truth tried: or, animadversions on a treatise published by the right honorable robert lord brook, entituled, the nature of truth, its vnion and vnity with the soule. which (saith he) is one in its essence, faculties, acts; one with truth. by i. w. wallis, john, - . approx. kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from -bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : - (eebo-tcp phase ). a wing w thomason e _ estc r this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons . universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase , no. a ) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set ) images scanned from microfilm: (thomason tracts ; :e [ ]) truth tried: or, animadversions on a treatise published by the right honorable robert lord brook, entituled, the nature of truth, its vnion and vnity with the soule. which (saith he) is one in its essence, faculties, acts; one with truth. by i. w. wallis, john, - . [ ], , [ ] p. printed by richard bishop, for samuel gellibrand at the signe of the brazen serpent in pauls church-yard, london : . i.w. = john wallis. annotation on thomason copy: the " " in the imprint date is crossed out; " march. ". reproduction of the original in the british library. created by converting tcp files to tei p using tcp tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between and available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the , texts created during phase of the project have been released into the public domain as of january . anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. % (or pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf- unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p , characters represented either as utf- unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng brooke, robert greville, -- baron, - . -- nature of truth. truth -- early works to . - tcp assigned for keying and markup - apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images - john latta sampled and proofread - john latta text and markup reviewed and edited - pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion truth tried : or , animadversions on a treatise published by the right honorable robert lord brook , entitvled , the nature of truth , its vnion and vnity with the soule . which ( saith he ) is one in its essence , faculties , acts ; one with truth . by i. w. london , printed by richard bishop , for samuel gellibrand at the signe of the brazen serpent in pauls church-yard , . to the right honourable robert lord brook . my noble lord , your lordship being pleased to doe the world that honour , to impart to it somewhat of yours ( and therefore honourable , ) it was my happinesse , amongst the rest , to be an object of that favour ; and yet my vnhappinesse so farre , as not in all things to fall in with your lordship : like a mariner at sea , descrying within kenne a faire vessell under sa●le , promising a rich lading , makes up to her ; and understanding whence she is , and whether she is bound , desires to view her fraught ; but comming so neere as to goe aboard , falls foule of her ( as they speak ) and is entangled , and perhaps may both have work enough to get cleare . the ●●ire vessell i had in view , was your lordships treatise , now under saile , ( when made publique ; ) which however directed ▪ to a private port or sinus ( a friends bosome ) yet passes the ocean to arrive at it : your lordships name enforms me whence it is , and withall promises a rich fraught ; which the bill of lading tells me what it is , the nature of truth ; and blame me not if i were ambitious to see it , that i might adore it : if , by mischance , i be entangled , i hope your lordships hand will help me to get cleare . our first fathers , which had never seene fire before , while every one was catching at that which shone so bright , no marvell if he that first meddled with it , burnt his fingers : the beauty of truth is likewise bright and glorious ; so glorious , that some have found her dazle their eyes , ( he might have said , others have burnt their fingers , and i , perhaps , am one of them . ) truth is a glorious object , a fit object only for a noble hand : yet sutor sometimes , though he presume not to better apelles picture , may yet find fault with the shooe ; and that without blame , while he goe not ultra crepidam . your lordship , sometimes , in this divine treatise , for fear of dazling our eyes , hath left us in a want of light. naked truth , which your lordship had the happinesse to behold , is proposed to us cloathed , and guilded ( rather then painted ) in a most curious dresse indeed , yet such as hides the body ; the beauty whereof being so well worth beholding , we had rather have seene her ( as your lordship did ) without her gowne , without her crowne , the better to have discerned her true proportion . rhetoricall embelishments being the same sometimes in a philosophicall discourse , that varnish on a faire picture , which helps to set it off , but withall hides it , and presents it more glossy but lesse distinct . for what the orator useth to illustrate , that the philosopher finds to obscure . and thus much perhaps , if no more , may be gained by the ensuing discourse , that your lordship taking occasion from thence , may afford more light to that which divers desire better to understand , and vnmask so faire a face . ( at least those who have once seene her naked , may take the paines to vndresse her . ) and perhaps having taken a second view , through this a more thick perspective of not so high raised a fancy , may give us a more distinct delineation of what its owne dazling brightnesse presented at first more confused . i hope i shall need no large apology to obtaine acceptance , at least a pardon from so noble a lord , ( to whom , i am told , nothing can be more gratefull , and who promiseth the fairest answer , ) if i accept the challenge : which it 's like your lordship would performe , ( if at least encounters of another nature would give way to those of the penne. ) if i be demanded therefore of what i doe , why at all ? i reply , because , in your lordships name , invited : if why so late ? i have nothing to reply but this , qui serò dat , diu noluit . what was at first , in a few dayes , written to a private friend , having lien so long in your lordships hands , is a sufficient testimony that i made no haste to publish it . i have but one request to make , and kisse your lordships hand , that you would vouchsafe , if i have done well , to accept , if otherwise , to pardon your lordships most humble servant , iohn wallis . to the worshipfull , and my worthy friend , henry darley esquire . worthy sir , the sad news of so unhappy a losse as his lordships death , forceth me to give an account of what might else seeme a soloecisme . the book was newly finished in the presse , before his lordships death , and expected only to be first presented to his noble hands , before it was presented to the world ; to whome it was then a going , when that unhappy news stopped it , and some copies were gone abroad . i have suppressed it since , to adde that which you see adjoyned ; in testimony of mine own sadnesse for so great a losse . which yet cannot be so fully expressed by a private penne , as by the common tears of all those to whome religion is deare . a sad losse it was , had it been in the best times , to loose so many excellent accomplishments in one noble breast ; but now most unhappy , when there is so much work and so few hands ; in which , i am confident , none was guided by a more single eye , with lesse obliquity to collaterall aimes . vnhappy then was that accident , that deprived us of one so well worthy to live ; vnhappy hand ! by one sad stroke who shot religion , learning , piety , what not ? sir , the treatise penned long since at your request , had once passed in another character through yours to his lordships hand , not then intended to be made publique , nor directed to any other then your own eye ; what entertainment it then found ( such candour and noblenesse dwelt in that breast ) you know as well as i : and now , being oft solicited , as well by you as others , it was a second time advancing , ambitious again to be made happy by the same hand ; ( and indeed i had been extreamly injurious to his candour , if i should have seemed to decline his eye and present it to another , who taking liberty sometime to dissent from others , did with the same freedome allow others to dissent from him , willing to accept of any assistance in the search of truth ; ) but being there prevented , it is fain to retreat , and fall back to the same hand where it first lodged , as being , next after his lordship , due to you ; from your humble servant j. w. march. . the contents of the ensuing chapters . the preface . divers acceptations of truth . pag. . logicall and morall truth , their nature , and difference . ibid whether breach of promise be formally a ly. . metaphysical truth . . veritas essendi & cognoscendi , or cognoscibility . ibid none of these are truth or light as here taken . . the object not identically the same with the faculty . ibid by truth or light is meant the light of reason . . . . . chap. . a double notion of truth . . his first position , that truth in the first notion is the understanding in its essence , the argument because both , a ray of divinity cousidered . chap. . a second argument from the three requisites to every being , a fountain imparting , a chanel receiving , and wa●ers imparted , considered ; and where wee may find these in the vnderstanding , if a faculty . whence ignorance , and errour in the vnderstanding . . reason and the vnderstanding , ratio & facultas ratiocinand● , all one . ● . the efficient of accidents . . what is the recipient of truth . . how reason in the ●nderstanding , ●an make the soule rati●nal , and give it an essentiall difference from the irrationall . ib. whether the qualities be formae ●ementorum . . the efficient or fountain whence reason comes to the soule ; internall , externall , from the soule it selfe , from the parent , from god. . whether the recipient of truth must be truth . . whether light passe from the vnderstanding to the soule ; from the vnderstanding to the will ; and how the soule acts by its faculties . . chap . how these are found if the understanding be truth . . how every thing is its own recipient . ibid to receive a being , and to receive a forme do esse , & do habere ; differ . ibid chap. . whether the vnderstanding-faculty may not be the recipient of truth . . chap. . a second assertion ( or the first improved ) that both truth , and the vnderstanding , be the same also with the soule , considered . . chap. . a corollary , that all things are this one truth , considered . . whether a consequent of the former assertions . ibid whether true in it selfe , viz. whether all things one. . . whether physically , integrally , specifically ; one thing , one whole , of one kind . . how all from one fountain . . simplicity in god hinders not variety in the creatures . . vnity in god equivalent to an infinite variety . ibid whether the divine attributes be distinct ratione ratiocinat● . . whether all beings be homogeneall ; of the same specificall nature , only gradually distinct . . how all received in the same manner . . whether number be reall . ibid chap. . a farther corollary , that unity is the essence of all things , considered . . whether vnity be the essence of god. ibid whether infinitenesse or vnity in god be first . . whether vnity be the essence of created beings . ibid how the commandements are comprised in love : and morall vertues concatenate in prudence . ibid whether quantity may be divided in semper divisibilia . . vnity as opposed to multitude , is purely negative . . yet , not imaginary . . negatio realis & negatio rationis . ibid ens rationis & negatio rationis . . chap. . the nature of habits . a third assertion , that habits also are the same with the soules essence , considered . . faculties and habits how they differ , and how distinct from the soule . ibid habits infused and acquisite . . plato's reminiscentia , and aristotles rasa tabula , compared . . whether former acts do help subsequent acts or only seeme to doe . ibid whether reason and faith differ only in degrees . . the liberty of the will , wherein it consists . . . why some of more knowledge have lesse faith. . whether the will always follow the vnderstanding , and how . . libertas contrarietatis & contradictionis . it is no perfection to the will , to be able to disobey reason . ib. how all sinfull acts may be called omissive . . the vnderstandings dictates are declarative , not imperative . . speculative & experimental knowledge . this latter the will cannot reject . ibid. whether god be all mercy to the divels . ● . how mercy and iustice are one in god. ibid. chap. . how knowledge and affection differ . . whether knowledge extinguish affection . ibid. why some of lesse knowledge have larger affections . ibid. how far we may admit , reason , the vnderstanding , the soule , its habits , and actions to be the same . . chap. . a fourth assertion , that the operations are the soules essence , considered . . how the soule is actus . severall acceptions of actus . . an materia individuetur a formâ . . whether the act or the power be first , in order , dignity , and nature . . how omnis virtus consist it in actione . ibid. the difference between actus primus & secundus , ibid. chap. . an objection against his last assertion , whether the actions being divers , there be not so many soules , considered , and whether time and p●ace be onely imaginary . . distinction of operations proceeds not from time and place . ibid. whether all the soules actions be one. how all things are present to ●od . how permanency in god may consist with succession in the creature . whether good and evill may be in the same act . whether contradictions may be conscistent . ibid. whether copernicus opinion be confused by sense . chap. . another objection against the same assertion , concerning falshood in the soules operations ; whether it cease to be , when it ceaseth to act truth , considered . whether it cease to be , when it ceaseth to act . ibid. whether succession of moments be onely imaginary . ibid. whether all acts be the same . whether it cease to be when it acts falshood . whether the reality of the object be requisite to make the act reall . ibid. distinction of metaphysicall goodnesse and truth , from morall and logicall goodnesse and truth . whether evill be meerly privative . ibid. whether any individuall action be indifferent . whether falshood be meerly privative . how ens & verum convertuntur . ibid. the difference between ensrationis and error intellectus . whether pain be meerly privative . whether better to be miserable , then not to be. ibid. whether god be the author of falshood , or evill . relations , how produced . ibid. chap. . corollaries or generall consequents from his whole assertion , ( that all things are one truth : ) whether usefull in practicalls . chap. . whether knowledge and sciences receive benefit from this assertion . curiosity in searching , blamed . chap. . whether confusion in the knowledge of causes be redressed by this unity . . chap. . whether divisions in other parts of learning be redressed by it . . wherein the nature of faith consists . and bellarmines dilemma avoided . whether faith save onely declarative . ibid. whether we be saved , even in the execution of the decree , without faith. ibid. scientia simplicis intelligentiae and scientia visionis . . whether god will doe what ever he can doe . ibid. chap. . of curiosity in the search of causes , with a close of all . the post-script . a breviate of the whole discourse . errata . pag. ● . l. read ●i●t . l. . r. first . pag . l. . r. produced . p. . l. . r. and ●ood . p. . l. . r. contrariè , sin●ulares verò contradictoriè . p. ● . l. . r revera singulares . truth tried : or , animadversions on a treatise , entituled , the nature of truth . sir , i have , according to your desire , perused that treatise concerning the nature of truth . ( the which how farre it serves to the expounding the . chapter of math. i examine not . ) one thing that may make it seem somewhat dark , is , that his lordship speaking of a matter somewhat unusuall , is forced to use such metaphors , for want of native words , which may somwhat obscure it : and his lordship was the lesse carefull to avoid it , because they being with himselfe of frequent use , and sufficiently understood by him to whom hee wrote , there was the lesse feare of being not understood , or mis-understood : and so the lesse need to prevent it , by seeking for such words as might better sute with an ordinary reader . before i proceed to state the question , whether truth and the soule be one ; it is very requisite to search , in what sense his lordship understands truth ; that through the ambiguous sense , and divers acceptations of the word , we be not confounded in the progresse . truth in logick , is when the proposition agrees with the thing ; and falsehood , when they disagree . truth in ethicks , is when our words and actions agree with our mind ; and is opposed to a lye , to hypocrisie . and truth in these acceptations is nothing else but an agreement or ●onformity of a type with its prototype , archetypi & ectypi ; of a transcript with its originall ▪ of an idea , or thing representing , with that represented ; signi & signati . thus in logick , vox est signum rei , or imago r●i . if therefore we have that expressed in words , to which in the order of things there is nothing agreeing ; it is a false copy , or rather no copy , being drawn according to no pattern . if that be , which is affirmed to be ; it is true , because they are a copy or representation of the things so being . as it is in words , so it is also in apprehensions , in conceptibus ; if our mind conceive a thing to be , which is not , or to be otherwise then it is , this is a false apprehension , because the idea in our understanding is not a true representation of the thing . in ethicks , our words are to be compared with another copy ; because ( thus● they are not the representation of the things ( immediately ) but the representation of our thoughts , or intentions : therefore , if our words do truly expresse or represent what we think ; it is morally true , that is , it is not a lye , because they agree with this copy ; but yet they may be logically false , as not being a true expression of the thing . if the idea in our apprehension agree with the things , so that we conceive a ●ight of them ; and our word ▪ be a true representation of this idea ; they do truly also represent the things : there is both v●ritas logica , and veritas moralis if wee conceive a right of things , and our words expresse otherwise then we think ; this proposition is both wayes false ; for it neither agrees with the thing , nor with our judgement : but our judgement is logically true ▪ because the idea in our mind is a true expression of the thing . if we conceive amisse , and yet ●ffirm as the thing is ( if we affirm snow to be white , which we conceive to be black , ) our proposition is logically true , but morally false ; and our conceptus is also logically false . if lastly , wee conceive amisse , and speak otherwise then wee conceive , and yet diverse from what wee ought both to think and speak ( as if we conceive snow to be bl●●k , and affirm it to be red : ) our idea or conceptus is logically false , our proposition logically false , and morally false . thus i● one ▪ intending upon a signet to grave the kings ▪ image , mi●●●th of the true proportion , and with this signet maketh impression in wax ▪ the wax cont●●nes a true representation of the seale ▪ but not the true image of the king ; whereas , if the signet had been truly graven , and then impression made in the wax ; the wax had truly represented both the one and the other . thus is it in morall and logicall truth . accordingly , one making a promise with intention to perform it , yet afterward breaks it ; this promise is morally true , because it is a true representation of his intentions ; but it is not logically true , as not being a representation of his future actions . and in his subsequent actions there is also a kind of morall falshood ; because they are not conformable to his promise , by which they should bee regulated . or you may say , his promise was ( morally ) a true expression of his intention ; but his intention was ( logically ) false , as not agreeing with the thing , because he intended that which was not futurum whereas , if he had promised , with a purpose to breake it , his promise had been morally false , but his intention logically true ▪ if , intending to break it , he yet perform it , his intention is logically false , and his promise morally false , though logically true . and thus breach of promise will come under the nature of injury , or injustice ; but not under the nature of a lye , except it were made to deceive ; because it is the true expression of the intention , which is the immediate rule of veracity or morall truth . thus hypocrisie , or dissimulation , is a branch of morall falsehood ; because actio and gest●s , are index animi , as well as words . and this i conceive to be the nature of , and difference between logicall and morall truth . there is yet another truth , and you may call it a physicall truth , ● formall or essentiall truth : thus that which hath the essentialls of a man , is verè homo ; so an infant is a true man. thus we say , a true church , true faith , true grace , true gold , ( not counterfeit : ) thus a syllogisme in a right form , is a true syllogisme , though the propositions be false . and the like . ( but mistake me not ; by morall truth , or naturall truth , &c. i understand not , truths about naturall things , or morall things , ( though the words be oft-times so taken : ) for i am not now distributing truth into its severall species , or severall parts ; but am shewing the ambiguity of the word , and so distinguishing it into its severall acceptations . thus morall or ethicall truth , is that acceptation of truth that is usuall in ethicks : logicall truth , is that accep●ation of ●●uth , which is used in logick , &c. ) but ●●●pp●●● , we ●●● y●t ●●rre from that acc●pt●tion of truth , in which ●●● lo●● ▪ speaketh : i will therefore come somewhat ne●rer . ●●●●● the logicall and morall●…ptat●●n ●…ptat●●n ●● truth , we have a metap●ysicall acc●ptat●… ●●s and v●rum are ●ermini conv●r●ib●les . and truth is taken in ●●●● such acc●ptation , when it is divided into veri●●s essendi and cognosc●ndi . veritas essend● , or the truth of being , is that per quam res ver●●st : and thus ens & verum conver●untur . quic ●uid est , ver● est ▪ for except it have a reall and true being ( and not a supposed being ) it is not ●ind●●d ) a being , but is su●●os●d ●o be . veritas ●ognosce●di is that per quam res ver● cognoscitur . and thus also ens & verum conver●u●t●r : for whatsoev●r is , may b●e ●n●wn to be . this veritas i● nothing ●lse but cognoscibilitas : th●re●ore veritas , as it is affectio entis , is d●fin●d by some to be convenie●●ia r●i , seu co●formit●s rei , ●um i●tell●ct● ; ( ●ive humano ●ive di●●●● . ) thus truth in the things and knowledge in the understanding have ●elation to each other as objectum a●● p●tentia . as colour in the object to sight in the eye . colour , as it is inherent in a body , makes it to be coloured ( cor●us coloratum : ) the same colour , as it stands in relation to the eye , makes it to be visible ( corpus visibil● . ) thus essence , or being , as it is in the ●hing , constitutes it in the nature of a thing , or a being : and the sa●e ●●●●nce in the thing , as it hath relation to the understanding , makes it ●ognos●ibile . ●n the first sense it is veritas essendi ▪ in the second it is veritas cognos●end● . ( where t●e cons●●uction will be somewhat hard , exc●●t you give philosophers leave to use the g●●●●d in a possive signification , which amongst pure ●rammaria●s is more ra●●ly ●●und . ) for by the s●me e●se●c● by which it is ens , by the same it is cognoscibile ; that being by which it is , by the same it ●●y be ●●own to be : as by the same colour , by which the object is color●tum , it is also visibile . and this ● conceive to be the right acceptation of metaphysicall truth , or truth as it is taken in metaphysicks for an affection of being : not being a thing really di●●inc● for that thing , that truly is , and may be truly known to be ; but ( as they call it ) modus entis . and now we be come somwhat n●e●er that acceptation of truth wherein his lo●● ▪ takes it ; though ( if i mistake him not ) that sense wherein he useth it , is somewhat distinct from all these : for whether you consider the truth of ●eing , or the truth of knowledge ▪ they are in themselves really the same , and the same ●l●● really with that ens , t●●● being , which tru●y is , and is truly k●o●n ●● be : which thing 〈…〉 a being , and as truly cognos●●ble , when there is no understanding present to take notice of it , as when it is actually unders●●●d . ●●●e a● an object is ●●uly col●u●ed , and truly visible , even then when ●●●re is no ●ye present to behold it . and therefore this truth cannot be one with the understanding ▪ because it may be then and there where the understanding is not . again , truth being ( as i said ) one with the thing known , if it ●● also one with the understanding , or the soule ; the understanding or soule knowing shall be one with the thing understood : a s●one and the soule shall be one individuall being : for how can truth be the same with the stone , and the same with the soul , except the soul and the stone be the same . object . but you will say thi● is that he contends for , not only , that truth understood is one with the soul ; but that both the thing understood , and the sou● understanding , are this truth . answ . . to proceed therefore . if the stone understood , and the soule understanding , be the same ; then when began this unity , ●●●● identy ? were they the same before the stone was actually understood ? or did they then contract this unity , when first the soul did actually know it ? why they should be the same , before the act of knowing ; there 〈…〉 no more reason , then why one ●●●ne should be the same with ●…ne ; ●●y one man should be the same with another man : and so peter or paul might be ●s truly said to b●●ray christ , as ju●●● , if peter and judas be one and the same . and if they should ●●●n ●●ntr●●● a● unity , ( and not before when the understanding ●o●h ●●●s● actually understand it ; we must ta●e ●●●● saying , intell●ct●s i●●ellig●●do ●m●●a ●it ●mn●a ▪ in a more gr●●●e 〈…〉 it w●● m●●●● . a●● , ●●●y j●●●emen● , it i● utt●●ly impossible , for that which hath ●●●● been al●ud●● ●● be made idem ; ●s also for that which is o●● , to ●e made a●●ud a s●ips● . i say , ●● i● impossible for two things to be made one●nd ●nd the s●me , by a re●ll identitie . 