wise-men came from Persia to worship Christ that is two came indeed but the third came onely in appearance You would laugh at me if I should tell you that of any three ships or mills which move really one did move apparently whereas both you I see them move really Now if the Sun doth not move why doth the Scripture say it doth What danger would arise if it spoke plaine in this point You say That the Scripture speaks of some naturall things as they are esteemed by mans false conceipt But this is a false conceit of yours the Scripture doth not cherish or patronise the falshood of our conceits the end of it is to rectifie our erroneous conceits It is true that in high and obscure points of Divinitie the Scripture condescending to our capacity useth the tearms of familiar and earthly things that by them we may by degrees ascend to the love and knowledge of spirituall things for the naturall man understandeth not the things of God but in naturall things which are obvious to our senses we need no such helps If the Sunne stood still it were as easie for us to understand his standing as his moving What you talke of the ends of a staffe and of the ends of the earth is impertinent and frivolous for the Scripture for want of proper words useth metaphoricall and because there is no other word to expresse the remote bounds of the earth then the word End therefore the Scripture useth it But you inferre that because the ends of a staffe and the ends of the earth cannot be taken in the same sense that therefore the motion of the sun and of the winds must be understood in divers senses make an Enthymeme and see the consequence the Scripture saith That a staffe hath ends and that the earth hath ends which cannot be understood properly and in the same sense ergo when the Scripture saith The sunne moveth
and the winde moveth both cannot be understood properly and in the same sense as if you would say The Scripture affirms that Angels are the sons of God and that Judges are the sons of God but not in the same sense ergo when the Scripture saith That the raven flew out of the Arke and the dove flew out of the Arke both must not be understood in the same sense but the one properly the other in appearance Our second proofe out of Scripture which you goe about to undermine is that of Saint Peter The heavens were of old and the earth standing out of the water and in the water You say That the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is equivalent to fuit but I say that this were to confound two predicaments to make the essence and accident all one the site or immobility of the earth and the essence or existence thereof cannot be one or equivalent 2. This were to commit a plaine tantology for so the words must run The earth was was out of the water if these two words was and standing be equivalent 3. The Apostles scope is not only to shew that God made all the earth as you say but that he made it thus that is standing or immoveable that he is the authour not onely of its being and essence but also of that inseparable accident of immobilitie 4. We collect not the rest and immobilitie of the earth from the bare expression of its being or creation but from its being thus made for so we may reason What God hath made to stand fast out of and in the water is immoveable but God hath made the earth thus ergo it is immoveable 5. It were ridiculous to conclude the immobility of a ship or a mill-wheele because a part of them was made to stand above and another part under the water for they were not made for that end to stand but to move But if you had brought your Simile from the rockes of the sea you had done well for God made these rockes to stand partly above and partly under the water and hee made them not to fleete with the Isles of the lake Lommond therefore they are not moveable for God hath made them immoveable and so hee hath made the earth therefore both the old and new Latine translations doe use the word consistere which signifieth constanter stare Our third Argument is taken from these words The world is established that it cannot be moved which words you will have to be spoken of the world in generall or the whole fabricke of heaven and earth but you are widely mistaken for in the Hebrew text the word holam which signifieth the whole universe of heaven and earth is not used in any of these places but the word Tebel which signifieth the round globe of the earth or the habitable world as Pagnine hath it So the Greek Interpreters in all these places use the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth the whole bulk of the world so called from its beauty Now 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is alwaies used for the habitable earth so that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a Synod of men dwelling upon earth and not of Angels or stars And when the Patriarch of Constantinople assumed the title of Oecumenicus Episcopus he did not purpose for all his pride to bring the Angels and starres within the verge of his Diocesse or Episcopacy So the old Latine translation never useth the word mundus but orbis and orbis terrae and Iunius with Tremelius use the words orbis habitabilis that is the earth so that orbis is not used for mundus in any classick Author in prose but for the earth or regions and dominions of the earth as Orbis Asiae Europae orbis Romanus c. Besides in the 96. Psalme the heavens and the world as wee translate it are distiuguished in the 5. ver God made the heavens in the 10. ver hee established the world or earth We need not then to have recourse to a Synecdoche iu the three originall Tongues But you tell us That David you would have said Moses seems to make a difference between the earth and the world when hee saith Before thou hadst formed the earth and the world hee doth but seeme to make a difference but indeed hee makes none for the copulative and is put exepeticè for the disjunctive or here and elsewhere in Scripture as in Exodus Hee that smiteth his Father in the Hebrew it is Abiu ve Immo his father and his mother and in the 17. ver of the same Chapter Hee that curseth his father and his mother which the Evangelist St. Matthew rendereth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 father or mother so among profane Authors the same kind of speech is used as Natus annos 60. senex Here then God made the earth and the world that is hee made the earth or the habitable world 2. Wee may explain Moses his words here thus God made the earth the first day and then it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 earth but it was not made habitable till the third day and then it became 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a habitable world and so in this respect there is some difference between the earth and the world that is between the earth mingled with the water and separated from it Because Solomon saith That God hath founded the earth and established the heavens you inferre That the places of Scripture can no more prove an immebility in the earth then in the heavens But here also your speak at randome for the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Conen here which Arias Montanus and the old Latine translate stabilivit doth properly signifie to dispose or order and so we translate the word Conenu Ps. 37.23 a good mans steps are ordered by the Lord. This word also signifieth to prepare as David prepared a place for the Ark. Therefore the LXX Interpreters explain this word here by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hee hath prepared the heavens and Iunius with Tremelius by statuit hee hath appointed or disposed the heavens But what though wee should yeeld that the word may signifie to establish will it therefore follow that the heavens are immoveable because established No for there is the stability of nature and naturall qualites which is opposite to mutability and so the heavens are established and there is the stability of rest and so it is opposite to mobility thus the earth is established But you will say seeing the same word establish is spoken of both the heaven and of the earth how shall you know that it implyeth immobility in the earth and not in the heaven I answer well enough because the Scripture speaking of the earth saith It is established that it cannot be moved but the Scripture never speakes so of the heavens but onely that they are established not a word to shew any rest