't is true , two things may be so united as to be made one aggrega●um ; as the body and the soul make one m●n , the divi●●●y and humanity of christ make ●n● person : but that two things can become the same ; that the soule is the body , and the body the soule ; that the humanity of christ is his divinity , and his divinity his humanity ; i conceive not onely false , but impossible . the hand and the foot ( with the rest of the members ) make one body ; but neither the hand is the foot , nor is the foot the hand , but really distinct . answ . . but further , as it is hard to shew , when this neer kindred either of affinity , or consanguinity ; this union either of identity , or of identification , had its first originall : so , if there be any such vnion , ( either con●ate or contracted ) between the soul and a stone : then will not onely one but all soules ( at least , all soules actually understanding and apprehending it ) be the same with this stone . and these soules , being one and the same with this one individuall stone , they will be one and the same with each other . thus we shall have but one soule informing all bodies ; not by a pythagoricall metempsychosis ▪ by translating of soules from one body to another , but as a●●mus averroisticus , one soule extended through the whole universe , informing so many men as there be bodies , wherof every man is partaker tanquam communis aur● : nay neerer , for of the ayr each takes a part ; but as for this soul , each is , each hath this soule entire . neither doth it inferre onely an identity of soules , but an identity of objects also : for all ▪ objects being apprehended by one soul , they become all one with it : and being all one with the same numericall soule , they must be also one with each other . so that all soules will thus be one , all objects will be but one , and this one object one and the same with that one soule ; and all the world but vnum ens , whose every parcell is alteri ●dem ; the same with each other . object . you 'l say , all this is no more then he contends for ; to make truth ▪ one with the soule ; and that all things that are , are nothing but this one truth . answ . if this be his opinion , to prove an identity of all creatures , because their being , from whence proceeds their cognoscibility , is all one with the soule , or understanding : his lord ▪ must give me leave to dissent from him , if for no other reason , yet because ●e dissents from himselfe : for if his argument be good , that all things are one with the soul , because truth or cognoscibility , ( which differs not really from their essence ) being the object of the soules operation , must also be one with the soule ; it will follow also , that god is likewise one and the same with the soul , because he also is cognoscibilis , and may be known by the soul : and also , that all things else are one with god , because they are al known by him. and so he falls upon the first of those errours , which he mentions in the ●nd of his prooemium , immediately before the first chapter ; which is , by mounting too high in the exal●ing of truth , to confound the creator with the creature ▪ by making her god. neither doth it onely make truth to be one with god ; but even all things else , being one with truth , to be one with god. again , if so , how is it that in the end of his . chapter , concerning the body and the soule he tells us , not that they are the same , or that the body is the soul , but as husband and wife each bringeth his part towards the making up of the compositum . at least m● . sadler is mistaken as well as i , ( who is presumed at least to understand his lor● ▪ mind , su●●●ciently , ) who ●ells us in his epistle , that corporall vnion ●● materialls is sometimes [ miscalled ] identity , which is at best but a ●●ld touch in a point or two . but i suppose there may be another acception of truth , which may better sute with ( at least the first part of ) his lordships discourse . you may call it veritas cognoscendi , as well as the former , bu● in a different sense . there knowledge was taken in a passive●●●se ●●●se , and truth was that which makes the thing cognoscib●le , or fit to be understood : here you must take it in an active sense ; and so veritas cognoscendi , or the truth of knowledge , will bee that which makes the understanding cognoscitivum , or fit to conce●ve and apprehend that cognosc●●li●y which is in the obj●ct . and thu● truth will be that ●rinciple , whereby the soule is able to ●…hend or conceive that which may be known . veritas cognoscendi in the former sense , and that in this sense , are both principia cognoscendi , principles of knowledge , but in a severall way . ( you may distinguish them , if you please , thus ; truth of knowing , and truth of being known , and veritas cognosce●di may be 〈…〉 both ) they differ as colour in the object , from the power of seeing in the eye : the former makes the object visible , and fit to be perceived ; the other makes the eye visive , and fit to discern it . if the first were wanting , vision would be hindered , because there is nothing visible : ( hence it is that the ayr , and spirituall substanc●● are not seen even by the s●arp●st sight . ) if the latter be wanting ▪ ●●● sight is hindered from a desect in the organ : ( thus ▪ the most persp●●●ous colou●s are not discerned by a blind eye ; whereas the ●ame colours are in themselves sufficiently visible , and actually discerned by others ▪ ) thus veritas cognoscendi , in the former sense , makes the object to be cognoscible ; truth , in the latter sense , gives the understanding , or soule , ability to know it . now if you call the power of se●ing , which is in the eye , by the name of ●●●ate light ( ●o dis●●●gu●sh i● from light either in the object , or in the medium : ) you may also call reason , which is this principle of knowing in the soule , or understanding , by the name of innate truth , or light. and this signification of truth i conceive to be most sutable to his lor● ▪ meaning . ( but verum , or truth , in this sense , is not convertible with ens : for though all beings have in them truth , wherby they may be known , yet all have not this truth , or power to know. ) and thus if you understand it , it will not seem so strange a paradox , ●o 〈…〉 th●● reason ( which he calle●h truth ) is all one with the vnderstanding ; and that the vnderstanding is not distinct from the soule . for this will be granted by all those , which affirm that potenti● non real●ter distinguuntur ab animâ ; that the powers or faculties of the soule , are not really distinct from the soule it selfe : and these a●e 〈…〉 i mistake not ) the greater part of ●ound philosophers . and ●●us his lor● ▪ opinion is but the same with theirs in other words . ( yet may we ●●●ll speak distinctly of these severall facul●ies ; as w● do of the wisdom of god , the power of god , the will of god , &c. which are as en●●rely one with god , as these faculties can be with the soule . ) and thus much for explaining the state of the 〈…〉 . ● proceed next to examine the grounds of this his lor● ▪ opinion . chap. ● . whether the vnderstanding , and truth understood , be one. in his first chapter he tells us , that truth ( that is reason ) is enthron ▪ d in the vnderstanding ; and there appears under a double notion th●●●●● the fountain or ground-work ( which is reason it self , ) we call it ( saith he ) the form or substance . and then those workings which breathe from thence ( the streams issuing from it ) viz. the operations and exercise of reason , the effects of a reasonable soule . ( we call them usually , actus primus , and actus secundus . ) the first of these he begins with , proving it to be the vnderstanding in its essence : ( the second he proceeds to in the tenth chapter . ) his argument is this , what is the vnderstanding other then a ray of the divine nature , warming and enlivening the creature , conforming it to the likenesse of the creator ? and is not truth the same ? if you take truth in any other acceptation beside that last mentioned , i see not how the argument will hold : for if you take it either for the truth of being , or the truth of knowing ( in the common acceptation ; ) for that essence , whereby every creature both is and may be known to be : it may be granted , that the understanding is one of those rays of the divine nature , somewhat of that excellency implanted in man , of that image of god whereby man is conformed to the likenesse of the creator : it will be granted also , that the essence or truth of every creature , whereby it is or is known to be , is a ray proceeding from the same center , ( though to another point of the circumference , ) a stream issuing forth from the same fountaine of being ; and carryes some weak resemblance , some sparkling of that primitive light , or truth , that originall essence which is in god ; ( for thus every creature hath somthing of god in it , refert quaelibet herba deum . ) yet will it not follow from hence , that this communicated ray of being is the same with the understanding . for the argument will prove erroneous , as being affirmative in the second figure , in which no affirmative proposition can be concluded : and the consequence will be the same with this , [ what is the body of man but a materiall substance ? and is not a stone the same ? ] which you would hardly admit as a sufficient argument to prove our body to be a stone . if you take truth for reason , the argument will admit of a reduction into an exact form , thus , [ that ray of the divine nature , which doth ( solely , or principally ) expresse gods image in man , is the vnderstanding ; but truth or reason is this divine ray ; therefore truth ( that is reason ) is the vnderstanding . ] and this argument will hold good , if we grant the soule to be the immediate worker in rationall operations , without an intervenient facultie : but ( otherwise ) those that are of the contrary opinion would deny ( or distinguish ) the major , and say , that this divine ray , this image of god , consists not wholly in the understanding by it selfe , but in the soule or understanding , accompanied with its severall faculties and ●perations . and indeed it cannot be denyed , but that the operations of the soule do containe part of this divine image , ●s well as the soule in its essence ; and yet they are the soules ( immediate ) progeny , and are not immediately produced by god. now what others admit concerning the operations , they will a●●●rm concerning the faculties ; that they are but parcels of this ray or divine image , that they are but lesser rivulets derived from the greater stream ▪ or branches annexed to it . now from hence , [ that the soule in its essence , together with the severall faculties and operations wherewith it is endowed , doth make up the chiefest part of gods image in man ] to prove , [ that every part of this image are the same with each other ▪ ] and so [ the faculties to be the same with the soule ; ] is that which they will not allow . and to presume , or take for granted , that this image of god consists but in one single ray ; i● but petere principium , it being no lesse hard to prove , then that the faculties and the soule are one ; that truth ( or reason ) is one and the s●●e with the understanding , or reasonable soule . they would say rather , that the soule is one of those bra●●he● , which ( issuing from the same root of being in god , from whence all other created beings doe arise ) divides it selfe into severall twigs . and we have no way to convince them of falshood in this particular , till we have first proved the soule and its faculties to be one simple o● single essence . the prosecution or explication of his lor● ▪ . argument doth no way oppose this acceptation of truth which i have given , but confirms it ; which ( if i rightly understand it ) may be thus explained ; that truth ( reason ) is light , none will d●ny ▪ ( by light understand , that internall principle whereby the soule can see o● know , which is so called by a metaphor drawn from the innate light , ( we call it potentia visiva ) whereby the eye is enabled to see : ) that light ( this power or principle of knowing or reasoning ) i● a reasonable creature i● the fo●ntai● of life , i● ma●●f●s● : ( by life understand the life of the soule , if i may so speak , that which specificates the rationall soule , and makes i● 〈…〉 ) for ●●●●●●● of a reasonable soul , ( that which makes it to be reasonable ) is light , ( that principle whereby it know● and understands : ) and therefore when the soule informeth , or giveth life to animal rationale , ( making it rationall ) it inableth the creature to work according to that light , ( according to this principle of knowing : that is , it inableth the reasonable creature to know or understand , &c. ) thus whilst life ( that which makes a reasonable creature to be reasonable ) and light ( this power of knowing ) is truth ( or reason ; and truth ( or reason ) is conformity to god ( or gods image in us : ) and the vnderstanding also , as we yet discourse of it , is this light ( this principle of reasoning ) to the soule ; the vnderstanding and truth ( or reason ) can be but one. the whole argument i● briefly thus ; [ the image of god in us , is our understanding ; and this image or divine radius , consists in reason ( which he calls truth ; ) therefore truth or reason is our understanding . ] his minor ( that this ray or beam of divinity in us , is truth or reason ) is thus proved ; [ because reason in us is ● derivative beam , a sparkling , of that primitive light ( or wisdome ) which is in god : ] and so that which enlightens us , and inables us to know , or understand , according to our measure ( that which furnisheth vs with knowledge ) is a representation of gods sapience or wisdome whereby he is said to know. now , [ that truth or reason ( which is all one ) is this derivative beam of light , wherby we are able to know ; ] and [ that this ability to know or understand , is that which makes u● to be reasonable , ] is manifest . wherefore he concludes , that , whilst ●ur life ( or rationality ) consists in light , ( that is , in an ability to know and understand ) and this ability consists in truth ( or reason ) which is a conformity to god ( as being a stream issuing from his ocean of wisdom ; ) and whilst ( as reason is this abilit● of knowing , so ) the vnderstanding also is this light ( this ability or power of knowing ; ) the vnderstanding and truth ( that is , reason ) must be all one. those , who deny his conclusion , would answer , that both reason and the vnderstanding , doe inable the soule to know , or understand , but in a severall way , as distinct principles ( and therefore are not the same : ) the one instrumentally or ministerially ; the other , by using this as its minister . thus fire , by its heat , burns ; a stone , by its heavinesse , descends ; glasse , by its l●vity or smoothnesse , re●●ecteth ; and the like . if you say , the weight of the stone , or smoothnesse of the glasse , are not things distinct from the stone and glasse , but rather modifications of these things ; i contend not : for neither doe i hold the understanding , or any other of the soules faculties , to be a thing distinct from the soule ; but , at the most , only an accidentall modification of it , not really distinct from it : yea rather , that it is the soule it self , quatenus intelligens , ( as the power of god , is god himself quatenus potens ) admitting no other but a distinction of reason . chap. ii. a second argument ( from the three requisites to every being ) examined . in the second chapter , he proposeth first the opinion of those that stile the understanding a faculty , whereby the soule receiveth or entertaineth truth , and acteth accordingly . but here his lordship ( if i mistake not ) varieth from his former acceptation of truth ; comparing it not to the innate light , or power of seeing , in the eye ; but to the advenient light , which streames to it through the ayr , bringing with it the idea , or visible species , of the object seen . for , soon after , he calls it , those sweet beams of light which beat upon us continually ; which cannot be meant of any innate light , but of an advenient light. and thus i see no inconvenience at all , to say , that the soule , or understanding , by its innate light , of reason , ( which whether you say to be distinct from the soule , or not , it is not much materiall ) doth daily receive or entertain new truths , or new representations of that truth of being which is really existent in things ; either by a reiterate actuall understanding of those things which it had formerly understood , or by a new apprehension of somwhat whereof before it was ignorant . like as the eye by its innate power of seeing , discerns new species ( conveyed to it by advenient light ) either from objects formerly seen , or now first represented . next he lays down three requisites to the constitution of every being . a fountaine commu●icating ; a channell entertaining ; and waters imparted . ( conferen● , collatum , recipiens . ) and he asks where we shall find these three , if the vnderstanding be a faculty . i answer . if you speak of advenient light ( last mentioned ) which is a representative truth , or an idea of that r●all truth which is in the things known ; i say , the reall truth ( or veritas ess●ndi ) sends forth this representative truth , or idea , which is conveyed by a deferent light ( either of discourse , or information , or the like ) till it come to the vnderstanding , where it is received and entertained by the innate light ( or truth ) of reason . like as the inherent light of colour in the object sends forth a representative light of visible species , which is conveyed by a deferent light in the ayr , till it come to the eye , where it is entertained by the innate light , which is the faculty of seeing . and , as the remotenesse , or obscurity of the object ; the darknesse of the medium ; or the weaknesse of the faculty , may hinder sight , so that we see not at all , or not perfectly : in like manner the distance of the object , as in things quite out of our reach ; or the obscurity of them , which send forth no species , or manifestation of their essence towards us ; our imperfect discourse , or insufficient information , which is as a dark medium ; and lastly , the weaknesse of our apprehension ; doe cause ignorance in the understanding , which is answerable to not-seeing in the eye . again , as in ignorance so in errour . a reflection of a false light upon the object , casting a false seeming colour , which may be mistaken for the true colour of it ; an indisposed medium , as when we see through red glasse , &c. and a distempered organ , by reason of some vitious humours accidentall in the eye , &c. may cause a mistake and errour in sight : so here , when there is a false light upon the object , as when we conceive that to be the effect of one thing , which indeed proceeds from some other cause , fallacia non causae pro causâ , or the like ; a false discourse or inference , or a false relation , which is as a stained medium ; or a distempered vnderstanding , by reason of passion , of l●sa phantasia , or the like ; may cause an erroneous judgement , apprehending things to be otherwise then inde●d they are . and thus i have shewed not onely those three requisites which his lordship requires , but some others besides them ; supposing in the mean time the vnderstanding to be a faculty ; and taking truth for those sweet b●ams of light , which beat upon us ; advenient light. if you take truth for reason ; and withall suppose reason to be distinct from the vnderstanding , and ●t also from the soule . you may say , the understanding is the recip●ent ; reason the thing received in it ; and that then and from those , when and from whence it received its essence , to which reason is a conna●e and appendent faculty ; that is , either from god , by immediate creation , which many think ; or from the parents , by propagation , which others ▪ ●old . but i suppose there be few or none , that hold , reason to be distinct from the vnderstanding , and that also from the soule . for when they speak of reason , as a faculty of the understanding ; by vnderstanding they mean , the soule it selfe , quatenus intelligens , being considered a● the subject of reason : and when they speak of the vnderstanding●● ●● a faculty , whereby the soule is able to conceive and judge of truth ; then they take the vnderstanding to be the same with reason . i should rather say , that reason , and the vnderstanding ( as it denotes a faculty ) are two words synonima , denoting the same faculty or power of knowing and judging . which faculty i would not grant to be another thing from the soule-knowing , or the soule-understanding but a modus ▪ as neither doe i allow to any naturall-power , or faculty , ( which they make the second species of quality ) any other being then the being of a modus , and not the being of ● thing . and thus we may safely say , the soule receives the faculty of reason or understanding ; thence , from whence it receives its being : ( as a stone receives its heavinesse from that which produceth it : ) that which gave it to bee gave it to be thus. sometimes indeed accidents are not received from that which produceth the substance , but from some other efficient ; as the smoothnesse of marble proceeds not from the producer , but from the polisher : and yet i hold not , the smoothnesse to be one thing , and the marble to be another thing ▪ but the marble to be a thing , and the smoothnesse to be modus . and thus it must be granted in acqui●●te habits ; where the giver and receiver are the same , and the thing received modally , but not really , distinct from either . but for faculties , or naturall-powers ; if you look for an externall efficient or giver , it will be the same that produceth the substance ; but if you be contented with an efficient per emanationem , thus they are said to flow or arise from the form , or substance . and then the giver and receiver is the same ; ( for the form which i● the subject receiving , is also per emanation●m effectiva , from whence it ariseth as an essentiall consequent : ) and if you say the faculty received is not so much as modally distinguisht from it but onely ratione 〈…〉 ; i contend not . but so much ▪ distinction at least , i suppose , we must allow it . having thus answered his lordships qu re , i proceed to answer his objections . if the vnderstanding ( saith he ) be the recipient , then the light ( of reason ) which differenceth us from the vegetative and sensitive creatures , lieth in the vnderstanding , and not in the soul : and so the soul is either not enlightened at all , but only a theca to the intellect ; or else there be two enlightened ( rationall ) beings in ●●● reasonable creature . for answer , first , i suppose ( as i said before ) that there are few , if any , that will affirm , the soul , the understanding , and reason , to be three things : but they will either say , reason is the understanding , and not in the understanding : or else , reason is in the understanding , which understanding is the soul , considered only under this notion ▪ quatenus intelligens , as it is the subject of reason . and thus the difficulty appears not ; for the light which differenceth us from unreasonable creatures , whether you call it reason , or call it the understanding ▪ is seated in the soule , and so denominates it intelligent or vnderstanding . but secondly , we want not a recipient for truth though the soul be not it , it may be the understanding . yet thirdly , though the soul be not the immediate subject , it may yet be the vltimate , which is more then a theca . object . but you will reply , however it be so , that wee make this light to be inherent in the soul ; yet it is not sufficient to make an essentiall difference between the reasonable and unreasonable soul. for though reason be in the soul , except it also be the soul , it makes the difference but accidentall ; for thus the reasonable and unreasonable soul will not differ in their essence , but only in their adjuncts . answ . to this i answer ▪ first , this is a new difficulty not arising out of his lordships argument : for though this light ( of reason ) be an accident , yet this hinders not but that there may be his three requisites : for an accident may be truly received , in the subject , from the producer . and yet ( secondly ) this , though a faculty of the soul , and not the soul it self , makes notwithstanding a noble difference between a rationall and irrationall soul ; so that the soul loseth not its dignity ▪ neither becomes a bare theca to the understanding or reason : and is su●●iciently dignified to have such a divine faculty in it , and of it , by which it produceth it operations , which the irrationall soul hath no● . we account those s●ones precious , that have in them some rare vertues : and why not the soul , indued with so divine a faculty ? especially ( which is the third thing i reply ) since it is so in the soule , that is also of the soul. the honey which samson found in the dead lions carkas● , proceeded not from it , but was only accidentally or casually in it . a knife touched with a loadstone will take up a needle , or the like ; but this attractive vertue is not from it self , but from the loadstone : and you may call the knife , if you please , a theca or receptacle of this vertue ▪ and say , it hath no other then a relative excellencie , as it is the receptacle of an excellent vertue ; ( though indeed to be the subject of inhesion , is more then a theca , or a bare receptacle . ) but in the loadstone it is otherwise , for there the attractive vertue is not onely in it , but of it , or from it selfe : it is so received in it , that it ●●owes from it , it is sui partus . thus in the soule , though reason be a faculty of the soul , yet is it such a faculty as floweth from it ; and so the soule not only its receptacle , but also its originall . thus is light in the sunne , and from the sunne , it is not received aliunde . and it is a reall excellencie in the sunne , and not onely relative , to be the author and originall of that which enlightens the whole world. and it is a reall excellencie in the soule ( and more then the excellencie of a theca ) to have from it selfe , from its owne essence , such a faculty whereby it is able to know and understand . but you will say still , however reason may thus dignifie and distinguish it from irrationall beings ; yet this is but an accidentall dignity , an accidentall distinction , no● essentiall ; as consisting in that which is in the soule , but distinct from it . therefore fourthly , reason in the soule , is not onely an accidentall , but an essentiall perfection , an essentiall consequent flowing immediately from the essence of the soul , as an inseparable endowment : and so may make an essentiall difference ; ( it is essentiall to the soule that reason should arise from it . ) and thus that which is distinct from a thing , may yet be essentiall to it , viz. essentiale consequens , though not essentiale constituens . but fifthly , ( which i conceive to be of the greatest force ) though reason , or the understanding ( as a faculty ) be only essentiale consequens ▪ and so , in its formality , makes onely an externall difference ( aposteriori ; ) yet it points out unto us an essentiale constituens , an essentiall ingredient ( as i may so call it ) from whence this consequent doth arise . which is somwhat in the essence of the soule : whereof we can take no other notice then from its operations ▪ ( and this answer holds good , though you suppose reason to be distinct from the understanding , and both from the soule : for so , that essence ( from whence the understanding flows , together with its immediate and remote issue , viz. reason and its operations ) will make this essentiall difference between the rationall and irrationall soul. ) thus they say , prim● qualitates are not formae elementorum , but that from whence these first qualities do essentially flow . and though the qualities make but an accidentall difference between them , yet the substantiall forms from whence the qualities do arise make an essentiall difference . ( so here : the rationall soule is such a substance as is able to give rise to such faculties , which the irrationall soule is not . ) if you ask what this substantiall form is ? you know the ordinary answer ; dic formam lapidi● & eris mihi magnus apollo . ( it is a hard thing , by his own confession , to find out the form of any being , much more to discover the being of a form , pag. . ) tell me the being of any thing , and i will tell you the being of this. if i ask what the soule is ? ( which to be we are sure : ) you will say perhaps , a spirituall substance : and that is all you can say , for the essence of it . but if i ask , what it is to be spirituall ? what , to be a substance ? i suppose you cannot tell me otherwise , then by negations , or effects . and ( thus ) they will do in the elementall forms ; they are not these qualities , but something from whence they arise . ( and so for the substance of the soule , it is not these faculties but the originall of them . ) if you will say , there is no such something , as this substantiall form of the elements ; because we cannot tell you what this something is . ( to omit , that by the same reason you might banish all being , because none can tell you , what being is : for if you say ( and that is all you can say ) that being is a ray communicated from the originall entity in god : this tells us at the most , but whence it is , not what it is . ) i say , if you deny , that there be any other forms of the elements ( beside their qualities ) whereby they differ one from another ; then need we look no further : for then these faculties , though but accidents , may be sufficient to make an essentiall difference in the rationall soule from the irrationall . but further , if you can perswade them , that the essence or form of the elements , and their accidents or prime qualities , are the same : i doubt not , but then they will as easily grant , the soul and its faculties to be the same also . and thus i have answered according to their opinion that hold the soul and its faculties distinct : and have shewed , that we are not so farre to seek for a recipient of reason , or truth , as his lordship might imagine . and indeed there is nothing more difficult in this particular , then in all accidents whatsoever ; their subject is their recipient , and so is the subject of truth , or reason , it s recipient . but there is another kind of recipiency ( which i shall touch in the next chapter ) which ( if i mistake not ) will cut the sinews of this argument , and leave it of no force . but in the mean time ( having found a recipient ) we must seek for a fountaine , from whence this light of reason , or truth , is derived . for that is his lordships next demand ; who is it that communicateth this light ? for the answering of this , i shall first propound another qu●re of the same nature , and then apply mine answer joyntly to both . i ask therefore first , whether fire ( supposing it to be an element ) be not the true recipient of heat ? and the loadstone the true recipient of the attractive virtue that is in it ? and the sunne , the true recipient of light ? if so , then i demand , from whence they are received ? what is the fountain from which they are communicated ? if you speak of an internall fountain , from whence they flow by an essentiall emanation ; the recipient and the fountain will be the same . and so , if you say the body of the sunne , of the fire , of the loadstone , be the immediate recipients of their light , heat , and virtue ; then must i say , that these severall bodies are the severall fountains from whence ( respectively ) those qualities do proceed . if you s●y , that these qualities are received ( subje●tantur ) immediately , in the form or essence of these bodies , and not in the entire substance ; i must say also , they do arise from these forms , and flow from them by an essentiall emanation . and the definitive resolution of this quare depends upon the determination of that question in philosophy , whether accidents be subjected immediately in the form , or in the comp●situm : and ( consequently ) whether they flow from the form immediately , or jointly from matter and form together . which questions it is not materiall for me to determine ; for take which side you please , i shall soon finde both the fountain and a recipient . if you look for an externall , physicall fountain , or efficient ; we must say , that the same fountain from whence they have their essence , from the same do they receive with their essence their inseparable accidents , or essentiall consequents , by a comproduction . thus the sunne received its inherent light by creation , together with its essence , from god : for in the creation of the substance , the accidents are also concreated . so fire produced by a naturall agent , receives its heat comproduced , or congenerated , and conferred upon it together with its essence from the same efficient . now in any of these ways , it will not be hard to find a fountain of truth , an originall from whence the light of reason or truth may be conferred ; though we hold the understanding and the soule to be distinct . if you ask an internall fountain ; it will be answered , that reason ▪ or the faculty of understanding , flows from the essence of the soule , as an essentiall consequent ; and is received and inherent in the soule ▪ ( for i think not fitting to say , that it is inherent in the whole reasonable creature ( jointly ) consisting of body and soule ; because it remains in the soule separate , without the body . ) or ( if you look at them as three things ) then reason must be said to flow from the vnderstanding , and it from the soule ; and to be received , by inherence , in the understanding , as that also is received in the soule . if you enquire for an externall efficient ; so the faculties are either concreated with the soule by god ; or else comproduced by the parents by propagation . and so we want not a fountain , from whence reason may be communicated . i proceed to his lordships prosecution of this quaere . this light ( of truth or reason ) must be conveyed ( saith he ) to the vnderstanding , from the soule , from some other creature , or from god himselfe ; but neither of these ▪ ways ; therefore not all . i see not why any or all of these fountains may not be admitted to be the source of reason , in a severall way . first , why may not the soule be the fountain of reason or the underding faculty ; as well as the essence of fire is the fountain of its heat , and the essence of the magnet the fountain of its virtue ? not by physicall production , but by essentiall emanation ? indeed , i like not to say , the soule communicates reason to the understanding , ( as to a third thing ; ) for i have said before , the recipient and the fountain in this way of conveyance , viz. per emanation●m , are the same : like as in i●manent acts , the agent and the patient are the same . but i say , that reason or the understanding faculty , which the soule as recipient entertains in it selfe ; it hath also from itself , as being the fountain . ( but if you take the understanding as a third thing from both ; then the soul must not be said to be the immediate fountain , but the understanding must be said to be the ( immediate ) both source and chanell . ) and thus his lordships reason troubleth me not , viz. if the soul communicate light , then hath it light already , and so this faculty , the vnderstanding , is in vain . i say , the soule hath this light , which both flows from the soule as an essentiall consequent , and is inherent in the soule as an inseparable accident . next , why may not the soule , or vnderstanding ( whether you will ) receive this light of reason from another creature ? i mean , from the parent , by procreation ; producing both its essence , and adjuncts , as well essentiall as accidentall , together ▪ not by essentiall emanation , as before , but by physicall production ? to the reason annexed , viz. that if a creature produce a faculty in the soule or vnderstanding that creature must produce it by an intervenient faculty , and that faculty must be produced by another faculty , and s● in infinitum ; i answer , the faculty of reason ( together with the soul ) was produced by the parent ( according to this supposition , ) and that by an intervenient faculty , viz. the generative faculty in the parent● and yet shall we not proceed in infinitum , for this generative faculty was produced by another , and that again by another , ascending still upwards till we come to the generative faculty of adam , which was immediately produced of god , without an intervenient faculty ▪ either by concreation with the soule ; or by infusion , when he pronounced that blessing increase and multiply . lastly , why may not this and other faculties be produced in the soule and with the soule , by immediate creation , from god ? i mean , if soules be daily created , as most suppose ; or , if not , yet at least the faculties in adams soule might be by god created or concreated with it , notwithstanding that they be distinct . but you aske , why then did not god immediately and intrinsecally communicate this to the soule it selfe , rather then as a faculty , or by a faculty ? if he did not , it was because he would not ; and we cannot give account of this will. god might have created immediately all mankind , as he did the angels ; yet we see he pleased rather , that they should be produced by generation , one from another : but who can give us any other account of this his pleasure , save onely his will ? so neither , why reason should be an accidentall faculty , rather then m●d●● substan●i●li● ; that is , why he should produce it mediante animâ , rather then by himself immediately , together with it : he might do either . but , in generall , by what means soever ( saith he ) truth ( or reason ) be conv●yed ; if the vnderstanding do at all , receive truth , then it is truth ▪ for god doth not communicate light , but to light. if he mean , god gives lucem non nisi lucido ; or lumen non nisi luminoso ; i grant it , saking the words i● sensu composito , but not insensu diviso . ( and so god gives not animam nisi animato , nor rationem nisi rationali ) that is , god gives not light but to that which is light ( ● . lucide or illuminate , ) viz. when that light is bestowed : but in s●nsu diviso , that this was ( before ) lucid , it is not to be admitted . light communicated to the ayr , makes it illuminate , but finds it not so . god inspires not a soule , but into a living-creature : and so breathing into adam the breath of life , he made him a living-creature ; but found him ( his body ) inanimate , a ●ump of earth . so here ; god gives not the light of reason , but to that which is light , or inlightned , viz. then inlightned when this light of reason is bestowed . but if by this , god gives not light but to light , he means , lucem non dat nisi luci , or lumen non nisi lumini ; i cannot admit it , either in sensu composito , or in diviso . when the sunne imparts light ( lumen ) to the ayr ; the ayr is illuminate or enlightned : but , that the ayr is lumen , i must never grant , till we cease to hold , lumen non est corpus . so if god communicate to the soule or understanding the light of reason ; the soule or understanding becomes thereby illuminate or enlightned with reason : but , that the soule or understanding , is this light , this reason ; follows no more then if you would say , that water is heat when it grows hot ; the ayr is light ( lumen , ) when it is enlightned ; a body becomes a colour when it is coloured ; any substance whatsoever is metamorphised into an accident , when ( as a subject ) it receives that accident ; or that the body of adam , formed out of the dust , was made a soule , when it received a soule inspired . that which is annexed as a proof ; because quicquid recipitur , recipitur ad modum recipientis , ( together with the illustrations following ; ) proves no more but this , whatsoever is conferred ▪ is no further forth conferred , then as the subject is capable of , and actually doth receive it . and this we grant , that the soule or understanding , upon which the light of reason is conferred ; is a fit subject to receive or entertaine reason , and is actually indued with reason . and so i admit that which he cites of dr. twisse , neither a quality permanent , nor an act immanent unlesse they be made inherent in the soule , ( observe the phrase ) and the latter also produced by it , can be said to be given to the soule . hee saith , it is inherent in the soule , not that it is the soule . lastly , how passeth ( saith he ) this light from the vnderstanding to the soule ? there being as vast a distance between it and the soule , as between it and the will , ( supposing them distinct faculties ) whence grow those inextricable disputes , how the will is made to understand , what the understanding judgeth fit to be willed . but here his lordship varies somewhat the state of the question in altering the acceptation of the word truth , from truth understanding , to truth understood , and instead of innate truth of reason , speaks of the advenient truth , which is a conceptus or idea framed to represent the truth of being in the object . for we cannot conceive reason , which is now looked upon as a permanent faculty , to be transient from one subject to another . but truth vnderstood , how it may be conveyed from the understanding to the soul ; i shall then perhaps better tell when he shews me , how the visible species are conveyed from the organ to the soul , or faculty , seeing . that the organ receives species , he will not deny ; for else the soul might as well see , when the eye is out : that the soul also ( by the organ ) doth apprehend these species , must likewise bee yeelded ; else why should not the eye of a dead man see ? that the soule and the organ are distinct , must needs be granted ; for we see them really separated by death , whereas nothing can be separated from it selfe : and when i am informed , how the soule and the organ , being distinct , are conjoyned in seeing ; i shall better be able to resolve , how the soule and the faculty , though distinct , may joyntly vnderstand . till then , it might suffice , in generall to say , that , as by the organ the soule s●●th , so by reason or the understanding-faculty , the soule knows and understandeth : ( only allowing such disproportion as must be allowed between a materiall and immateriall instrument . ) and it seems to be no more vast distance between a faculty and the soule , then is between an organ and the soule . so that if by visible species in the organ , the soule may see ; why not by intellectuall species in the understanding ( though a faculty ) may the soule vnderstand ? but , because i love not to answer a difficulty only by opposing another ; you may resolve it thus . we are not to conceive , there is any such vast gulfe between the soule and the understanding ( though a faculty ) as that truth should need a ferry-boat to wa●t it over : for as the eye doth not first see , and then inform the soule or visive faculty , what it hath seene ; but the organ and the faculty joyntly concurre to the act of seeing : so neither doth the understanding first receive and entertain truth , and afterward inform the soule , what it hath understood : but the soule with and by this faculty of reason or understanding , doth know and understand ; both concurring to the same act. ( thus a stone , by its heavinesse , descends ; fire , by its heat , warms ; by its light ▪ shines ; glasse , by its smoothnesse , reflects light ; a knife , by a communicated faculty from the magnet , draws iron : and yet ( in some of these at least ) you must of necessity grant a distinction ex parte rei . ) there is indeed sometimes a reflex act of the soule , whereby it knows ▪ what is vnderstood : but we must not think , that it is an act of the soules essence , surveying or taking account of the vnderstanding faculty , what it hath done ; but the soule , by this understanding faculty , reflects upon a former act , which it selfe by the same faculty had formerly performed . the gulfe is likewise fordable between the vnderstanding and the will , though they be distinct faculties . not as if the will by an act of knowledge should understand what the intellect doth dictate : but the soule , which by its faculty of understanding knows , doth by its willing faculty command , and by its loco-motive execute . so that neither the will knows what the vnderstanding judgeth , nor the inferiour faculties what the will commands ; but the soule by severall faculties executes severall functions . thus when the soule by the eye discovers a danger imminent , by the hand it endeavours to divert it : and yet there is no messenger dispatcht between , to inform the hand , what the eye hath seen ; notwithstanding that the hand and the eye are really distinct , yea locally distant . as for mine own opinion , i could easily grant , the distinction of the faculties , from the soule , and among themselves , to be neither reall , nor a parte rei . and concerning the first , i am sufficiently confident : but for the second , whether the distinction be modall ( i. à parte rei ) or meerly rationall ( rationis rati●cina●● , ) i do yet desire a convincing demonstration to determine . chap. iii. the same argument further prosecuted and examined , in this and the ensuing chapters . in the next chapter he shewes , that if we make the vnderstanding and truth to be one , ( which i suppose will be easily granted ; there being but few or none which make the soule , the understanding , and reason ( that is , truth ) to be three distinct things : ) then will it be easie to find these three requisites : for thus light or truth is dispensed ; by the father of light ; and hath for its recipient , the whole reasonable creature , consisting of body and soule . all which i admit , ( as likewise will those that be his greatest adversaries : ) onely with this proviso , that he make the entire reasonable creature to be subjectum denominationis , and not subjectum inhaesionis , to reason or truth . next , he spends some time to clear this , how the whole reasonable creature can be said to be the recipient ; which labour , in my judgement , might have been spared : for i cannot see any reason to fear , but that it will as easily be granted , that the reasonable creature may be the subject of reason ; as that the ayr illuminate is the subject of light : without any fear of identity in the thing received with the recipient . but it seems his lordship speaks of another kind of recipiency beside the recipiency of a subject : such a kind of recipiency as where the recipiens and receptum be the same . no being ( saith he ) but it is the thing receiving and received : for consider any individuall being you please , vegetative or rationall , or what you will ; who is it that entertaineth this being , but the being it selfe which is entertained ? who is it that receiveth from the womb of eternity that reasonable creature , but the creature received ? you may distinguish them thus , the recipiency of a being , and the recipiency of a form : and so , the fountain or efficient , dat esse , and dat habere . in the first kind of giving and receiving , the recipient and the thing received must of necessity be the same ; thus the efficient or producer of light , dat lucido esse lucidum , dat luci esse lucem , not dat lucido esse lucem . but in the second it is otherwise , not dat lucido habere lucidum , nor luci habere lucem , but lucido habere lucem . thus the efficient or fountain of reason , dat rational● esse rationalem , habere rationem . ( but how his marginall note stands good , viz. that in all things the agent and the patient must be one , because the thing receiving and received are one , i cannot conceive ; for thus he makes god and the reasonable creature to be one : for , if i mistake no● , the fountain or efficient is the agent , and the recipient the patient . ) and indeed he must of necessity admit this distinction of recipiency : for otherwise his fundamentall axiom would have failed . for if we allow no recipiency , but the recipiency of a subject , whereby it receives or entertains a ▪ form ▪ it will not be universall● true , that to the constitution of every being , there must be the three requisites formerly mentioned . for substantiae non sunt in subjecte ; compleat substances are not communicated or imparted to a subject receiving ( a●d so would want a recipient , ) but are onely made to be , and to be the subject receiving other things . but ● desire his lordship to consider , whether , admitting such a reception , wherein every thing is its own recipient ; he do not lay open so wide a gap , that his adversaries may make an escape ; and himselfe break that net wherein his adversary should have been taken ? whether , in answering an objection , he doe not overthrow his principall argument ? for how easie is it to say , that truth , though it be neither soule , intellect , nor reason ; yet it is a faculty ( or what you will ) proceeding from god , and its own recipient . and so , though they imagine an hundred faculties in the soule , one dependent upon another ; yet they shall never be put to a straight to find either a fountain or a recipient : for god , of necessity , must be the fountain of all being whatsoever ( either mediatè or immediatè ; ) and that being whatsoever it is , shall be its own recipient . therfore the soule ( in this sense ) hath not the body for its recipient ; neither did god communicate or bestow a living soule upon adam's earthly body , when he breathed into it the breath of life : but he gave to the soule , to be a soul. neither is the soule a recipient to the understanding , nor it to reason , no● any of these to truth , ( if they be distinct things : ) but each of these their own recipient . neither ( lastly ) is the entire reasonable creature a recipient of truth or reason ( as he would have it ) but truth is its own recipient . and then must he hold his hand from concluding as he doth in the close of this chapter , that the totum existens consisting of matter and form : the reasonable creature , is the recipient of this truth : except he will say , veritas est animal rationale , & animal rationale est veritas ▪ but how , the ignorance of this point should give the ground to that question , whether the soule or the body be contentum ; ( which he admonisheth us of ) i cannot see . for though it be granted , that every thing be its own contentum ; yet this difficulty remaineth as firm as before . for , is not water its own contentum : is not the vessell also its own contentum ? yet he will not deny , but that ( in another sense ) the water is contained in the vessell ; nor can he say , that the vessell is contained in the water : so though the soule and body be either of them their own contentum and recipient ( quia datur animae ▪ ut sit ani●a ; datur corpori , ut sit corpus : ) yet that the one may not be locu● ▪ and the other locatum ; one the subject , and the other an adjunct ( which is the meaning of that question ) will not from hence appear . chap. iv. whether the vnderstanding , faculty may not be the recipient of truth . in the . chapter he proceeds , further to shew , that the vnderstanding cannot ●● this recipient . and if he speak of such a recipiency as where the recipient and the receptum be the same ; his adversaries , that say , truth and the understanding to be distinct , will contend for this as well as he : for neither will they say , datur intellectu● se esse rationem , nor datur rationi ut sit intellectus . but if he speak of the re●ipiency of a subject , i see not from what hath yet been said , why the understanding ( if distinct ) may not be the subject of reason ; why they may not say , datur intellectui habere rationem : since it is granted in logi●k , that one accident may be the immediate subject , though not the vltimate subject of another . and so , if any will have the soul the intellect , and truth or reason , to be tria distincta : they must say , the intellect is the immediate subject of reason , and the soule the vltimate . and then call the understanding either a quality , a faculty , or virtus quâ , it is no great matter ; ( we will not contend with his lordship for the name . ) for virtus quâ i● but a faculty , and a faculty , ( or po●●●tia naturalis ) is the second species of quality . chap. v. whether the soule and truth in the soule , be one . the like answer must be given to that in the . chapter , whether the soule ( without an intervenient faculty ) may not be the recipient of truth ? for we cannot say , datur animae ut sit veritas ; except we agree to make the soule and reason one : but we may say datur animae ut sit subjectum veritatis , or subjectum rationis , though we ●old them distinct . as may appeare at large by what i have said upon the second chapter . that which is further added in this chapter , whether as a su●sive to inforce this , or as a new argument ▪ viz. that our soule resembles god , who is vnus & simplex actus , and therefore it selfe must be simple in its operations ▪ and we must not expect first an essence , and then a faculty whereby it worketh , &c. may as well be urged , to prove , that our soule and body are the same , because man was made after gods image , who is ●nus & simplex , not consisting of parts . or ( if you instance particularly in the soule ) it may as well follow , that we know not one thing ( successively ) after another , nor ( discursively ) by another ; but by one entire act like god , because the soule bears the image of god , and vnitas ( which i grant not ) is formalis ratio dei. that which is lastly added , concerning a resemblance of the trinity , in truth thus understood : is no way peculiar to this acceptation of truth ; but holds as well in every degree of being whatsoever . all entity or being , as it lieth involved in the originall ▪ fountain of being , which is gods essence , may represent patrem intelligentem ; as it descends from above , filium intellectum ; as it is received in the creature , and maketh it to be , spiritum dilectum . and thus i have surveyed his lordships reasons to prove , the soule and truth to be one. understanding by truth , or light , the light of reason ; which is the originall or actus ●rimus , from whence rationall operations doe proceed ; and therefore must needs be the first of those nations of truth laid down in his first chapter . and , that it cannot be any other acceptation of truth , that is here meant , is very apparent ; if we look upon the other acceptations of truth ; which we shall find to be no way consonant either with his method or his arguments . for if you consider of truth understood , or the idea of truth entertained in the mind by actuall apprehension ; this will have no being , either in the understanding , or elsewhere , till such time as the understanding it selfe frames this conceptus : but ( as ye● ) we have nothing to doe with the operations of the ●●tellect ▪ ( for he proceeds not to consider the operations or effects of the reasonable soule , till he come to the . chapter ▪ ) but with something ante●●dent them , which is the fountain from whence these operations doe proceed ; which can be no other but reason . yea , himselfe affirms it in this . chapter , pag. . ) and likewise that acceptation of truth , for the truth either of being , or of cognoscibility , in the object hath no conjunction with the understanding , till it be actually understood : and , even then , we cannot make it to be one with the understanding , except we make those things to be one , which have neither coexistence of place , nor coexistence of time ; for those things may be understood , which were many thousand yeares past , and many thousand miles distant . chap. vi. whether all things bee this one truth . in the next place he proceeds to a consequent or corollary , arising out of his former thesis , viz. that all things , are this one truth . i confesse , i was at a stand a great while , and could not imagine any shew of consequence between these propositions : if truth or reason , be the same with the soule or vnderstanding ; then is it also the same with all things else . why so . this argument ( saith he ) will presse all things that are . this argument ? which argument ? doth he mean that argument which was last propounded , towards the end of the fifth chapter , [ that because god is one simple act ; therefore , not only the soule and its faculties must be one , but even all creatures must be one , because there is in all somewhat of gods image , whose essence is vnity ? ] if this be his argument , i shall content my self with a bare deniall of the consequence , till i see some shew of proofe . for , that unity is gods essence , is ( in my judgement ) grossely false ▪ or , were it true , yet , that because god is one , therefore the creatures must also all be one ; hath no strength : for this vnity in god is equivalent to an infinite multiplicity . and , that one simple efficient , may not produce distinct effects , seems to me a paradox . or is it his second argument , propounded in the second chapter , and prosecuted in those that follow ; [ that , to the constitution of every creature there must be a being communicated , a fountain from whence , and a recipient to which ; the which recipient must be the same with the being received ? ] from hence perhaps he might prove , that every thing is the same with its own being : but that very thing should be the same with each other , or the same with reason , or the understanding ; follows not . is it then his first argument , propounded towards the end of the first chapter ? which perhaps his lordship lookes at as the principall argument ; and at all that follows , only as a prosecution of that ; ( though his marginall notes , and the titles of chapters ( which i question whether or noe they be of his lordships doing ) point out to us distinct arguments , in the beginning of the second , and in the end of the fifth chapter . ) the argument was this , the vnderstanding is nothing but a ray of the divine nature , &c. and is not truth the same ? which i understood , as you may see , thus , [ the understanding is gods image in man , and this image consists in truth , or the light of reason ; therefore truth , or reason , is the understanding . ] and thus the syllogisme will be true in the first figure , if you transpose the premises and convert the conclusion . or thus , [ the image of god in man is the understanding ; and this image is truth ▪ therefore ( some ) truth is the understanding : ] and thus it will be true in the third figure . and beside these two forms , ● see not how that argument can be reduced to a true syllogisme . now chuse you which form you please ; yet how ●● should follow from hence , [ that all things else are this one truth , ] i do not yet perceive . it may be his lordship would have his argument thus ordered ( in the second figure ) [ the understanding is a ray of divinity ; and truth also is a ray of divinity : therefore truth