the Mediterran c. Consisting also of lakes and rivers not to speake of Isles and Isthmus hath not then the earth in this respect many ends corners and sides If you did saile along the coasts of the earth you should finde it so 2. The earth of it selfe is not round for without the water it doth not make a globe 3. Though it were perfectly round yet it must have its longitude and latitude 4. By the earth the Scripture oftentimes meanes the land of Judea with the neighbouring countreys as his dominion shall be from the river to the ends of the earth which words were spoken of Solomon literally All the ends of the earth have seene the salvation of God which was not seen by the Americans in Davids dayes So all the world was taxed under Augustus that is the Roman world 5. Whatsoever is finite hath bounds and ends but such is the earth ergo it hath ends Therefore as the Scripture by the ends sides and corners of the earth doth shew that it is not round so doth it also by the stable foundations thereof shew that it doth not move Isaiah speaketh of the planting of the heavens which you say May as well prove them to be immoveable as that which followes in that Verse concerning the foundation of the earth Answ. I perceive your case is desperate for like a man that is sinking in the water you catch hold of every thing that is next you though it be weeds and such as cannot help you For 1. by heavens here may be meant the Church which is that Vine that God hath planted with his owne right hand 2. Though this word heaven were taken in its proper signification yet the planting of heaven is a metaphor out of which you can conclude nothing but must spoile your Syllogisme with quatuor termini 3. Nothing is properly planted but what hath motion in it as trees hearbs and such like vegetables This word then may intimate that there is motion in the heavens as the word foundation sheweth that there is no motion in the earth for it is very improper and dangerous for a foundation to move When the Scripture saith The earth is established by this word you answer is means onely the keeping of it up in the aire without falling to any other place Answ. If the earth be established onely so that it may not fall or be removed to any other place what singular thing hath the earth that is not in other bodies for so are the heavens established and every starre that they shall not be removed out of that place or station which is appointed for them so is the sea confined within its bounds which it cannot passe But there is something else in the earth whereby it differs from other bodies and wherein Gods power is the more admired to wit That it is so established that it cannot be removed Nay more then so it cannot be stirred or wagged at all Thus as Gods glory is admired in the perpetuall motion of other bodies so is it in the perpetuall immobilitie of this 2. The earth you say is kept up from falling I pray you whither would the earth fall being in its owne place and sowest of all the Elements if it fall any where it must fall upward and that is as proper a phrase as if I should tell you the heaven must mount downeward therefore Mute hauc de poctore euram never feare the falling of the earth The Gentiles were afraid that the heavens might fall being held up by the shoulders of Hercules therefore Artemon it seemes was afraid of this who never durst venture abroad but under a brasen target carried over his head And one Phaenaces in Plutarch was sore afraid that the moon would fall downe and therefore pitied the Ethiopians and others that were under the moone but if he had knowne what you know That there is a world in the moone his feare had been just It may be the great shower of stones that fell heretofore in agro Piceno were the stones of some buildings that had fallen downe in the moone We need not feare the falling of our earth which God hath so established that it cannot be moved You see no reason but that we may prove the naturall motion of the earth from that place in Iob Who moveth or shaketh the earth out of her place that is to say We may prove a naturall motion out of a violent or one contrary out of another we may prove the fire to be cold because it is hot or that the earth may move naturally becanse it moves violently The motion that Iob speakes of is an earth-quake extraordinary which is a violent and temporary motion and of some part only and a concussion rather then a motion the motion that you would inferre from thence is a naturall perpetuall totall regular and a circular motion Will you inferre that because the mill-wheele is turned about violently that therefore the whole mill is turned about naturally I have seen a Church-tower shake when the bells have been rung but if I should inferre that the whole Church therefore may move circularly I should feare Nè manus auriculas imitetur mobilis albas lest I should be thought a creature of Arcadia And I hope you are not so simple as to thinke that God did ever shake the whole earth out of its place or if he had that therefore it may move naturally and circularly CHAP. VI. 1. The earth is in the middle and center of the world and why 2. Hell is in the center or middle of the earth 3. The earth lowest and basest how 4. Every thing is made questionable by some 5. Aristotle defended 6. The earth is in the center because in the midst of the equinoctiall Horizon c. 7. The imagination must be conformable to the things not these to it the vanity of imagining circles 8. Astronomers reproved and their vanity shewed chiefly about the bignesse of the stars 9. The earth is the least circle therefore the center how understood HEre you will not upon any tearmes admit that the earth is the center of the Vniverse because our arguments you say are insufficient Answ. Our arguments may be insufficient to you who hath an overweening conceit of your selfe and a prejudiciall opinion of other men But our arguments have been hitherto accounted sufficient by moderate wise and learned men but to your sublimated understanding they give no satisfaction there are some men that are never content and nothing to them is sufficient no not Gods owne word but what though our arguments were insufficient will you therefore reject them You may by this meanes reject all humane learning for it hath not that sufficiency which perhaps you require We know here but in part the sufficiency of knowledge is reserved for a better life Si quid tamen aptius exit But if you have more sufficient arguments for your opinion impart them to