is the understanding , or truth and the understanding are one. ] and if this be the form of his argument ; i will easily grant , that it presseth all things that are , as much as this . for , is not this syllogisme in the same form , [ the blessed angels are spirituall substances ; and the damned spirits are spirituall substances ; therefore the damned spirits are blessed angels , and the blessed angels damned spirits ? ] then which consequent , scarce any thing could be lesse probable . and thus indeed he may prove all things that are to be one truth , one understanding , yea one stone , or what you will : for take any two beings whatsoever , and they will both be sound to be rays of divinity , because both proceed from the ●ame originall and fountain of being in the divine essence ; and therefore ( according to this argument ) they will be both one. but his argument thus ordered , will prove but a plaine fallacy , offending against the laws of the second figure , wherein no affirmative proposition can be concluded . the most that he can prove from hence will be this , that there is some common praedicate , which may be affirmed of both ; and so that there is some general nature in which they both agree . and this i am confident there is none will ever deny that grants but this proposition , quicquid est , est e●s , that all beings , whatsoever agree in the generall nature of a being . for then they may all be the subjects of the common praediate ens. but this is farre enough from proving , all things to be one and the same . for to assume [ that whatsoever things agree in a vniversall nature , are also the same numericall and individuall existence ; ] is such a proposition as logick will not admit of . yea , though his argument should proceed thus , [ the specificall essence of the understanding , consists in this , that it is a ray of the divine nature ; and the specificall essence , as well of truth , as of all beings whatsoever , is the same , viz. that it is a ray of the divine nature ; and therefore all things whatsoever agree in the same specificall essence ; ) and ( consequently ) all things whatsoever , having the same specificall essence with each other , must also be one and the same with each other . ] i say , though his argument proceeded thus , yet would it little availe to prove all things to be one and the same . for , besides , that the specificall essence of the understanding ( and so of other things ) consisteth not in being a ray of divinity ; besides this , i say , although they had all the same specificall essence ; yet doth it not follow that they must be all one and the same . for are there not many individualls under the same species , whereof one is not the other ? doth not the soule of peter and the soule of judas agree in all the ●ame specificall and essentiall praedicates , whilst notwithstanding it may be truly said , that the soule of peter is not the soule of judas , and again , that the soule of judas is not the soule of peter ? what essentiall difference is there beeween water in the baltick sea , and that in the mediterran●an , ●ince they are both but integrall parts of the same homogeneall ocean ? yet how true it is withall , that the baltick sea ▪ is not the mediterranean sea ; and that the water which is now in the baltick , is distinct from that which at the same time is in the mediterranean sea ? two drops of water taken out of the same spoonfull , be they in their essentialls never so consonant , in their accidents never so like ; yet we may truly say this is not the other , nor the other this. how then can it follow , that truth is one with the understanding , and that all things are this one truth , because all being is but a ray of divinity . it follows indeed , that if all things have the same specificall essence , then are they all , things of the same nature ; ( but that they are all the same thing , it follows not . ) thus much therefore i suppose will be granted him by all , that all things are of the same ( at least genericall ) nature , because all things have a being ; and , when he hath proved their specificall essence to be the same , it will be granted also , that they are all , things of the same specificall nature ; and ( if you will ) that all being falls under the same praedicament ▪ ( though yet a predicamentall distinction be not always a reall distinction ; no , not a par●e rei . ) but is this all he seeks to prove ? i supposed he had laboured to shew that the light of truth or reason was not onely of the same nature with the understanding , but that it was the vnderstanding . otherwise he proves lesse then his greatest adversaries would have granted him . for those that contend for the greatest distinction between the soule and its faculties , doe not yet maintain a more reall or physicall distinction between them , then is between one soule and another , which yet agree in the same essentiall praedicates . and if you allow them the same distance between the soul and the understanding , which is between the soule and a stone , yea between two soules , they will tell you it is more then they desire : for they will grant that the soule with all its faculties , and the body with all its members , do constitute the same suppositum ; which is a more physicall , a more reall union , then is between two soules , though agreeing in every essentiall praedicate . but ( if i mistake not ) that which he was about to prove , was , not that the understanding is of the same nature with truth , but that it is truth . his supposition in the first words of the ● . chap ▪ is , if the intellect , the soul , light , and truth are all but one , &c. not , a like , or of the same nature . and p. . if you make the vnderstanding ▪ the soule , light , truth one , then are you delivered out of these streights , &c. and pag. . if the vnderstanding be enricht with truth , then is it , it selfe that truth , that light ; thus he frequently calls them one and the same ▪ now to be , ●● selfe that truth ▪ and to be of the same nature with truth , is far different . and if he prove no other but a logicall union , that truth and the understanding are of the same ( genericall or specificall ) nature ; we may y●t safely deny a physicall or reall union or identity ; and say , truth is not the vnderstanding , nor is the understanding truth , ( though of the same nature with truth ) as well as say , this drop of water is not the other drop , though this and the other be of the same nature . neither can the same argument ( taken in the same sense , without equivocation and ambiguity ) possibly prove a physicall and reall identity between the soule and its faculties ; and also a logicall or specificall identity between it and all things else . it is impossible by the same argument to prove , the soul and its faculties to be one thing , and , the soule with all things else to be things of the same nature : these to be t●lta , and those to be id●m . but to omit the consequence and dependance of this , upon that which went before : i will examine it as an entire proposition by it selfe , whether all things are one ? and if so , then must it be either thus understood , that all things are one and the same by a physicall identity ; this is the other , and the other is this ; bucephalus is alexander , and alexander is bucephalus : and ( by the same reason ) the bread in the lords supper is the body of christ , and the body of christ is this bread , by consubstantion . in which sense it seems so impossible , that ( in my judgement ) it needs no refutation . or thus , that all things are one and the same by an integrall identity ; that is , they be all parts of the same whole : all members of the same integrum , the same aggregatum . and in this sense it is true indeed , but there is nothing new in it , nothing strange : for who ever denied , that all things , as parts , as members , do constitute the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , one vniverse ? that the whole aggregatum , the whole heap or multitude of creatures do make one world ? or ( lastly ) thus , that all things whatsoever are one , by a logicall identity , as being all of the same nature . and if he speak of a genericall nature , this will be as easily granted as the former : for none deny , that all things agree in the genericall universall nature of a being : and whether ens be genus vnivocum , or gen●● anagolum , yet it is predicated or affirmed of all beings ; only that which he calls truth , others call being , both meaning no other then the formalis ratio entis , propter quam dicitur esse . put if he speak of a specifical● nature , wherein he would have all things to agree ; making the universe to be one homogeneall body , ( which ●e seems to mean here ; though he meant , i suppose , a physicall unity , when he said , the soule and truth w●re one : ) then are we to enquire , whether those things which agree in a universall genericall nature , may not admit of a specificall difference ? and for this , it will not be sufficient to prove that every being is a ray of divinity issuing from the center of being in god , or that the essence and form of every particular thing is a roy of divinity : except it be proved ▪ that every being is this ray , that it is such a ray. if therefore all those rays that have issued forth of that center of infinite being , if the streams derived from this fountain be exactly of the same nature , without any specificall difference ; then is it because god could not send forth distinct and different rays , or because he would not . if we make god an agent so uniform , as that we will admit no possible variety , not so much as in the object , or manner of his actions ; what difference is there between the most determinate naturall agent , and god the most absolutely free agent ? if in his operations we admit not of this choice , to work thus rather then th●● ? but if he could work in severall manners , by communicating rays of divers natures , but would not ; how then hath he manif●sted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the exceeding great var●●●y of his wisdom and power ? for there cannot be so much as an accidentall variety in the creatures , except there be somewhat reall produced in the one which is not in the other ; which cannot be , if all being , all entity whatsoever be exactly of the same specificall nature . i grant therefore , an integrall unity ; whereby all things are parts of the same aggregatum , the same world : i grant likewise a genericall unity ▪ whereby all things agree in the generall nature of a being : but if he cont●nd further for an identicall or an hom●geneall unity ( wherby each is other , or of the same particular nature , without any other then a graduall difference ; ) i must deny both . and mr. sadler ( his lordships champion ) denies it with me : for so he , corporall vnion in materials which ●● [ mis●●ll ] 〈…〉 identity , i● at best but a ●old touch in ● point or ●●o , ● most disdainfull ●mbrace ( at 〈…〉 dista●●● ) of those beings which hav● much 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but lit●l● 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . if the unity of all things be identicall , how is i● [ miscalled ] identity ▪ if homogeneall , how is there much 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and ●●t little 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ▪ his lordships reasons to perswade this identity ▪ come next to be examined ▪ why ( saith he ) may it not be so ▪ since ● all being is derived from the same vn●f●r● fo●●tai● ; since all i● the same in nature ( 〈…〉 ) a beam of that excellent light ; and ▪ all entertained in the same manner by every individuall existence , viz. by a similitude and vnion of nature ▪ if his lordship speak of a physicall identity , it is easie to say , this soule is not the other soule ▪ this drop of water is not the other drop ▪ though both produced by the same uniform agent , and in the same manner : this beam of light is not the other beam , though both shining forth from the ●ame sunne : because one ( uniform ) agent may produce two effects . if he speak of a likenesse in nature , it will be said , that the same agent may produce not only two effects , but vnlike effects . e. g. the same sunne produceth heat and light. here these severall beings are derived from the same fountain the sunne , which hath either virtually or formally both ▪ heat and light ; they are both beam● issuing in the same manner from their fountain ; and their essence is in the same manner received , viz. by being what they are , and informing a subject recipient : yet can i not think that light , and heat are either the same thing , or of the same ( specificall ) nature : ( however some fondly dream that light and heat are the same : ) for then whatsoever is h●t , must also be light ( lucide ▪ ) which holds not in scalding lead : and whatsoever is light , must also ▪ even in the same degree ▪ be h●t , which holds not in snow , which is lucide ; nor in ice , which being transparent ●i● also illuminate . object . if you object a disparity in the example , because light and heat , though they both proceed from the sunne , yet the one from the sunnes heat , the other from the sunnes light , and that therefore their fountain is not the same ; whereas in gods essence being absolutely simple in it selfe , and vniform in its operations , we may not imagine severall fountains from whence severall streams may proceed . answ . i answer , that gods essence , however simple , is yet equivalent to an infinite variety : and though we cannot in god suppose to be light distinct from heat , and heat from light ; yet gods simple essence hath virtually both heat and light , and all things possible . his essence therefore being equivalent both to heat and light ▪ why may it not produce heat in one thing , and light in another thing , and so severall beings in severall creatures ? ( except you will suppose , that gods essence , being equivalent to , and productiv● of , all essences possible ▪ must of necessity exercise all this equivalency in the production of every being , and actuate all his efficacy in every product , and so agere ad extr●m●m virium , which in a voluntary agent is not necessary ; in an infinite agent is impossible . ) all the radii or semidiameters of a circle proceed from the same c●●t●r , but they tend not all to the s●me point of the circumference : but the same indivisible center , which lyes equally opposite to every point of the circumference , as it i● supposed to lye opposite to one point , it sends ●orth one radius to it , as it lyes opposite to another point , it sends forth another radius to that other point , though the center remain indivisibly the same . thus gods simple essence quatenus productiv● angeli , or , as it virtually contains the essence of an angel , may produce that essence : and the same simple divine essence , as it contains virtually the essence of a stone , may produce a stone . and if you say , as dr. ames concerning the divine attributes , that these two considerations esse productivum angeli , and esse productivum lapidis , be distinct ratione ratioc●●atâ , perhaps there will be no great errour ; although his lordship admit not of dr. ames his opinion ; p. . for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 esse productivum angeli , or posse producere angelum is not the same with posse producere lapidem . for although it be the same simple essence of god whereby he is able to do both , yet this hindreth not but that this simple essence may be by us apprehended per i●ad●quat●s conceptus , which is no other but distincti● rationis ratiocinat● . the same center considered as it is the beginning of one radius , is distinct ratione ratiocinatâ from it self considered as the beginning of another radius . and so the divine essence , quatenus productiva angeli , may perhaps be distinct , ratione ratiocinatâ , from itselfe quatenus productiva lapidis , without any violation to its simplicity . they are onely inadaequati conceptus ejusdem simplicis essentiae ; and a metaphysicall abstraction may be sufficiently consistent with a physicall simplicity of essence . thus therefore may it appeare , how the unity or simplicity of the fountain , hinders not but that the streams may admit of specificall and essentiall distinctions . but he saith secondly , all being is also of the same nature , viz. a beam of that excellent light. therefore what ? is therefore all being the same ? how ? physically the same , ( as if that soule which is of the same nature with another ▪ must needs be that other soul ; ) or metaphysically , logically , the same ; that is , of the same nature ? if he mean , the first ; i see not how it follows . if the second ; his antecedent and consequent is the ●ame ; and so he assumes what was to be proved . but for the proposition it selfe , all being , saith he , is of the same nature , s●il . a beam of that excellent ▪ light. and this i grant ; all being is of the same ( genericall ) nature ; all being is a stream communicated from the fountain of being , all being is a beam , &c. but ( specifically ▪ ) all is not such a beam. if his lordship yet contend , that this being is also specifically the same , only with a graduall distinction . i desire , first , to know whence the great variety in the creature doth proceed , if all being be absolutely homogeneall ? adde water to water , and it remains water still ; in a greater quantity indeed , but yet without any alteration at all in its essence , it is still but water . adde heat to heat , it remains heat still ; in a more intense degree indeed , but yet it changeth not its nature : increase its intension as long as you will , yet you shall never make this color to become color . a deaf man though he see never so acutely , it will not help his hearing . repl. if he urge , that the ●ame light proceeding through divers mediums is stained with divers colours ; and why may not therefore this beam of essence , though homogeneall , being received by divers creatures , appear in a diverse form ? answ . i answer , the variety of those appearing colours proceeds from the variety of the medium : but here can be no variety in the recipient at all : for if there be no recipient but the being received , then will the medium be every way as uniform as this light or essence received , and so cannot cause this variety . it must be therefore various in it self , or else it cannot be variegated in the recipient . secondly , if all beings be but gradually distinct : i demand whether the essence of a man , or the essence of a magnet be the more intense degree ? if the magnets essence be the higher degree of light , why hath not the magnet the use of reason ? if mans essence be the higher degree , why hath not man the loadstones magnetick faculty ? for if there be onely a bare graduall distinction in their essence : then the inferiour essence is actually included in the superiour , with an addition of somwhat more : and if included , whence comes it to passe that it cannot operate ? again if the body and the soule be absolutely of the same nature ●which they must be , if being admit onely of a graduall distinction ▪ ) then the essence of the soule ( being the superiour degree ) includes in it the essence of the body , and somewhat more ▪ therefore is it able to operate according to that essence , and to do of it selfe , whatsoever the body can doe . if so , then how comes it to passe , that the soule needs the service of the body ? why may not the soule separate , perform all corporeall operation● , since it hath in it corporeall essence , and somewhat more . ( yea , why may not the soule see , when the eye is put out ? ) for the adding of another degree hinders not the operation of the former degree , but rather perfects it . yea what need is there of the body ▪ at all ? non bellè quaeda● faci●● d●o , sufficit unus huic op●ri ; as his lordship saith , out of martiall . to his third consideration , i must answer accordingly as to the second ; all being is received in the same manner by every individuall existence : that is , every creature receives its being , by being what it is : a stone and a plant receive their severall beings , by being ( severally ) what they are . but come to particulars , and the case is altered : a stone receives its being , by being a stone ; and a plant receives its being , by being a plant. that which followeth in the ensuing part of this chapter ( besides what i have already touched by the way ) i passe over as being explicatory , rather then probatory . onely thus much ; the doctrine of the platonists , reducing all being to number , must either be taken in a metaphoricall , analogicall sense , or not taken at all . and being so , it availeth little to prove either a physicall or specificall identity of being . whence they had this doctrine , i inquire not , as not belonging to the present matter in hand . neither will i stand to debate the controversie , concerning the nature of number ▪ whether it be a reall , or rationall being ; which ● conceive to have as much reality as a relation hath , and no more ; that is , hath fundamentum i● re , but in its formality , it is onely ●●li●… the birth of reason . and when i am convinced , that paternity , or ●iliation , are essentiall to humanity ; that fatherhood , or so●ship doe constitute manhood ▪ or humane nature ; i shall also grant , that 〈…〉 est prin●ipi●● essend● ▪ rather then consequent essentians . but , not to projudge the discourse of the next chapter , ( wherein vnity is made to be the essence of all things , yea of god himselfe ) i proceed rather to consider the large 〈…〉 of unity there exprest . chap. vii . whether vnity be all in all things , or , the essence of all things . and there we have it first proposed to consideration , whether vnity be not in nature so glorious , and of that dignity , that it is able to inform a being , yea , to be the essentiall form of all things ? it is prosecuted in the severall kinds of beings . vncreated , and created , whether spirituall , morall , physicall , or mathematicall . in all these , saith he , you shall find vnity as it were the form of their being . and first , whether vnity be not all in god ? ( the humility and reverence , which his lordship useth in proposing of it , may be a fit pattern for all to imitate , in all approaches to a deity ; not onely in duties of worship , but even in scholastick discourses . and so neither to be peremptory in affirming , nor rash in censuring : since the vast disproportion between an infinite object , and a finite faculty , subjects our understanding both to ignorance and errour ; suntque oculit tenebrae per tantum lumen . ) there is ( saith he ) but one god ; and more there could not be , since there cannot be two infinites , two eternities ; neither could this one be otherwise , for then were he not infinite . vnity then being so inseparable , as without which god could not be what he is , may it not be said to be co-essentiall to him ? and if of his essence , then is it in him all ; for gods essence is all in god. the objection which his lordship moves , viz. that there is the same reason for all other divine attributes , they being all essentiall to god , as well as vnity : will bring the question to this issue , whether of these attributes may be supposed in nature to be first ? ( for that every of them should be the formalis ratio of a simple essence is impossible : ) and so , whether infinity , &c. do arise from vnity , or vnity from thence ? i should rather say , that neither of these , or any other divine attribute , may be said to be formalis ratio , or the essentiall form of the deity ; but somewhat else , in it selfe simple , and yet comprehending all these : which because we cannot apprehend at one discovery , we are fain to take severall views of it per inadaequatos conceptus . but if we must needs seek for a seniority in gods attributes ; i suppose , i might derive as clear a pedigree of them from his infinitnesse , from his perfection , from his absolutenesse or independency ; as can be shewed either from his vnity , or from his verity . but not to be too extravagant , it shall be sufficient for the present to sh●w , whether his infinitenesse flow from his vnity , or his vnity from his infinitenesse ? whether he must needs be infinite , because he is one ; or one because he is infinite ? if we say , god must needs be one , because he is infinite ; his lordship will not only assent , but furnish us with a reason , because ( saith he ) there cannot be two infinites . but if otherwise we say , that god must of necessity be infinite , because he is one ; it is not so easily proved , since there is but one sunne , and yet that one sunne not infinite . how then can we say , that god is essentially infinite , or that infinitenesse is essentiall to him : if the formalis ratio , the essentiall form of divinity , may consist without infinitenesse ? sed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . to his instances in created spirituall beings . that all the commandements are comprised in love , shews that there is somewhat generall , that is common to them all ; or rather love ( as likewise obedience , and the like ) is a collective word , and an integrum , whereof all those are parts : but that vnity is either the generall form of all the commandements , or the particular of any , it shews not . the like may be said of the saints which agree in the common nature of saint ship , and do joyntly make up the body mysticall , whereof christ is head. yea of all creatures , they all agree in the common nature of a being , and they all make up one vniverse ; yet is not vnity either the generall of all , or particular form of any creature . the morall virtues are said to be conjoyned or concatenate , because they all proceed from one fountain , viz. the absolute subordination of the will and affections to the understanding : which subordination they call prudence , ( and is of the same extent in morality , that obedience is in divinity ) whereof all the morall virtues are but integrall parts . ( but i had rather apply prudence to the understanding only ; as that whereby it is able to judge in all practicall things , what is fit to be done ; and the universall conformity of the will to this universall rule of reason , i should call justitia vniversali● , universall justice . ) and thus i understand that axiom , that morall virtues are concatenate in prudence : because where there is this universall subjection of the will to reason , there will be an observance of it in all particulars . but if the rules of some virtues are observed , and not the rules of others ; there this observance is not a virtuous action , as not proceeding from the subordination of the will to reason , ( which would have as well prevailed in others also ) but from some other principle . now this shews perhaps , that the morall virtues are vnited in one generall essence : but how appears it , that this essence is vnity ? physicall beings , as water-drops ( and other connaturalls , either of the same , or concordant species ; as the loadstone and iron ) desire to preserve their union and neighbourhood one with another : but let us consider the ground ; do they desire to preserve their essence that they may be one , that is , united or joyned together ; or do they desire vnion and conjunction , that they may preserve their essence ? this latter i suppose ; and therefore a drop of water doth not desire to bee , to the end that it may be conjoyned with the rest , but desires to be conjoyned for its preservation , lest it should cease to be . but how doth this prove its essence to be vnity ? in summe , all those instances in nature ( which doubtlesse are very many ) whereby it may appear that all things naturally do desire vnity ( or conjunction rather ) either for conservation , or for consummation of their naturall perfection ; that by unity their vigour is encreased , quia vi● unita fortior , and the like ; will shew no more but this , that unity is a perfection of being , not a principle of being ; or that things of the like nature conjoyned together are able mutually to help each other in their conservation or operation . but what is there in all this to perswade us , that unity is their essence ? as for the mathematicall unity of harmony , proportion &c. it being only relative ( for they denote but the relation of one thing to another ) can conferre nothing to the constitution of an absolute essence , as of sounds , &c. but how this should any way conferre to the deciding of that question , whether quantity be divisibilis in semper divisibilia : seems to me a greater mystery , then this mystery that is to be cleared . for as long as mathematicall demonstrations shall be thought worthy of credit , it shall never be granted , that continuum constat ex indivisibilibus . and however some naturalists , that know little what belongs to the nature of quantity , make much adoe to the contrary , and therby bewray their grosse ignorance in these things ; yet i am confident , that not any one mathematician ( deliberately , and in a mathematicall way ) either ever did , or ever will assent to them . and i cannot without indignation ( or pity rather ) read sometimes how fondly and vainly some ( otherwise ) able schollars think to shift off mathematicall arguments in this and the like cases ; which will not be so easily baffled by an empty verball distinction , as some of their idle fallacies may . and if i make it not evident ( to those that are acquainted with mathematicall terms ) that a continuum consists not of indivisible points , by as certain and infallible mathematicall demonstrations , as that . and . make . i will hereafter turn sceptick , and affirm confidently that we are sure of nothing . if a line consist of indivisible points , each point is supposed to be minimum possibile , by those that doe maintain it ; ( or else how are they indivisible . ) then must all points be equall ; ( for if they be unequall , they cannot all be minima . ) then no two lines can possibly be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or incommensurable ; ( for if all lines doe consist of points whereof each is equall to other , then are all lines whatsoever measurable by this common measure of a point ; qu● aliquoties applicata , & hanc & illam commensurabit . contrary to what hath been often demonstrated mathematically , that some lines are absolutely incommensurable with some other , admitting of no common measure , ( as for example , the diameter and the latus of a quadrate , ( whose proportion therfore cannot be expressed by rationall numbers . now that two contradictory propositions should be true by mathematicall demonstration , is utterly impossible . thousands of the like demonstrations might be brought to prove it ; as , that from hence , all angles may be demonstrated to be equall ; the same line , to be shorter , to be longer then it selfe , to be equall to two or more conjoyned , and yet to be shorter then either ; yea , all lines to be equall , all circles of the same bignesse , the equinoctiall circle to be no bigger then a ciphar , all motions to be of the same swiftnesse , all bodies of the same weight , and of the same bignesse : and yet in the meane time all these to be unequall , in length , weight , swiftnesse , &c. and infinite the like absurdities ; as might be shewed , if this were the question i had in hand . take an instance or two . let two circles be described upon the same center , of what greatnesse you please ; let a thread be fastned at the common center , and so extended that it cut the circumference of both circles ; thus extended , the one end being fastned at the center , let the other end be moved round : now while this thread passeth over one point in the greater circle , i demand how much it passeth over in the lesser ? lesse then a point it cannot be , because ex hypothesi , a point is minimum possibile ; for every point therefore that it passeth over in the greater circle , it passeth over a point answerable in the lesser circle ; there be therefore as many points in the lesser as are in the greater circle ; and these points being all equall , because every one is minimum possibile , the lesser circle must needs be equall to the greater circle , because it consists of as many points ; and by the same reason , all circles equall . now the thread thus moving , move it never so slowly , it passeth over a point in a moment ; and move it never so swiftly , it passeth but a point in a moment : and therefore all motions are alike swift , as passing over equall distances in equall time . again , let two lines concurring in the same point make an angle , ( of what greatnesse you please ; ) their two next points , joyning upon this common point of concurrence , will terminate a basis of two points , ( not more , for then the subtendent would be equall to both the crura . ) the two third points will terminate a line somewhat longer then the other , and therefore at least of three points ; and so on , for every point added to the crura , ( be the angle greater or lesse ) you must adde one point to the length of the basis , subtendent to that angle ( and more then one it cannot be , for then the increase of the basis will be equall to the encrease of both the crura : ) whence it will come to passe that all angles ( at an equall distance from the point of concurrence ) will have their subtendents equall ( the basis or subtendent being thus measured by the length of the crura , or lines containing the angle● ) wherefore themselves also must be equall . now also it is sufficiently apparent to a mathematician , that upon all liues whatsoever , you may erect ( as from a basis ) lines of the same length containing an angle ; and therefore ( both the angle and the basis being measured onely by the length of the crura ) not onely all angles may be equall , but also all lines , ( as being subtendents to equall angles at the same distance . ) i need not adde more demonstrations to shew the impossibility of that opinion which makes every continuum to consist ex indivisibilibus . it is certain then , that continuum non constat ex indivisibilibus : but , how this doctrine of vnity serves either to confirm the truth , or to clear the doubts ; i see not . but to return . his lordship hath been copious to shew some vnion , ●ome relation , of one thing to , or with another , in the severall kinds of being . from whence he is ready to infer , that the essence of all things is one , that it is vnity . but be it granted , that there be divers particular species under the same genericall nature ; ( as when all particular acts of duty are comprised in one generall name of love , or obedience : ) be it so , that many effects may proceed from the same cause ; ( as all virtuous acts from the subordination of the will to reason : ) that there be many combinations of beings or persons , naturall , voluntary ▪ o●conomicall , politicall , logicall , &c. whence may arise one aggregatum , one praedicament , one city , or kingdome , one world : be there s●pernaturall or spirituall societies , one church , paroch●all , nationall , o●cumenicall , visible , invisible , one mysticall body : be there also in lines , bodies , sounds , &c. ( besides their absolute affections , length , bignesse , lowdnesse , &c. ) some mutuall relations of proportion , harmony , discord , &c. be there in physicall bodies , a desire of union or conjunction in one to another ; yet will not this prove , that all things have one nature , one essence ; much lesse , that this essence is vnity . if iron desire union , ( or conjunction rather ) with the loadstone , doth this prove their specificall essence to be one ? or ( if it doe ) doth it pro●e ▪ that this one essence is vnity ? and so of the rest . all that can arise from hence , is , that god hath so ordered the severall natures of particular creatures , as that his wisdome doth not only appear in their absolute and simple natures ; but hath also put relative or respective natures in them , whereby his wisdome may appear in their mutuall oppositions , conjunctions , similitude , dissimilitude , sympathy , antipathy , help , and hinderance of one thing to another ; whereby not onely every thing ( severally ) in its absolute nature doth set forth gods glory , but also all things ( joyntly ) doe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and work together in their respective relations , as well for the good of those that love god , as for their mutuall advancing of gods glory . all which may be , though neither vnity , nor any one specificall being , be the formalis ratio , the essentiall form of all things ; but each species have a severall kind of being . for my own judgement ; i am as confident , that vnity is nothing ; as his lordship is , that it is all things . 't is a meer rationall , nominall notion , that hath no more reality in it , then darknesse , then non esse . yea , to be one , is a pure negative proposition ; and what reality you can allow to a negation , so much you may allow to vnity . it is true , vnus , as it is opposed to nullus , is affirmative , and is the same with aliquis , or nonnullus : but if it signifie the same with vnicus , and be opposed to multitude , ( according as we now take it , ) it is a meer negation , and no more . which to make clear , observe but this syllogisme , [ whatsoever is in england , is in europe ; but in england there is rex vnicus , one only king ; therfore in europe there is rex vnicus ; but one king. ] where you shall find no fault in the syllogisme , save that the minor is negative in the first figure . whence it is apparent , that vnity , as it is opposed to multitude , is a meer negative term . there is one sunne ; but is this vnity essentiall to it ? whether another sunne be , or be not ; it nothing concerns the essence of this sun , but onely grounds an externall relation , which is yet but relati● rationis . was not the essence of adam the same , and he equally a man , before the production of eve , while he was vnicus ; and after both the production of eve , and the generation of sonnes and daughters , when he ceased to be vnicus , there being more beside him ? was there any detraction , or addition of essence , or any reality , that concerned adams person , at such time as his children were born ? or would there have been afterwards , if all except adam had been swept away ? nay when two drops of water are separated , or conjoyned , is there any essentiall or reall mutation in either ? surely , if vnity may come , and goe , without any reall alteration ; then is vnity so farre from being essentiall to all things , that it is not so much as reall . object ▪ you will say ; but god is indeed one , vnus et vnicus ; and not onely supposed to be one : therefore his unity must needs be reall , and not imaginary . answ . i grant it ; but what then ? must therefore unity be positive or reall ? the ayr , in the night time , is indeed dark , and not onely ●●●posed to be dark ; will you therefore infer that darknesse hath a reall , a positive being , and is not a privation of light ? when the moon is eclipsed , it doth really and indeed want the illumination of the sun-beams , and is not onely supposed to want them ; but you will not , i suppose , say that this want of light , hath a reall essence . so here ▪ god is indeed one , and not only imagined so to be , yet hath not vnity●ny ●ny entity or positive being in it . there is negatio realis , and negatio rationis ; a reall absence and a supposed absence . of the one you may truly frame a negative proposition ▪ of the other you cannot ; there may be indeed in the understanding concerning thi● , negatio actus , ( which is all one with abstraction ) but not actus negationis , actus negativus . when the ayr , in the night time , is dark ; there is a reall absence of light : when , in the day time , i conceive of the ayr according to its essence , or according to some other qualities , not at all regarding its being light ; this is negatio rationis , or negatio abstractionis , there is only a supposed absence of light , but indeed a ( reall ) presence . yea , ipsum non-esse , is a reall praedication though it be not a reall praedicate ( like as mendacium esse falsum , is a truth : ) therefore when i say , centaurus non est ; i do not forge this proposition , or suppose a non-entity in a centaure where indeed there is none , but i affirm that non-entity to be , which is ; for a centaure , is non-ens , and not only supposed to be non-ens . and of negations , or privations , that is onely negatio rationis , when by abstraction things are supposed to be separate , which are indeed conjoyned : other negations though they have not realiter esse , yet they have realiter non-esse ; their non-entity is not imaginary . ( i speak of negatio physica , not negatio logica ; for a logicall negation , that is , a negative enunciation , is as reall as an affirmation . ) a supposed being is ens rationis , and a supposed absence is negatio rationis . negations and privations are non-entia , and not entia rationis ; for they have not in themselves so much as esse cognitum , which is requisite to ens rationis ; and when as sometimes a negation is said to be ens rationis ▪ it is not to be understood of its internall entity , for so darknesse in it selfe doth not include esse cognitum , but when the understanding considers of a negation , and so makes it objectum cognitionis , then of a non-ens it becomes ens rationis . but then ( i say ) it is ●●trationis , not negatio rationis . yet all this hinders not but that vnity , and all other negations , may have a kind of reality , as it is opposed to a fiction . and therfore the ayr ●● really dark , god is really vnicus , and not onely supposed so to be : and yet darknesse and unity are not in themselves reall , but negative term ▪ i purposely passe over severall particulars , ( as well in this chapter , as in others ) which his lordship lights upon by the way ; to avoid tediousnesse : and look principally at those things , to which his lordships aim doth especially tend . chap. viii . the nature of habits whether they be one with truth or the soules essence . in the eighth chapter , he speaks somewhat concerning the nature of habits . and this is to be adjoyned to the end of the . chapter : the . and . chapters , ( wherein he inferres a corollary , concerning the essence of all things ▪ that it is one , that it is vnity ; ) being inserted as a parenthesis . he had in the fifth chapter affirmed that the soul is nothing but truth ; yet ( saith he ) while i affirm , that the soule is nothing but this truth , i doe not refuse the doctrine of habits , either infused or acquisite . but before i proceed , it is not amisse to give notice of a different acceptation of truth here , from that before . he spake before of the truth or light of reason , which he contended , to be one with the soul , and not a distinct faculty . this light was an innate or connate light , which hath its originall and its period with the soule : for when the soule begins , the light of reason begins , and this light of reason is no sooner extinct , then when the soule shall cease to be . but the light of habituall knowledge , ( whether infused or acquisite , ) is not an innate light , but an advenient light ; subsequent to the soules first existence , and really separable from it . yet may it be antecedent to another degree of advenient light , viz. actuall knowledge , which may proceed from habituall . this advenient light of habituall knowledge differs from innate light of reason ; as a habit in the first species of quality , from naturalis potentia , or a faculty , in the second species . and so , howsoever it may be true , that a faculty or naturall power , may be so farre the same with the soule , as that it differ only ratione ratiocinatâ ; yet in a habit , we must of necessity grant a distinction ex parte rei . for where there may be a reall separation ( and not onely mentall ) there must needs be granted a distinction in re . now that in all habits there may be a reall separation , is apparent : for ( though , it may be , some habits acquired or infused cannot be lost when they are once had , as grace , &c. yet ) before the acquisition or infusion of such habits , the soule was actually without them . indeed it is true , that these habits cannot subsist without the soule ; and therefore they may not be imagined to be really distinct , as res & res ; yet because the soule may exist without these ; therefore they must have a modall distinction in re , as res & modus . thus the roundnesse of a piece of coyn , though , when it is , it is the same thing with the silver , not being a thing added , but only a modification , a moulding or fashioning of the former thing ; yet must it be distinct from the essence of the silver , though not a thing distinct : otherwise when this silver looseth its roundnesse , it should loose its essence and become somwhat else ; whereas the silver in this form , is not really distinct from it selfe in another forme , but the same metall , the same silver . there being then this difference between a habite and a faculty : though reason should be one with the soule without so much as a modall distinction ; yet follows it not , that a habit hath the same reall identity , but that it may be distinguished ex parte rei . habits he distinguisheth into infused and acquisite . when the soul ( saith he ) by vertue of its being is cleare in such a truth ; it is said to be an infused habit : when by frequent action , such a truth is connaturall to the soule , it may be stiled an habit acquisite , though &c. whether or no this be the genuine distinction between an acquisite and infused habit , it is not materiall strictly to examine . if the soule by its essence be cleare in such a truth ; that is , be ready to act according to such a truth : i should call this a faculty or naturall power , rather then an habit. thus gravity in a stone , whereby it is naturally prone to descend , i should not call an habit , but a faculty . ( though heavinesse , in another relation , be neither a faculty nor an habit , but qualitas patibilis . and so perhaps may knowledge , as it is an accidentall form informing the soule , be referred to the same species of quality , though it can hardly be called by that name : for a habit quatenus sic , is so called , not with any relation to the subject , but in relation to acts , which slow from it , or are produced by it . ) this pronenesse or aptnesse for operation which is in any thing immediatly from its essence , is a naturall power or faculty ; and a habit , is a further readinesse , and pliablenesse , or facility of working according to this faculty : a habit therefore alwayes presupposeth a faculty , as being but a facilitation of it . and when as by reason a man hath an ability to understand : by habituall knowledge , he hath a readinesse to understand . now this readinesse or facility , if it proceed from often acting ; so that from the iterating of former acts it becomes more prone either to continue or repeate those acts ; it is an acquisite habit : ( somewhat of this may be seene in naturall things ; a wheele being once in motion , it will by a smaller force be continued , then at first begun ; yea for a while persist without help . ) if this facility proceed from some accidentall form produced in it by an externall agent , it is an infused habit : the difference between an infused and an acquisit being no other but only in respect of the efficient . thus the knowledge of divers tongues and the ability to speak them , which was in some of the apostles by immediate infusion , was an infused habit ; whereas in others ( as in paul ) it was acquisite ; differing from the other , not in form , but in the efficient . a habit therefore , whether infused or acquisite , being but a facilitation of the faculty , cannot be a thing distinct from that faculty , but only a modus of it , which hath not in it selfe a positive absolute being of its own ; but is a modification of another being : and its physicall being , existentia rei , must be the same with the being of that , which is thus modificated ; for it is not ipsum existens , but modus existendi : and this manner of existing hath not an existence of its own , distinct from the existence of that which doth exist in this manner : yet its formall and metaphysicall being is distinct . yea and its physicall existence , such as it is capable of , that is , existentia modi ; for not being res , but modus rei , we must not expect that it should have any existence of its own besides the existence of a modus : and this existentia modi is the actuall modificating of the thing existing after this manner . the which existence though it be not existentia rei , yet it is a reall existence , ( existentia in re ) and not mentall : for the thing existent is not only supposed to exist in this manner , but indeed doth so , thus ordered , thus modificated : and therefore that modus doth actually , & really modificate , and is not only supposed so to doe . but if you will not admit ( with scotus ) of any modus entis , as a medium between ens & non-ens , res et nihil , a thing and nothing ; you must then say , it is res : for nothing i am sure it cannot be : for doubtlesse there is some difference more then imaginary between knowledge and ignorance , between a square stone and a round stone , between silver stamped and the same smooth and plain . this difference i should call modall , accounting the roundnesse &c. not res but modus rei ; affirming , that when wax &c. is put out of one form or fashion into another , thereis no new thing propounded ; but that which before was , is now otherwise ordered . and thus it is most true which his lordship speaks , that habituall knowledge , is nothing but light more or lesse glorious ; it is reason cleared ; it 's only facultas facilitata , or facultatis facilitas : and to this facility or readinesse to operate , i cannot allow a physicall existence of its own ; as neither to any habit whatsoever , as being but modi and not entia ; it 's not a being , but a manner of being ; not ens but aliquid entis . and i should easily be perswaded to grant the same concerning all accidents whatsoever , which have long since been called entis entia : and however an accident hath been accounted to be res , and so to have existentiam rei ; yet not subsistentiam rei : though it have an existence of its own , yet its subsistence is no other but subsistentia subjecti . yet i cannot with his lordship subscribe to the platonists , to make knowledge nothing but a remembrance . ( as if there were naturally in our understanding , the pictures or pourtraictures of all truths , but so obscured and covered as it were with dust , that these glorious colours doe not appear , till such time as they be rubbed and washed over anew . ) i approve rather of aristotle's rasa tabula , ( then plato's reminiscentia ) making the understanding , of it selfe , to have no such idea or picture at all , but capable of all . or thus ( i know not how it can be better expressed ; ) the understanding is not as a table , wherein the kings picture is pourtrayed in lively colours , but ( hanging in the dark ) it appears not , that there are any such lineaments , till it be enlightened with the sunne , and then it presents us with a fair description : but rather as a glasse which is able to receive and reflect whatsoever colours fall upon it , though ( before ) it had none of them . for i demand , what principle is there implanted in nature to enform me , whether there ever were such a city as troy ? whether it were so destroyed ? whether this or that were plato's or aristotle's opinion ? what principle to enform , that it rained yesterday & is faire to day ? certainly , matters of fact have not such idea's implanted in nature ; for then might they by discourse be known to have been or not to have been , without the help either of sense or information . and if historicall knowledge may be acquired without any fore-implanted idea's of those truths so known ; why also may not discursive truth be also known without a reminiscentia , or a review of forgotten o● obscure principles ? next he tells us , that wee may seem by frequent actings to help the soule , and so to create acquisite habits ; whereas indeed it is not so , but all actings are only new discoveries . but how this can stand with his former doctrine of reminiscentia , i doe not see : for this takes away not only plato's reminiscentia , but all remembrance whatsoever . if all actings be new discoveries , how and when can wee be said to remember ? but is it soe ? doe former actings no way help our subsequent acts ? i● so , how can a learned schollar be said to know more then an ignorant peasant ? for the one is as capable of a new discovery as the other , i● his former acts make no preparation or fitnesse for future acts . how comes it to passe , that learned men shall apprehend those truths at the first relation , which another cannot without much adoe be brought to conceive ? nay why should an artist be more skilfull in his trade then another ? why may not an infant new born plead his cause as well as the best experienced lawyer ? certainly , if former acts doe not indeed produce an habituall knowledge ( but only seem to doe ) in the one which is not in the other , the one may as well act as the other , for there is the same reasonable soule in a child , which is in him afterwards . the difference surely must proceed from hence , that the former actings have produced a facility and readinesse for future acts : that so , what was before more difficult , becomes now facile . nay more , that which before was utterly impossible , becoms now both feazi●le and easie . all the most refined wits in the world joyning their acutest discoveries , their strongest iudgements together , are not able without the help of historicall relation , ever to know such a thing as the destruction of troy : yet when this , or the like , hath been either seen by our selves , or related to us , it is then easie to tell afterwards , what wee have seen , what we have heard , without a second view or a new relation . now if the former actings , do no● way prepare for a future act ; why might not the first discovery have been made by our own light of reason , without an externall supply , from our senses , or from information , as well as the second ? philosophers ( saith he ) affirm this boldly of the vnreasonable creature , ●teributing it to an instinct or new influence ▪ why then may we not conclud● the same of man ? that philosophers attribute much to instinct in unreasonable creatures , i grant : but that by an instinct , they meant a new influence , i was not aware . certainly memory hath been accounted one of the sensus ●nt●rni , and soe belonging to the sensitive soule , and therefore not to be denied to brutes : and doubtlesse daily experiments put it out of question , that brute creatures make use of memory , and by former acts , are fitted for following acts ; not doing all from a new instinct . i am called in the next place , to search out the difference between reason and faith. they differ ( saith he ) only in degrees , not in nature : for if soule , vnderstanding , habits be all the same , then neither doe reason and faith differ . i grant that there is the same ground , why wee should make reason and faith the same ; that there is to make the faculty and the habit the same . reason is a faculty , faith a habit : now a faculty and a habit , i have before sayd not to be res & res , but res & modus . their physicall difference therefore ( i mean , if you consider faith and reason in the same man ) is but modall . but it doth not follow from hence , that they differ not in nature . for though an habit have not entitatem rei , distinct from the faculty ; yet it hath entitatem modi ; so that the habit is not a faculty , neither is the faculty an habit. to enquire of a physicall identity , and of a metaphysicall or formall identity , are quaere's farre distinct . the faith of peter is really and physically distinct from the faith of paul ; and yet their metaphysicall formall nature is exactly the same . again , all the modall beings in the same subject , though their essence and nature be never so distinct ( v. g. duration , augmentation , situation &c , in the same man ) be really the same ; ( for neither of them , being modi , have any entitatem rei , beside the entity of their common subject , and so cannot make a reall distinction , because there is not res & res : ) yet each modus hath a distinct formall nature of its own : the nature of a figure , is not the nature of a habit , though both in the same subject . but yet , though it doe not follow from that reall identity between res & modus , that the nature of reason and the nature of faith be the same : yet if he change but the terms , and say ( in stead of reason ) that knowledge and faith are the same in nature , i will not contend : so that he mean faith as it is an act or habit of the vnderstanding , and not of the will. for so , faith is an assent to a truth reveiled : & the same individuall assent to the same truth , may be both cognitio scientiae , and cognitio fidei ▪ i will instance in the creation of the world : by faith we know that the worlds were made , and assent to it : and by naturall demonstrations it may be proved , that the world was made ; and these also are sufficient to perswade assent . now we from both grounds ( joyntly ) assent to this proposition , that the world was made . the which assent in respect of the one ground ( propter evidentiam rei ) is an assent of science or naturall knowledge ; in regard of the other ground ( propter authoritatem dicentis ) is an assent of faith , or supernaturall and reveiled knowledge . the assent of science , and of faith , differ not in their form , but in their efficient . but if he speak of saving faith ( quatenus salvifica ) as it doth save : so it is an act of the will , and not of the understanding ; and therefore differs from knowledge . but , to conclude this : if we speak of a physicall difference or distinction , then all the modi that belong to the same thing , can admit of no more then a modall distinction : because having no other entitatem rei , but that of the common subiect , their entitas rei must be common ; there cannot be res & res : the difference must be either tanquam res & modus , or tanquam modus & modus : and here is no consideration of the nature of these modi . in distinct things ; the modi are really distinct and not modally though these modi be exactly of the same nature ; as the roundnesse of severall circles ; for they not having entitatem rei besides the entity of their subjects ; their subjects being really distinct , they must be really distinct also . ( thus in the present case , the faith of peter is really distinct from the faith of paul : but faith in peter from reason in peter is only modally distinct , tanquam res & modus ; ( viz. if you make reason to be res , or a faculty really distinct from the soule : ) and the habit of faith in peter will be distinct from all other habits in peter ( v. g. from the habit of knowledge ) tanquam modus & modus . ) but if wee speak , not of a physicall , but of a metaphysicall difference ; here it little avails to enquire of their physicall difference , or identity . for those things that are really distinct , as two souls , may yet agree in the same specificall nature : and those which are not really distinct ( as severall modi of the same thing ) may have their formall specificall differences . again , though it be granted that naturall knowledge ( attained by by the use of reason , without a supernaturall revelation ) be of the same nature with faith ; yet doth it not presently follow , that their difference is graduall , and the one but a greater degree of the same light : for skill in musick and skill in metalls or mineralls , are both naturall habits ; yet the skill of a musician , and the skill of a chymist are not the same ( though of the same nature ; ) neither yet is their difference graduall ; for the one is not the way to attain the other and the other a perfection of that former . and moreover a man may be skilfull in either of them without a knowledge of the other , whereas a greater degree of knowledge in the same kind cannot be without the lesser . that which follows , concerning falling from grace , and the freedome of the will , ( as also what proceeds , how farre we do acti agere , that is , how farre , and in what manner , the first cause doth concurre with the second in its operations ) require a larger discourse for the deciding of them , then to be toucht at in transitu , and by the way . i shall therefore say onely this ( and so passe them over ; ) liberty and servitude are opposit ; and both are relative terms . he that is free from the dominion of one master , may be a servant , a slave , to another . thus the will , though it be free from any naturall necessity , either from within , or without ; so that it be neither determined by an inward principle , as meer naturall agents are ; neither can have either compulsion , or necessity , imposed upon it by the command of another creature : yet is it not free from the command and power of god , by whose absolute decree it is determined . we must not so farre affect to be liberi , that we become sacrilegi ; we must not vindicate our liberty by committing sacriledge , exempting our selves from being under the power of a deity . if i were now to examine the nature of freedome , wherein it consists : i might perhaps place it in a spontaneity , that it acts without reluctancy , sponte agit : were it not that even naturall agents ( as a stone falling ) have such a free action , without constraint , without reluctancie . or it might be placed perhaps in a reflection upon its own act ; whereby it doth not onely agere , yea and sponte ( or volens ) agere , without a nolition , a renitentia ; but also vult agere : whereas a naturall agent , though perhaps sponte or volens agit , yet you cannot say vult agere , because there is not a reflection whereby it willeth its action . that which hinders me from placing it in this , is , because i allow not any reflex act of willing in god , besides that direct act of working , who is yet a most free agent . for ( beside other reasons , that if need were , might be produced ) it stands not with gods simplicity , to admit distinct acts in god , whereof one should be the object of another . now what strength there is in this , to hinder the placing of freedome in this reflex act , i propose to be considered , rather then affirm . but i rather place the nature of the wills liberty , in a freedome from servitude , that it is not under the command of any creature , or a naturall determination of its own . and therfore though it be free from such servitude as a naturall agent , or such as may be forced , is subject to ; yet it is not free from gods command ; nor ( perhaps ) from the dictate of reason neither , or , if it be , yet is not this its freedome , but its weaknesse . and this is not far distant from the received opinion , which makes it consist in indifferentiâ . for the will can agere vel non agere notwithstanding anything to the contrary from the creature ; but it cannot agere vel non agere notwithstanding the decree of god ; and therfore is not free from that determination . and whereas other things are from god determined mediante causa secundâ , the will is immediately determined a causa primâ . and therefore what he cites out of rutterfort , that granting all things to be under an absolute decree , it is fond to aske , whether the free creature remain indifferent to doe or not to doe ; i willingly assent unto . but you must consider withall , that this freedome neither the angels have , nor had adam in his innocencie . and therefore , when divines tell us , that by the fall we have lost our liberty , or freedome of will , in spirituall things , which yet we retain in morall and civill actions ; i desire that they would more punctually set down , what the liberty is , which we retain in naturall things , but want in spirituall ; what liberty that is , which the angels have , and man once had , but hath now lost : and not speak of such a liberty as neither man or angel ever had , nor is it possible for any creature to have ; nay not for god himselfe , for god having once decreed , cannot with his truth revoke it , nor is indifferent to execute it or not ; but , as they say of jupiter , which make him to be the author of their stoicall unavoidable fate ( understanding it cum grano salis ) he once commanded , and ever after obeyed . there follows in the next place , an objection , how it comes to passe , if faith and knowledge be one , that some who have more knowledge have lesse faith. i need not recite his lordships answer , i will only propose my own . if there be meant a physicall identity , whereby two modi of the same thing doe subsist by the subsistence of their common subject , it is not hard to determine : for two modifications of the same thing may yet be independent of each other : and therefore it is not requisite they should be both in the same measure , or degree . . if by knowledge be meant an assent to naturall truths , and by faith , an assent to supernaturall truths ; neither is here any difficulty : for the knowledge of one thing is not inconsistent with the ignorance of another thing . . ●f knowledge and faith be considered in relation to the same object , spirituall truths , or saving truth , and faith be taken for an intellectuall assent to them : then is it not true , that there is in any ( if you speak adid●m ▪ more knowledge and lesse faith ; what any knows to be thus , he cannot beleeve to be otherwise . for the understanding is not a free faculty , that it can either accept or reject a reveiled truth . . if by faith be meant , not an assent in the vnderstanding to the truth known , but a consent in the will , an imbracing of it ( which is the iustifying act of faith : ) neither is this difficulty much greater then the former ▪ for the too too frequent sinnes , even in gods children , against light , makes it over manifest , that the action of the will doth not always follow the knowledge of the understanding . and yet if this too cleare experience be not able to prove it , but that you still lay all the blame upon the understanding , as not being cleare enough in its apprehensions , or not sufficiently peremptory in its dictates ; and so excuse the will of all remissenesse : i demand then , what disability there is in the will of man since the fall more then in the confirmed angels and saints in heaven ? i cannot think but that the image of god , by the fall , is defaced in the will as well as in the understanding ; and yet if the will doe never disobey the light of reason , which is its sole ( immediate ) guide , i see not wherein this disability doth appear . i grant that the will doth always follow the understanding , that is , it never goes before it , or without it ; it goes never but where the understanding hath led the way , in discovering some good , ( more or lesse , ) something desirable . for the will is caeca potentia ▪ and knows of nothing desirable , but what the understanding discovers . and knowing nothing , can desire nothing ; ignoti nulla cupido . but yet i grant not that proposition in this sense , the will allwayes follows the understanding ; that is , it never stays behind . for to omit what the understanding commands , requires not a discovery of some other good , but only an impotency , a backwardnesse , or remisnesse to doe its duty . to goe without direction , requires a positive cause , because it is a positive act ; but not to goe when it is directed , may proceed from a negative cause ( negatio causae , ) because it is a negative act , or a not-doing . a lame man doth not runne , when he knows , that he ought to runne ; yet here is no need of a positive cause to stay him , but his impotency ( a negative cause ) sufficeth . and thus farre do i admit that distinction of libertas contrarietatis , and libertas contradictionis , though in that way in which it is ordinarily made use of , i doe wholly reject it . there is not in the will an indifferency to choose good or to choose evill ; neither yet to choose good , or reject good ( velle & nolle ; ) both which they call libertas contrietatis . for the understanding doth not shew any amiablenesse or lovelynesse in evill ; nor any odiousnesse in good ( quatenus sic ; ) and therefore the will cannot desire evill , nor reject good ( nolle , or velle non . ) for bonitas is objectum formale appetitûs ; and malum is the formall object of nolition . now the soule cannot velle quatenus bonum , that in which no good is apprehended ; nor nolle quatenus malum ( that is , velle ut non sit ) that wherein it apprehends no evill . but for the other kinde of indifferency , ( which they call libertas contradictionis , ) to will good , or not will it ; to nill evill , or not to nill it ; this i acknowledge to be in the will. for that by reason of its imbecillity , it is not so ready to execute its functions as it ought to be . but yet i do not conceive the liberty of the will to consist in this ; or , that this is any perfection to the will , to be able to suspend its act , notwithstanding the understandings direction to the contrary . ( for this the angells confirmed cannot doe , nor the saints glorified ; for if their will could act contrary to their understanding , then could they sinne ; and yet these agents are no lesse free , then man is : yea god , who is the most absolutely-free agent , yet cannot will or decree that which is contrary to his sapience , ( intellectus divinus ; ) his will never thwarts his wisdome . ) but i conceive it to be an imperfection or weaknesse in mans will ; which , before the fall , was not so stable , but that it might fall ; and is now become so weak , that it is vnable to staud . the common opinion is , that , if the will cannot disobey the iudgement of the understanding , then is it not a free faculty but all its actions are determined by the understanding , while it dictates , that this or that is to be done or omitted ; and so freedome should be placed in the vnderstanding and not in the will. i may adde , ( to help their cause forward ) that there may seem to be no freedome at all : for the will is determined by the dictate of the vnderstanding , and therefore in it is no freedom , no election ; and the vnderstanding ( by generall consent ) is not free , to judge this or that as it pleaseth , but must assent or dissent according to its light : so that here will be no freedom neither . for this reason they say , that the will is not necessitated to follow the dictate of reason ; but when the understanding hath declared what it can , it is yet in the power of the will to choose . but then , least they should fall upon another rock , viz. that , if the will may reject the understandings advice ; then may it desire that which the understanding affirms to be evill ; contrary to that principle , that good is the only object of desire : to avoid that danger , they have found out this distinction of libertas contrarietatis and libertas contradictionis , which they apply thus ; the will hath power indeed to disobey that which the understanding propoundeth : but yet not so , as if , of two objects , whereof the understanding allows of one , and disallows of the other , it were free notwithstanding to imbrace either ; but when an object is commended by the understanding , though the will cannot elect its contrary , yet it may not-elect this , it may choose whether or no it will imbrace it . and thus they think the whole matter is salved . this answer may seem plausible , and hath past for current : but yet ( with their leaves ) the wound , though perhaps skinned over , is not so easily healed . for if they may not admit the liberty of contrariety : they may not ( in my judgement ) admit the other . for when the understanding commends an object to the will , as that which ought to be desired , here are two opposite terms , to imbrace , or not imbrate ; ( agere , suspendere : ) the understanding saith , agendum est , it ought to be imbraced ; the will chooseth rather not to imbrace it , but to suspend its act. the understanding adviseth one extream ; the will chooseth the other extream . the understanding saith , it is good to act , and ( consequently ) it is ill to omit , to suspend ; the will notwithstanding chooseth to suspend ( which the understanding affirms to be evill , ) rather then to act , which the understanding commends as good. thus that libertas contradictionis , appears upon triall to include also a liberty of contrariety : and if it may not-choose the term commended , then it may choose the term forbidden , yea it must choose it , where the terms are contradictory without a medium . all that can be said to help it , will be this ; willing and suspending are indeed opposite terms ; and therefore when the understanding adviseth to will , if the will do [ velle ] suspendere , it chooseth the term opposite , and ( consequently ) that which is proposed as evill ; but ( they may say perhaps ) the will doth only suspendere , and not velle suspendere ; and so this suspending is not an object of choice , but only the absence or negation of an act ; and therefore though it doe ire in contrarias partes , yet it doth not contrariam partem eligere , it doth not choose , or elect , the opposite term , because there is no positive act of election or willing exercised about it . and this answer i confesse may seem to weaken the objection immediatly foregoing ; for thus the will is not made to choose an oppos●te term ; but then let them consider , how this answer will stand with their opinion : they tell us first that the freedom of the will is manifested in suspending when the understanding commands to act ; and yet when it doth suspend , they say this suspension is not an object of choice or election ; and ( consequently ) there is no liberty exercised . if they think thus to evade , in saying , that this liberty is exercised , not in suspe●ding when it might act , because there is no election , & therefore no freedom exercised ; but in acting , when as it might have suspended . i answer , that neither will this serve the turn . for as suspension is not objectum volitionis , an object of choice ; so neither is acting an object of choice . and as we say not volo suspendere , or volo non-velle , so neither do we say volo velle : for by the same reason that any may say volo velle , he may say also volo non velle . so that willing can no more be said to be an object of choice , then suspending . their libertas contradictionis therefore must either be also ibertas contrarietatis , and so by themselves rejected : or else it will be no exercise , no manifestation , of liberty , and therefore uselesse for their purpose . i admit ( as i said before ) the distinction in this sense ; that the will , though it cannot elect a contrary object , ye● it may not-elect this. and thus there is no action ( of choice or desire ) in the will , but tending to some good that the understanding proposeth ; for what is not known cannot be desired : but yet there may be a negligent omission or suspension , when it ought to act which i do not account ●o be the liberty , or perfection of the will , ( for angells &c. have it not , ) but an imperfection and weaknesse . neither do i say , that the will doth voluntarily suspend , or velle suspendere , without direction , ( for that were a positive act ; ) but ( either by negligence , or weaknesse , ) doth not-will . for which there is no● requisite a positive cause , but a negative , or the want of a cause . you will say , if this be so , then will there be only a sinfull omission●● ●● the will , and not a sinfull commission : for sinne of commission ( doing or willing that which ought not ) is positive , and therefore cannot proceed from the will , when the understanding dictates to the contrary . whereas the will doth as often fail in choosing a wrong object , which the understanding acknowledgeth to be evill ; as in not choosing a good object . i answer , it is true , the will doth often choose what it ought not : and yet i affirm , that the wills errour is onely negative and not positive ; it is omissive only , in not-obeying some directions of the understanding . i shall make it cleer by an instance . pleasure and vertue may be competitors , and rivalls ( as it were ) both courting the will ; ( as in an act pleasant , but sinnefull . ) the understanding proposeth pleasure as quid bonum , 't is good , 't is desirable ; it proposeth vertue as quid melius , 't is better , 't is more desirable . now the will perhaps follows the first direction ; it imbraceth pleasure as being good , and so desirable ; ( for bonum jucundum is desirable as well as bonum honestum : ) but the second precept , or direction rather , whereby vertue is proposed as better , and therefore should countermand the form●● , this it hears not , it follows not . if you say , the understanding doth indeed discover some good ( though a lesse good ) in the object ; yet this is not to be accounted the understandings practicall direction ( dictamen : ) but , that the understanding having examined the good and the evill that is in every act , and comparing them together ; upon this comparison , as it observes the good or evill to be more , so it prescribes , to doe , or not to doe , h●● age , or hoc non age : and if the will doe act , when the understanding forbids , it must be said to perform a positive act without direction . i answer ▪ i admit not the understandings dictate to be imperative , but onely declarative : it onely informs , this is good , this is evill ; but commands not , doe this , or omit it . but the will upon proposall of good , embraceth it ; upon proposall of evill , it rejects it : yet not so , but that , by negligence , it may not-embrace good , and notreject evill . and thus the proposall of pleasure , as good ; is as truely declarative as the other ; and this the will follows : but a further declaration , whereby it declares , that although pleasure be good , yet it is evill to embrace this good , because there is a greater evill annexed ; this direction , by omission , it imbraceth not . and this i conceive to be the true nature of the acts of the will and understanding . if you would have the will and the understanding to be the same , ( and therefore think these distinctions superfluous , ) understand by the intellect , anima intelligens ; by the will , anima volens , or anima quatenus volens , and then you are pleased . and thus you see , how there may be more knowledge ( even of spirituall and saving truths ) and yet l●sse faith : because there may be ●n asse●t , a beleeving , in the understanding , ( which is knowledge , or historicall faith ; ) without a fiduciall trust , a reliance , and resting upon it ; which is the justifying faith , or the justifying act of faith. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yea , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , without 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . . but if you speak of a knowledge peculiar to gods children , wherof others partake not ; such a knowledge of god wherby no man knows him but he that hath him ; that knowledge which is life everlasting : this knowledge , and faith , always go together ; the more there is of one , the more also of the other . a speculative knowledge , whereby we assent to the truth reveiled , is found even in the devils , and that in as large and ample measure ( i suppose ) as in the saints on earth : for i cannot be perswaded , but the devils ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) being knowing spirits , doe know and assent to the truth of every proposition that a child of god knows . but there is an experimentall knowledge distinct from the former , knowledge of another nature , whereby we know , what we know , in another manner : we do not only know that it is so , but we tast and see it to be so . a blind man knows perhaps that the sun shines , but he doth not s●● it : i know that at midnight the sunne shines to our antipodes , but i doe not see it shine to them : i know that at such a time there is such an i ●lipse visible to such a part of the world , yet doe i not see the eclipse . the confectioner that provides a banquet knows that this or that dish is sweet , but they only tast the sweetnesse that eat of it . a wicked man may know that god is good , ( as a blind man knows that the sun shines , by the report of others ; or as an astronomer knows of an eclipse before it come , by calculation , or rationall discourse and illation ; ) ●ut he s●es it no● , he tasts it not . now we read of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , h●b . . . som that have their senses exercised to discern of good and evill ; there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , phil. . . a kind of spirituall sense , whereby we do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , super●a s●pere , relish those things that are above . and where there is this spirituall tast , this experimentall knowledge ; there must needs be faith also ▪ for truths thus cleerly , and sensibly ( as it wer● ) rev●iled to the soul , it seems no● to be in the power of the will to reject : no more then it is in the power of the eare not to be pleased with harmonious musick ; or in the power of the palat , not to be delighted with the sweetnesse of a tast . and thus i suppose it may appear , how far , and from what ground there may be knowledge without faith. that god is all mercy and sweetnesse to the divels , is no article of my faith , those miserable creatures , saith he , cannot consent to it . no more can i : and yet i deny not , that mercy and justice are one thing in god. gods simple essence is the same with both ; yet are not they so properly the same with each other . the torment of the devils proceeds from that divine essence which is love ; ( as likewise the mercies of gods children proceed from that divine essence which is justice : for the justice of god is equally himselfe as is his love : ) yet may we not say , the torments of those are an effect of love , no more then that the mercies of these are the effects of anger ; yet both are the effects of that simple essence , which is both. it is a far different thing therefore , to say , a loving god doth notwithstanding punish ; and to say , a loving god doth therefore punish : punishment and revenge are sufficiently consistent with love ; but not the immediate effects of love. thus we say , musicus aedificat ; yet not his skill in musick , but his skill in architecture , is exercised in building . the love of god ( as likewise his anger , justice , power , &c. ) is ( i confesse ) the divine essence ; we allow no accidents in god at all : quicquid est in deo , est deus . but i ask , whether he think this attribute love ( and so of the rest ) to be an adequate expression of that whole essence ? if so , then is it all one to say , god loves his children , and , god is angry with his children , or god hates them : if not , then is it only inadaequatus conceptus , and there remains somewhat to be expressed by other attributes , which is not expressed in this . the attributes of god therefore ( as likewise it is in other inadaequati conceptus ) may be all affirmed of the same simple essence ; but not ( mutually ) of each other : and the effects of each may be said to be the effects of the same essence ; but not ( promiscuously ) of every attribute : ( unlesse we take them materialiter , not formaliter : ) and consequently , the ruine ( of the damned ) is not ( as he affirms ) an effect of infinite sweetnesse ( though of that ( essence ) which i● , infinite sweetnesse ; ) nor is god , ( in this ) mercifull to them . again , what we know , we are , ( saith he : ) i assume ; sed deum scimus , ergo dii sumus . chap. ix . how knowledge and affection differ . from what hath been spoken in the former chapter , without adding any more , may appear what is to be said concerning his ninth chapter : how it comes to passe that some of mean knowledge have large affections . for a speculative knowledge doth not alwayes breed affection , ( because the will doth not alwayes follow the understanding , ) though neither doth it extinguish it . it is true , there is an affection , which is rather a blazing ( then a warming , enlivening ) love , ( as the fools mirth like the crackling of thorns ; ) which ariseth either from a false apprehension , or else from the novelty , rather then the sweetnesse , of the object , ( as the smell of flowers at the first approach doth most affect the sense , though they be as sweet afterwards ; ) and this perhaps may vanish , at the presence of a more clear or more continued light. but the true warmth of zeal is not extinguished by the light of knowledge , ( though speculative , ) but feeds upon it as fewell : and the greater growth there is in ( especially experimentall ) knowledge , the greater is the strength of affection from it : and , thus , they that know most ( experimentally ) do alwayes love most : knowledge and affection go together . yet are we not forced from hence to grant , that knowledge and affection are the same : betwixt which i must needs allow the same difference ( be it more or lesse , that is , reall , or modall ) which is between the vnderstanding and the will : knowledge is not affection , and affection is not knowledge . and that objection which his lordship from hence makes to himselfe , that ( since men of largest affections , doe not alwayes know most of god , but some of weaker affections may know more ; ) it might appear from hence , that all being is not one , differing onely in degrees ; but that there are even different natures , amongst which one may excell , while the other is deprest : this objection , i say , i● of that force , that i see not how all which his lordship brings , can take it away . the large encomiums , which he brings for affectionate knowledge , preferring it before speculative , ( which he prosecutes very piously , very judiciously , very affectionately ; ) though it prove , that affectionate knowledge is the more excellent ; yet doth it not shew that speculative knowledge is nothing ; or that the measure of affection alwayes follows the measure of speculative knowledge : one of which he ought to have proved , if he conclude that knowledge and affection are the same . a man may truly know , that sugar is sweet , though he neither tast its sweetnesse , nor be delighted or pleased with that tast . and a christian is sometimes to live by faith and not by sense ; that is , he is to trust , and rest upon the speculative knowledge of gods goodnesse , and his own interest in it ; even then when for the present he wants the sense of it . he may know and beleeve that the lord is good , though he doe not tast and see it . i will wait upon god ( saith isay ) which hath hid his face from the house israel . he that walketh in darknesse , and sees no light , must yet trust in the name of the lord , &c. and thus much for the first notion of truth , or reason , as it is the groundwork of rationall operations . in which , thus far i may go along with his lordship , that reason is but the soul intelligent ; that intellec●u●ll habits are but reason advanced ; as likewise that its operations are but reason actuated . the first , distinguished from the soule at least ratio●e ratiocinatâ : the two last , modaliter . if he mean no more , i wish his expressions had been clearer : for then the notions are not new , but the words . if he do aliquid grandius moliri ; i either understand him not ; o● cannot assent to him . but you will tell me perhaps , that i am mistaken all this while ; his lordsh●p by truth intends not reason , as i take it ; for the very title of his first chapter , calls it truth vnderstood , and this cannot be reason , for reason is not that which is understood , but that whereby we understand . it is true , it do●h so : but ( shall i speak it once for all ? ) the titles of his ●hapters , and his marginall notes , do so often clash with the text , that i cannot beleeve they were done by the same pen. i● i● like his lordship , writing it but as a letter to a private friend , by whom i● i● since published , did not at first distinguish it into chapters , and give it that analysis that now appears ; and since its first writing , as the epistle tels us not having so much as perused it , it is not like he hath added them since ; but the publisher ( as in the like cases is frequent in treatis●s of all sorts ) not to trouble his lordship with so small a matter , did it hi●self . who ever did it , it is like ( as else where , so here ) he either did not apprehend , or not attend punctually ▪ his lordships meaning . for it is clear enough , if we attend it , that that which he there contends to b● the s●me with the vnderstanding , cannot be truth understood ; but the rise or groundwork from whence all actions and sayings , the effects of a reasonab●e soule , breathe forth . it had been more agreeable to his lordships mind , to have said , intellectus and principium intelligendi are the same ; and not , that the vnderstanding ▪ and truth-understood , are one ▪ and so his lordships method will be exact , making the soule or understanding ▪ one with its faculties , chap. . with its habits , chap. . with its operations , chap. . whereas , how the object of all these , should come first , and be that from whence all these breathe forth , appears not . chap. x. whether the operations of the soule be the soules essence . having done ( in the former chapters ) with the first notion of truth , as it is the fountain or source of knowing , as well naturall as habituall . in this tenth chapter , he comes to the second consideration , or notion of truth ; denoting the streams proceeding from this fountaine : the actions , and effects of a reasonable soule . indeavouring to prove , the particular and various workings of the soule , in conclusions , simple apprehensions , negations , and affirmations &c. to be all one and the same , both with each other , and with the soule . the fountain and the stream ( saith he ) make but one river : i adde , the root and the branches make but one tree . yet the root is not a branch , neither are the branches the root . to prove this , he compares the nature of the soule or vnderstanding ( for , saith he , we have proved them both one ) with their irradiations and actings . his argument tends to this effect : the souls essence , saith he , is no other thing then activity ( actus ) and therefore must be either potentia agendi , or ipsa actio ; actus primus , or actus secundus . and if it be actus , either primus or secundus , ▪ which he conceives to differ only in time ) it must be still in work , and is no longer then it acts : which act can be no other but a work of reason ; else how can it consti●ute a rationall soule ? and if so , then how doth it differ f●om thought or ratiocina●ion ? the operations therefore of the soule ( conclusions , sayings , actions ) are the being , the form of the soule . are they so ? but , i suppose , the soule at some times produceth no ( rationall ) act at all , ( as in sleep : doth it then cease to be a rationall soule , when it ceaseth to produce rationall operations ? ( for when its essence ceaseth , it selfe ceaseth to bee. doth a stone cease to be heavy , when it ceaseth to fall downwards ? i think not . but i will consider the argument distinctly . he hath proved ( he saith ) that the soule and the vnderstanding are both one. this , though i would not stick to grant , yet ( as i have formerly said ) i see not any argument , in his foregoing discourse , to prove that the soule and vnderstanding are all one ; but what will be of equall force to prove , the soule and the body to be all one. and if he will allow between the soule , the understanding , and its operations , a distinction as reall , a● essentiall , as there is between the body and the soule ; i am confident there is no rationall man that will desire more . the nature or being of the soule ( saith he ) is nothing but activity . that the soule is actus , is confessed , i grant , by all : but whether activity may be taken in the same sense , i question . this actus ( saith he ) whether primus or secundus ( which differ but in time , and so differ not at all , because time is nothing ) c●● be no other but a work of reason : and so the soules operation will be its form and essence . that actus primus and actus secundus , ( gravity and descension ) differ only in time , i grant not : for this is not a distribution of actus into its species ; but a distinction of an ambiguous term . actus in the first sense signifies actuality ( not action ) and it is opposed somtimes to potentia ad esse , somtimes to potentia ad formam ; siue sit forma substantialis , siue accidentalis , ( but never to potentia ad operari ; ) and thus actus is no other but that essence , per quam res aut actu-est , aut est actu-tale . actus in the second sense signifies , not actuality , but action , or operain ; and is opposed to potentia ad operari . i say therefore , the essenc● or nature of the soule or understanding is actus ; it is actus primus ; it is that whereby the soule & actu est , & est hoc , or est tale ( viz. in genere substantiae , ) such a being , such a substance . its faculties ( if distinct ) are also actus , ( yet not actions : ) which you may say to be actus secundi ( as some doe ) because they are a secondary actuality , whereby the soule becoms , not a being , or such a being ; but a being so qualified , so adorned : or rather i should say they be actus primi , because ( though accidentall , yet ) they are not operations ( which i conceive to be the truest meaning of actus secundus , though i confesse some attribute it to all accidents , ) but forms ; operative indeed , but not operations . if you aske what is the form of this activity ( or actuality rather ) of this actus primus which is the soules essence , if it be not rationall workings ? ( which is all one as if you should ask what is the essence of an essence ? and againe , what is the essence of that essence ? in infinitum . i answer , the form of this actus is it selfe , its essence . what can be the form of rationality , but ipsa rationalitas ? humanitas you may say is forma hominis ; but will you ask again , what is that which is forma humanitatis ? if you do we must answer still , that it is humanitas , and stay there . except you would have us invent one abstract upon the neck of another , and say humanitatitudo . and thus i think somebody hath been trying practises ; for if you ask what is the form of honorificum , or honorificabile , they can tell you it is honorificabilitas , or honorificabilitudo ; and aske again what shall be forma honorificabilitudinis , they will tell you , it is honorificabilitudinitas . ) i say , we must not enquire for the form of a form , or the essence of an essence : for every thing hath its essence ( positive ) and its hae●ciety , not from any other thing , but from it selfe ; though it may have an externall , a relative , or accidentall denomination from some adjunct . ( and therefore to say , materiae individuatur a formâ , as though the matter of a dead corps , were not the same matter that was in the living man , is a doctrine which i could never digest . for so all generation , will become creation ; for if it be the form which makes this matter to be this , then cannot one form succeed another in the same matter : because if the form precedent gave it its individuation , and made it to be this , and not other matter ; when this form is abolished , the matter which is joyned with the succedent form will not be this , but other matter : if this form make it to be this matter , then another form will make it to be other matter . and if so , then is both matter and form produced de novo ; which must needs be creation , because it is not made of any thing prae-existent , nothing remaining of what before was . ) hee proceeds thus , if the form of this activity ( actus ) be not th●se reasonable workings ; then must it be either of a baser allay , or of a higher stamp . for answer , i will but demand in generall , which his lordship judgeth to be most e●cellent , the end , or the mean● ? that which is willed , not for its own sake , but for somwhat else , seems to be of lesse worth then that for whose sake it is desired : and yet the mean● , being the ends efficient , how can it be inferiour ? i say therefore that a●●us primus is the efficient of actus secundus ; and this the ( partiall ) end of the other : and leave it to his lordships consideration , whether he will esteem thee more noble . hee tells us soon after , that if we distinguish between the act and the power , the act must ever be first in order , dignity , and nature . but ( under his lordships favour ) i conceive that the act is first neither in order , in dignity , nor in nature . the cause is before the effect , in excellency , because causa ( aequivoca ) est nobilior effecto ; for nothing can produce an effect more noble then it selfe . in nature , causa est prior effecto ; for that is defined to be naturâ prius , a qu● non redit essendi consequutio ; now i demand , whether of these two may be without the other ? the act , or the power ? and in order : for he speaks i suppose either of the order of production , or the order of intention ; if he speak of the first ; the order of production , is ordo naturae generantis , and so that which is first in nature , must be also first in order : if he speak of the order of intention ; then the end ( if it be the sole end ) may seem to be preferred before the means ; but this is a morall excellency , and a morall order ; not a naturall or physicall excellency , such as we are now speaking of . but i demand withall , whether action be the sole end of the soule ? that is , whether the soule in its essence might not be produced either for its own excellency or for the excellency of some other end beside the excellency of its operation or actus secundus ? and if so , then can it not be concluded that even its morall excellency , in genere finis , is inferiour to the excellency of its operation . but his lordship admits not at all of this distinction between actus primus and actus secundus ; so as that actus primus should be the being or substance , and actus secundus the product . but why ? they forget , saith he , that omnis virtus consistit in actione . nay we forget it not , but we deny it . for if you speak of morall virtue , est virtus tacuisse , &c. but ▪ to hold ones peace , is no action : if he speak of physicall virtue or excellency , of naturall perfection ; then doe i deny , that all naturall exc●llency consists in action ; for the essence it selfe is bonum physicum : but if he speak of physicall efficiency , then i grant , that virtus efficientis , or efficientis efficientia , consistit in actione ; the efficacy , or efficiency of a thing consists in its operation : but what then ? may not an essence be without action , because it cannot act without action ? must its essence be action , because its efficacy is action ? in ordinary philosophy , operatio sequitur esse , operation proceeds from the essence , and not constitutes it . but , saith he ; what is this their actus primus ? what is the form of it ? ( i have said , it s own essence ; it is it selfe its own form , and the form or essence of the soule : we must not enquire for the essence of an essence , nor for the essence of a thing out of it selfe : ) what is with them , the form of a reasonable soule ? is it not reason ? ( yes it is ) and this reason i● not potentia ratiocinandi , but ratio : ( he meaneth , i suppose ratiocinatio , rather then ratio ; for ratio and potentia ratiocinandi are all one : ) for if you distinguish between the act and the power the act must ever be first , in order , dignity , and nature : ( but this i grant not . ) so then , what is the form of this primus actus ? is it not some act ? ( yes , but not an action or operation . ) if it be , then must it exist , else you allow it but a bare notionall being ; and if it exist , mu●t it not be that which you call actus secundus ? i answer , it is actus , ( aliquid actu ) but not an action ; it exists also , and yet is not actus secundus , but the form from whence actus secundus flows . he proceeds ; if it be not an act ( or action ) then is it nothing else but a power or faculty depending upon somewhat else ( viz upon the soule ; ) and if this be the nature of the first , what shall the second being ( which is its effect , and so lower ) be but a notion . ( yet he said even now , that the act is before the power in order , dignity , and nature ▪ and yet the act is the power'● effect : how then ●oth he now affirm , that the effect is somewhat lower then the first being ? ) i answer , it is not an action ; neither yet is it a distinct ( dependent ) faculty , ( if we make the soule and the facul●y to be the same ; ) but the souls essence . but yet though we should admit reason to be a distinct facul●y , ( as s●me doe ) and so , not to be the soules actus primus , but actus afficiens : yet doth , it not follow that the operation must be onely a notion . heavinesse is not the stones essence , but an accidentall form , a power or faculty of gravitation ; yet is not its descension onely imaginary but reall . heat in water is not its essence , but a separabl● accident ; yet its calefaction , it heating or scalding , is not meerly notionall , but reall . so might it be here : there may be ( notwithstanding this argument ) a faculty or accidentall form in the soule , which may be an actus primus in respect of its operations , ( though , no● actus primoprimu● which is the soules ●ssence , ) from whence those operations , or actus secundi may proceed , which ye● might be reall , and not imaginary . ●● he had ( as he speaks ) set that distinction of substance and accident ▪ ( which he seems to challenge as an aged imposture ) upon the rack ; i would willingly ▪ have examined its forc'd confession . ●● the mean time , i see not from what ground ●e can strongly conclude , that this activity ( as he speaks , ) this actus primus , consists in action ; or that it and actus secundus are the s●me ; and both one with truth . you will ask me , what distinction therefore will i allow between actus primus and secundus ; between the agent and its action ? i answer , the one is res , the other is modus ; and so the distinction is modall : neither more nor lesse distinction will i admit of . and so doing , i dissent not from the opinion of others : for ( as i remember ) suarez ( not to instance in others ) makes action to be a modus ; and though he make a transient action to be modus patientis , ( in which i assent not to him ; ) yet an immanent act ( such as are rationall operations ) is with him , modus agentis . chap. xi . whether time and place be onely imaginary . in the next chapter , we are called to consider of the nature of time and place : which his lordship occasionally falls upon , by reason of an obiection , that lays so strong a siege to his opinion , that i doubt hi● lordships answer will hardly raise it . it ariseth from hence ; there a●e in the soule various operations and workings , distinct in time , and distinct in place : which distinction , though it may have an externall denomination in respect of time and place ; yet ariseth not from thence , but is internall or intrinsecall to the operations themse●ves ; this operation is not the other , and the other is not this. and thi● distinction would remain though the distinct operations were performed in the same time , in the same place : cas●r and pompey were not the same man , though contemporary . the water which to day runs down a river , is not the same water with that which yesterd●y ran in the same place , the same channell . two angels , though coexistent at th● s●me time in the same place ▪ the same part of the ayr , are not yet the same angel. thus nutrition , and volition , or intellection , though at the same time , performed by the same soule resident i● the same body , are yet distinct acts. and on the contrary , a man remains the same man to day , that he was yesterd●y ; at this place , that he was ●t another place ; though both time and place be altered . now there being in the soule various actings , distinct both in time and place ( though they receive not their distinction from either are there not then so many severall soules ▪ ( viz. if the operations be the souls essence ? ) this is the objection . his lordship supposing all the difference between these acts to arise from time and place , thinks that if he prove time and place to be nothing , then these acts will not be distinct , but the same , ; and so may constitute the same soule . but , whether place and time be any thing or nothing , whether they alter any thing or nothing in this point ; yet sure we are that this man is not the other man. this soule not another soule , this action is not the other action : and so the difficulty remains as hard ; there will be various operations still . he brings severall simile's to illustrate it . complexion lineaments , harmony , though they be in themselves diverse , yet they make up one pleasing being , which we call beauty . a flame arising from divers thorns is but one flame . a stream supplied from severall springs , is but one stream . i may adde , many members make up one body ; many creatures one world. ( yet still one member is not the other ; the water received from one spring , is not the same water which came from the other spring , though both runne in the same channell . ) but will he say , so is it in our case ? that ( in the same manner ) severall acts doe constitute one soule ? are these actions its integrall parts , as the members are of the body ; and severall waters of one stream ? &c. are they a piece of the whole and make up the totum compositum ? then is the soule divisible ; then doth it lose some part of it selfe , and becomes maimed at the cessation of every action . but he makes not the soule perhaps to be constituted of these actions , as so many integrall parts ; but , saith he , the soule is one act , distinguished to our notton by severall apparitions . if so , then his simile's drawn from integrall parts constituting the whole compositum , will not hold . but ( secondly ) i deny that all these operations are but one action in various shapes . they are all actions of the same soule , but they are not all the same action . the soule , if you will may be called , one soule under various shapes ; but these various shapes cannot be said to be one shape . like as wax fashioned successively in several moulds , is the same wax in severall figures ; but that these are all the same figure , we cannot say . actions performed by the same soule , are all modi of the same thing , of the same soule ; but they are not all the same modus . this is not the other . and this we may hold , whatever become of time and place for this distinction ariseth not from them. a man is the same man to day , that he was yesterday , though the time be not the same . he is the same man at york , that he was at london , though the place be not the same . time and place doe neither make the same to be two , nor two to be the same ; one to be two , nor two to be one : yet what hinders but that things and actions may have an intrinsicall difference one from another . these various beings , therfore , not being differenced by these circumstances of time and place , ( th●ugh different in both , ) it is lesse materiall for me to enquire what they are ? or whether they be some thing or nothing ? only i desire to know , wherein the strength of that argument consists , which is by us so often urged against papists and lutherans , concerning their transubstantiation , and consubstantiation ; viz. how christs body can be at the same time in severall places ? for , that i● might be successively in all these places at severall times , we deny not : now , if at severall times it may be in divers places ; why may it not be so , at the same time , if time and place be nothing ? againe , severall places at the same time may contein severall bodies ( v. g bread , and christs body ; ) now why may not the same place con●●ine them , if place be nothing ? why not together , as well as successively , if time be nothing ? all actions , saith he are nothing if time be anything ; because the time allotted for every action , be it never so short , may be divided into severall parts , many subdivisions of time. true. but is there not t●e same reason of actions that is of time ? are not they divisible into as many parts , whereof every parcell answers to a portion of that time ? there is the same reason in every continuum , be it magnitude , distance time , place , duration , motion , action , or whatever : they are all equally divisible in semper divisibilia . if it be actio instantanea , it is dispatched in an instant , not in time : if it be actus continuus , it is capable of as many divisions as is that time in which it is performed . this not being well weighed saith he , hath raised that question , [ how god should see all things ? ] if in their existences ▪ then they are coeternall with him : if only in their causes , then are they not present . which difficulty , he supposeth , is dissolved , by making time to be nothing , and al things to be exi●●ent , in their beings , with god from all eternity . ( which of how dangerous a consequence it may prove his lordship is not aware . ) that god befo●e the worlds creation , did co-exist to this instant ; i doe confidently affirm ; y●t , that all things present , d●d exist before they were produced , i cannot assent ; which i doubt not but to reconcile , ( if i were now discussing that question ex professo , and not glancing at it in transitu ) allowing notwithstanding to time and place , their due reality ; not making temporall and locall difference to be only imaginary . as likewise , how permane●cy in god may consist with succession in the creature ; and how acts ( of creation , preservation , redemption , decree , the execution of that decree ) may be eternall , as they pr●ceed from god , though in the creature recipiantur in tempore ▪ in place we make no scruple of it , to affirm that anima est tota in toto & t●ta in qualibet parte , that the whole soule may be present to one point , or part of the body , without ceasing to be wholly present to another part ; ( or , if possibly in the soul , and created spirituall substances , it may be questioned ; yet doubtlesse , in god himselfe , it must needs be granted , that he is vbique totus : ) now , if it be not repugnant to be coexistent to one point of place , without ceasing to coexist to another point though distant ; why not to one point of time , without ceasing to be present to another , though successive ? the next objection , concerning the nature of evill , is of lesse force against his tenet . for , that good and evill may coexist in one entire act ; that there may be some degrees of goodnesse in an action , and yet not that perfection of goodnesse , that ought to be ; may as well be granted , as that the twilight hath not [ so much ] light , and [ so much ] positive darknesse , but that it hath not so [ much ] light as the midday . but yet in the mean time it may be doubted , whether the nature of evill be meerly privative . it is true indeed , the nature of ( moral ) evill is a non-conformity ( or difformity rather ) to gods law : but why may not this non-conformity arise ex praesentiâ non debiti , as well as ex absentiâ debiti , or ex defectu debiti inesse ? may not a line disagree from its measure , by being too long , as well as by being too short ? the not distinguishing between bonum metaphysicum , and bonum morale , may perhaps have caused some errour in this assertion . but i stand not now to decide it : you shall find more of it in the next chapter . but that which is assumed as a ground of this assertion , is farre more improbable then the assertion it selfe . viz. that contradictions may be simul , semel , & eodem respectu , in the same subject . what necessity his lordship had to embrace this opinion of anaxagoras , democritus &c. ( as he saith , ) against aristotle ; i do not discern . neither can i see , wherein this co-existence of contradictions doth appeare . for the presence of an inferiour degree , and the negation of a farther degree , are no contradictions , because they are not ad idem . and such a coexistence aristotle and his followers will not deny ; else how can they speak of qualitates remissae ? nay more , they will grant an inferiour degree , to consist , not only with the negation of a farther degree , but even with the presence of its contrary ; for they deny not but that there may be contrary qualities in the same subject in remissis gradibus , ( as heat and cold in warm water , though not in gradibus intensis . but if anaxagoras , or any other , will contend , that perfect contradictions may ●t and together , that the presence of an inferiour degree , may stand with the absence or negation of the same degree ; it will be in vain to dispute against it . for when i have proved it to be false , they will grant it is so , and affirm withall , that notwithstanding its falshood , yet may it also be true , because contradictions are not inconsistent . ( another adversary perhaps would deale more sharply with his lordship upon this point : i passe it . ) he proceeds to shew by divers similitudes , how the same thing may take divers shapes in our apprehension ; and consequently , that the severall apparitions of truth do not forthwith evince the variety of truth . all which we deny not , for otherwise we cannot acknowledge that there is any distinctio rationis ; rationall distinctions being no other but inadaequati conceptus ejusdem rei . that there is therefore a rationall distinction , we deny not ; but that there is only a rationall distinction , and not also a reall distinction ; this is that we deny . some things we acknowledge to be only ratione distincta , but other things we contend to have a reall distinction . which must be overthrown before he can conclude , that all the actions of reason which seem severall , are but on● , a fixt intire vnity . he toucheth lastly , upon copernicus his opinion , which , he saith , hath been confuted these many yeares by the three leading senses . ( and yet his margent saith , that sense is confuted by him. ) for we [ see ] the circumvolutions of the heavens : we [ feel ] our selves upon a stable foundation ; we [ heare ] not from the volutations of the earth such a black cant as her heavy rowlings would rumble forth . but ( not to dispute the truth of copernicus his opinion ) i think i may affirm that neither of these testimonies of sense do any way contradict his assertion . for , first , i deny that we [ see ] the revolution of the heavens . we discern indeed , ( and that truly , ) that the starres at severall times have severall positions in respect of our horizon ; ( and this is all : ) but whether this diversity of position arise from the motion of the one , or the other , or both , our sight determins not ; affirming only that there is such a diverse positure . our sense of [ feeling ] assures us of thus much , that the earth is such a foundation as upon which we rest ; and , that we remain in the same positure in respect of the earth and the air circumstant ; which may be as well if all jointly move together , as if all jointly stand still . a man in a ship under hatches upon a smooth water , supposeth himselfe to sit fast upon his seat , ( and he doth so ; ) and he seeth all things about him to remain at the same distance , in the same positure , discerning no alteration : yet this hinders not but that he and they may be joyntly moved together , without being thrown from off his seat , upon which he may sit as firm as if he were on shore . and for the sense of [ hearing , ] i see no reason , why it should be more blamed for not hearing the sound of the earths volutation ; then for not hearing the pythagorian harmony . if the vast celestiall spheres , whose almost every starre doth farre exceed the terrestriall globe , be whirled about with such a silent motion , as that the quickest eare cannot discern it ; why may not the earth , a farrelesser body , passe as quietly , without such a dismall cant , such an hideous noise , as his lordship doth suppose ? for noise doth not arise meerly from motion ; but from the crossing or thwarting of severall motions , from the clashing and collision of one body against another , by reason that the one ( standing ) interrupts the other in its motion , or both moving according to severall motions do mutually hinder each others progresse : whereas , if all moved the same way , with the same speed , ( as is supposed in the motion of the earth , and the things adjoyning ) there would be no such clashing , or interruption of one another , and ( consequently ) no noise . the senses testimony therefore doth not contradict the opinion of copernicus , the eye tells us , that the starres and we are at severall times in severall positures , but , whether it proceed from their motion or from ours , it affirmeth not . our feeling informs us , that we are not tossed from place to place , that is , from one part of the earths superficies to another , but remain upon the same part of its surface : but whether we jointly move together , or jointly rest immovable , it determins not . the eare can tell us , that it hears no noise , ( for how can it since there is none ? ) but it doth not say , there is no motion . these witnesses therefore can testifie nothing in this cause ; except we should suborn them , and put that into their mouths , which is not within their knowledge , or falsify the records , by supposing them to say that , which they say not . chap. xii . concerning falshood in the soules operations . whether it cease to bee , when it c●aseth to act truth . in the twelfth chapter , he comes to another objection if actings of truth , be truth , ( that is , if rationall operations be the soule , the soules essence ) then when the soule acteth not truth , it ceaseth to bee : and so when it entertaineth or pronounceth a false position , the soule is no more it selfe . this objection i conceive to have two branches ; for the soule may cease to act truth , either by not acting at all , or by acting falsly . for whether it act not , or act falsly , it ceaseth to act truth ; and therefore ( if acting of truth be its essence ) it ceaseth to bee. his first answer may be equally applied to both ; that , granting the soule when it acts upon falshood , to be as when it acteth not , and so is not ; yet shall we advance nothing , till we prove the succession of moments to be reall and not imaginary . where he presupposeth , that when it acteth not , then it is not ; and , though the same be granted in a false acting , yet neither that , nor this , will prove of any force , since succession of moments is onely imaginary . the ground of this reply , i conceive to be this ; if there be not any reall succession , if there be no prius and posterius indeed , but be onely supposed so to be by our imagination ; then any one act of the soule , is able to give it a co-existence to all eternity : ( according to what he affirmed in the former chapter . ) for of this one act , being reall , it cannot be affirmed , that it was but is not , or it is but hath not-been ; but if it at all be , it must be alwayes ; because , if succession be onely imaginary , then to be and to have been is all one ; then there was not a time when it was not , neither will there be a time when it shall not be . but if the issue of the question depend upon this , whether succession be reall , or imaginary ; i doubt not but this might be soon decided . therefore first , i ask , whether there be not the same reason for succession in time , that is for extension in place ? whether there may be pars extra partem , punctum extra punctum , though not momentum extra momentum ; or there be the same reason of both , and both be imaginary ? if there be in both the same reason , ( which i suppose he he will affirm ; ) then must every being have a coexistence to all places , as well as a coexistence to all times ; it must have an vbiquity as well as a perpetuity . then is it in vain to dispute whether christs body be really present in the sacrament , whether peter were ever at rome , &c. if every body , every thing ▪ be every where . for if difference of place be nothing , then that which hath a reall existence in any place , hath a reall existence in all places ; because this place and all other places have only an imaginary difference , and are indeed all one . secondly , if one action give the soule a coexistence to all ●ternity , then what doth the second and subsequent acts produce ? do they give it a new being , a new eternity ? answ . you will say ( i suppose ) that there is not a second act , an other act , but all acts are one act : and this one act , which appears to our imagination to be first and second , &c. gives the soule one essence , one eternity . repl. if so , then what is the difference between an act of sinning , and a course of sinning ? what is the difference between the once committing of a sinful act , and the oft reiterating of it ? between davids one act of adultery , and the lascivious persons constant practise ? why are we exhorted to cease from evill ; if every act be eternall , and whatsoever succeeds can be but the same ? he that stole , let him steal no more : to what end serves this counsell , if there be no other act feazible , but what is already , and that to remain for ever ? answ . . if you would say , that the same act is again reiterated ▪ rep. i ask , if the iteration be somwhat more then the first commission ? if not , then to commit it once , and to iterate it often , is all one : if it be somwhat more , then is it either a reall addition , or imaginary : if imaginary , then are we where we were before ; if it be reall , then why may there not be a reall act distinct from the former , as well as a reall commission ( of the same act ) distinct from the former ? thus you see if time be nothing , if succession be only imaginary ; then is it all one to commit many sinnes , and to commit one sinne. thirdly , if succession and difference of moments be onely imaginary , if all duration be eternall , all simultaneous ; then what is the difference between the long life of the aged , and the few days of him that dy●th in his youth ? for the reall existence of one as well as the other is equally eternall ; since the length and the shortnesse of time is but imaginary , all duration being indeed simultaneous . thus the youngest child ( if he do but think so ) hath lived as long as the most aged . again , . if succession and difference of time be only imaginary ; then why do i not n●w know , that which i shall know to morrow ? what hinders but that every man should be praescius futuri ? i shall know it to morrow , because i shall see it ; but why should i not now both know it and see it as well as to morrow , since it is now as really present as it will be then ? why do we dispute concerning matters of fact ; as whether peter were at rome , and the like ? can we not see whether he be there or not ? for if he were there , then he is there : since then and now are all one : and if he be there , why do not i see him there ? for i am as really there as he is : for if i be any where , then am i there , since there and here are al one ; time and place making only an imaginary ( and not reall ) difference . ans . if you say , things that seem to be future , are even now as really present as they shall be hereafter , but they appear not to be present , and therefore are not now known and seen , ( like colours in the dark ; ) but when they shall receive a new luster , they shall both appear to be , and be seen to be . rep. i reply , if they shall appear , then they doe appear ; because then and now are all one . again , if there be apparet and apparuit , why not est and erit ? if there be a prius and posterius in appearing why not in being ? or i ask , whether appearing and not-appearing be a reall or onely imaginary difference ? if a reall difference , then will there be somewhat reall then , which is not now ; and consequently all reality will not be simultaneous , there will be somewhat reall afterwards which before was not : if appearing , be onely imaginary ; what shall i have to help my knowledge then , which i have not now ? ans . . if you say , things future are both now present , & we know them so to be , but do not seem to know them , or seem , not to know them : repl. then i reply as before , if we shall seem to know them , we doe seem to know them ; because then and now are all one . so that if succession of time be only imaginary ; then do we already know , whatsoever we shall know , ( whereas christ himselfe increased in wisdom , luk. . ) and the fore-knowledge of things to come , would not be such a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as might distinguish between the true and false gods. and thus ( if i mistake not ) i have sufficiently shewed ( though much more might have been added ) that there is a reall succession , a reall priority of duration , and not onely imaginary . and therefore ( notwithstanding his first answer ) the soule must really cease to be , when it ceaseth to work , or to work truth ; if these workings of truth be the soules essence : and the soule must be ( during that cessation , or errour ) as truly non ens , as before its first production ; for the precedent and subsequent workings cannot ( then ) give it an existence , as not ( then ) being . his second answer , to the objection propounded in the beginning of this chapter , toucheth not at all the first branch of it , wherein it is objected , that if particular actings of truth , be truth , or the soules essence , how is it that the understanding should not cease to be , when it ceaseth to work ; ( for this in his first answer he seemed to grant : ) but it is applyed to the second branch of it , viz. that if particular actings of truth be truth , or the soules essence , then the soule entertaining a false position should be no more it selfe . to which he answers , by denying that the soule doth at all act upon falshood : and that upon this ground , because falshood is not a reall being upon which the soule can work . for its nature being privative , and no reall being , how can the soule or truth work upon nothing ? i might answer here , that it is not requisite to the soules act , that its object should have a reall being : ( as appears by the soules apprehending ens rationis ; which apprehension is a positive act , and yet hath no reall object . ) for the object of intellection , is not reale , but cognoscibile . and therefore , that falshood wanteth a reall being , is not inough to shew , that the understanding cannot work upon it . and this ( in effect ) he granteth soon after . for , it being objected , that the soule while it pronounceth a false position , doth really act , ( verè agere ; he replyes , that there are in this action two things , a thinking , and a so-thinking . to think is a positive action , a good action , but the formalis ratio of so-thinking lyeth in thinking an errour , which is nothing ; and so a not-thinking . when ( mistaking ) a man catcheth at a shadow ; in catching he doth truly act ; but to catch a shaddow , is to catch nothing ; now to catch nothing , and not to catch ; to act nothing , and not to act , is all one . so to think is reall , but to think amisse is nothing , and all one with not-thinking . he grants therefore , that the soule pronouncing or understanding a false position , or thinking amisse , doth really think , really act : now i ask , while it doth really think , what doth it think ? what doth it act ? ( or vpon what rather ? ) certainly it must either be falshood ▪ or no●hing : ( for what else it should be , neither doth his lordship shew , nor can i imagine ) if it act upon falshood ▪ the false position ; then may falshood be the object of a reall act ; if it act upon nothing , then what hinders , but that falshood ▪ although it be nothing , may yet be the object of this act ? object . but he will say , if the soule do act upon falshood , then must it become falshood , that is , a vanity , a ly , a nothing : for i conceive ( ●aith he ) the agent it selfe , together with the subject acted upon ( the object ) to be one in the act. ans● . but this supposition must i deny ; for if so , then when the soule acteth upon god ( by knowing , loving , &c ) then doth it become god : and if so , why doth his lordship ( at the end of his preamble ) blame those for mounting too high , who , confounding the creator with the creature , make her to be god ? but for the better clearing of this whole discourse , concerning falshood and errour in the souls working ; i shall desire you to take notice of a distinction , which all know , and yet but few think of , when they have occasion to use it . the non attendency whereof , hath produced much obscurity , much errour , and inextricable perplexities concerning this and the like subjects . it is , to distinguish between verum metaphysicum ▪ and verum logicum ; between bonum metaphysicum , and bonum morale : to distinguish , i say , metaphysicall truth and goodnesse , from morall and logicall goodnesse and truth : to distinguish the truth of being from the truth of a proposition ; the goodnesse of being , from the goodnesse of an action . now this being premised , let us examine the truth of some tenents which are allmost generally received by all . the nature of evill , say they , is privative , not positive ; evill is nothing . and why ? because ens & bonum convertuntur , and therefore malum must needs be non-ens ; now non-ens is nothing . be it so ; evill is nothing . but what evill do they mean ? evill in metaphysicks ▪ or evill in ethicks ? goodnesse , in metaphysicks , is no other th●n entity , ( for none ever acknowledged a greater distinction between ens & bonum then a distinction of reason , ) and therefore malum ( in metaphysicks ) must be non ens. but will they say that morall evill is so too ? if they do , then must they say also , that bonum morale is convertible with ens ; ( otherwise their argument will not hold : ) that all being is honesty , or morall goodnesse ; and all morall goodnesse is being or entity . i ask therefore , whether morall goodnesse , or honesty , ●e the essence , the entity of a stone ? if not , then is not every being , bonum morale ▪ i ask again , whether silence be not morally good , at such a time as when a man ought to hold his peace ? yet to ● silent , or not to speak , hath no metaphysicall goodnesse , no goodnesse of being , for it is a mee● negation . there may be therefore morall goodnesse , where there is no metaphysicall goodnesse , no positive being ; and there may be metaphysicall goodnesse , goodnesse of being , without morall goodnesse or goodnesse of honesty . now if malum metaphysicum , a negation , a non-ens , may be bonum morale , what shall be the malum morale opposite to this bonum ? shall that be also a non-en●● if it be , then how can it be contrary to the other ? since that nothing cannot be opposite to nothing , but something to something , or something to nothing . i say therefore , that metaphysicall evill , is meerly privative , as being opposite to the goodnesse of being ; and it is no other but non-entity ▪ but morall evill is every way as positive as is morall good. for what is the nature of morall good , or evill ? is it not , a conformity , or a difformity to a morall precept ? then the goodnesse or evill of it is not in the being of the action , but in the so being ; it lies not in the positive or absolute entity of the action , but in the relative nature . morall goodnesse therefore , and morall evill , have not an absolute essence , but a relative ; an agreeing , or disagreeing ; a likenesse , or unlikenesse , to its rule . now if likenesse be a reall relation ; why may not vnlikenesse be also a relation reall ? if simile be reall , why not dissimile ? if the one be positive , why not the other ? object . they will say perhaps , that the nature of morall evill , is not a difformity but a non-conformity , to its rule ; not to be ( positively ) vnlike , but only not to be like . answ . if so , then not to be is a sinne ; for not to bee , includes not to be like , or not to be obedient . if the blessed angels had never been created , they had been eo ipso sinfull : for if they had never been , they must of necessity not be obedient ; ( though not disobedient ; ) for how can they be obedient , if not at all being ? a stone must then be sinfull , when it doth not-understand the nature of god , as a man doth and ought to do ; for though it be not disobedient to the precept of knowledge , ( because this precept was not made to a stone but to man , ) yet you cannot say that it is obedient , and therfore must of necessity be not-ob●dient , or not-be obedient ; wherefore if a bare not-obedience , or a not conformity to the command be a sinne , then doth a stone sinne. scire deum is morally good , and therefore ( if morall evill be only an absence of good ) since there is not in a stone this scire deum , how can it be but that a stone must sinne ? god commanded moses to go down into egipt , &c. and aaron to offer sacrifice : doe i sinne therefore when i doe not-obey this command made to them ? how is it possible that i can obey the command for moses his journey , or aaron's sacrificing ; for my going is not moses his going , nor is my sacrificing , aaron's sacrificing ; yet doe i not sinne in not-obeying . when moses made the brazen serpent , he did not ( in that ) obey the precept of going into egipt , ( for to go into egipt , and to make the serpent , is not the same , ) yet was it not sinfull to make the brazen serpent , though it were-not an obedience to that command , for neither was it a disobedience ; for that precept , did neither injoyn nor forbid it . thus every action , though never so good , will be a sinne ; for there is in the most perfect act , a not-obeying of many precepts , ( yea of all precepts , except that which injoyns this action , ) though there be not perhaps a disobedience of any . the nature of sinne therefore , or morall evill , is not barely a not-obeying ▪ but a disobeying ; it is not a not-conformity , but a difformity , a crossing or thwarting of some command . therefore the stone sins not , because there is no disobedience in its not-knowing , because it was not commanded ; moses his making the brazen serpent , was not a breach of his former injunction , although not an obeying of it ; for in his commission to go into egipt , his making the brazen serpent was neither forbidden nor commanded . the act of one morall virtue , is not an offence against the rest ; for it is no breach of their rules , though it be not an observance of them : it is praeter , but not contra. ans . . but if i should say on the contrary , that the nature of morall good , were not a conformity , or positive likenesse ; but only a not-difformity , a not-disagreeing , or not crossing its rule ; might not this be said with as good probability as the other ? you would think it strange perhaps , that evill should be positive , and good negative : but ( if i m●stake not ) there is more truth in this , then is in the other . for a bare not-agreeing doth not make an action sinfull , but a not-disagreeing d●th make it lawfull , and so morally good ; for where there is no law , there is no sinne. if i walk for my refreshing in one part of the garden to day , and in another to morrow ; or in that other to day , & in this to morrow ; i sinne not in either : not because i have a command to walk in this first , or in the other part first : but because neither is forbidden , therefore is neither vnlawfull . i ask therfore , whether the lawfullnesse of this action , in walking first in this part of the garden and not in the other part , doe depend upon its conformity to some rule , or its not-disagreeing from any ? now , what is the lawfullnesse of an action , but its morall goodnesse ? ans . yet thirdly , i affirm not the nature of morall good or evill to be negative , but both equally positive ; if by good , you understand , that which ought to be , not , that which may be . and therefore i make three sorts of morall beings ; bonum , malum , indifferens ▪ good , which must be done ; indifferent , which may be done ; evill , which may-not be done . the first , commanded ; the last , forbidden ; the other , of a midle nature , neither commanded , nor forbidden ; which being indifferent , is often called good , but never evill . the first consists , in a conformity to its rule ; the last , in a difformity ; the other in a bare not-disagreeing . the first and last are of a positive nature ; the other of a negative . ( and yet sometimes this positivenesse , whether in good or evill , is rather positivum logicum ( the praedicat of a positive or affirmative proposition , ) then positivum reale . for an omission , negatio act●s , may be good or evill : which having in it selfe no reall being , cannot be the subject of a reall relation . ) yet doth not this contradict their opinion who affirm , that non datur actio indifferens in individuo . for by good and evill , they mean licitum & illicitum , lawfull and unlawfull ; including under the name of good , or lawfull , not only that which ought to be done , but whatsoever may be done ; as when ( in civill matters ) we say , it is lawfull for me to give such a portion of my estate to such a man , not because the law of the kingdom injoins me so to doe ; but because it doth not inhibite me . and thus licitum will be a negative term , and illicitum a positive , ( though by the grammaticall notation it might seem contrary ; ) for illicitum affirms , that there is a law to the contrary ; licitum denies only that there is such a law to forbid it , but whether there be any to command it , it affirms not . and thus much concerning the nature of evill . ( wherein if i may seem prolix , it being but a digression in this place : yet because i was called to it in the former chapter , where his lordship gave me occasion to handle it ; i thought it more fit to referre the discussing of it to this place , where i meet with more questions of the like nature . ) . now , as it is in good and evil , so also in truth and falshood . falshood , saith he , is a vanity , a lye , a nothing and why so ? because ens & verum convertuntur , and therefore falsum must be non-ens . to this i say , as to the former ; truth of being , or metaphysicall truth , is positive , and of the same extent or latitude with entity , or being . and this truth i have formerly said to be cognoscibility , making verum in this metaphysicall acceptation to be all one with intelligibile . i affirm also , that ens & verum ( or intelligibile ) convertuntur . and ( consequently ) according to the manner of being , must be the manner of intellection . that which hath a reall being ( as ens reale ) may be known to be ; that which hath an apparent , or supposed being , may be supposed to be. i affirm likewise , that falshood in this sense cannot be understood , or that the soule cannot act upon ( metaphysicall ) falshood : for how can that be known , which is not cognoscible ; or understood , which is not intelligible ? but , when i affirm , that verum and ens are convertible ; i restrain it not to reall entity ; for there may be esse cognitum , where there is not esse reale : but i proportion its cognoscibility to its being ; and therefore if it have not a reall being , but only imaginary ; it may be supposed , but cannot be known , to be . neither yet doe i so proportion the reality of intellection , to the reality of the object , as if when there is no reall object , there could be no reall act : for it is cognoscibile that is convertible with ens , and hath its reality proportionable to the reality of being ; not cognos●itivum . the understanding , whether it know to be , or suppose to be , doth yet really act ; and his lordship also granteth , that when the understanding doth act amisse , it doth yet really act ; the opining , or thinking , ( saith he ) is a good act. but where the object is not reall , there the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cognosc● , cannot be reall ; for how can a reall relation be founded in a non-entity ? yet the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cognoscere is reall ; for the reality of ●t , depends not upon the reality of the object , but upon the reality of the act. that therefore which is so understood , is the supposed object of a reall act. but now logicall truth , the truth of a proposition , which is opposed to falshood , ●o errour , hath nothing to do with the reality either of the object or of the act ; for a true proposition may be framed concerning an imaginary object ( as when we affirm a chimaera to be ens rationis , or only imaginary ▪ ) and an act metaphysically true ( a reall act ) may be logically false . logicall truth and falshood ( like as morall good and evill ) have not an absolute being , but relative . they consist not in the being or not-being of the act ; ( for when the understanding doth act falsly it doth verè agere , though not agere verè ; it is verè actus , though not verus actus : ) but in the agreeing , or disagreeing with the object . for when the intellect doth understand , it frames an idea , a picture , or representation of the thing understood ▪ which picture , or idea , is a reall picture , ( it hath the truth of being ) whether it have the truth of representation or not ; that is , whether it be like or unlike , whether it agree or disagree , with the copy or object which it represents . a picture in a painters shop is truly a picture , it hath reall colours and lineaments ; but perhaps it is a false picture , it represents not that visage by which it was drawn . when the understanding conceives an ens rationis , the idea or conceptus is not this imaginary being , ( for this conception is as reall as the conception of a reall ens , ) but the supposed object of this conception ; there being indeed no such thing as this conceptus doth represent . when a painter describes in a table some antick shapes or strange chimaera's ; his description , his draught , is not a fiction , but as reall as the true pourtraicture of a living man : but that which by this description is represented , that is the fiction , there being no such antick forms , no such chimaera's , as he expresseth . when the understanding draws a reall picture , a reall idea or conceptus , without a copy , without a pattern ; it is ens rationis : when , indeavouring to imitate a copy , to represent the nature of things , the truth of being ; it yet misseth of it , not making its picture agreeable to its pattern ; this is a false apprehension . and this is the difference between ens rationis , and error intellectûs : both in the mean time being reall acts. the logicall truth and falshood of a conception or proposition , are but relations of likenesse or unlikenesse , conformity or difformity , in the act to its object ; and are both founded in the reality of the action , or its truth of being : and are both equally reall , equally positive ▪ for falshood is not a meer not-conformity , or not-expressing of things existent ; but a difformity , a crossing or thwarting of them . for else , when a man ceaseth to think or speak of this or that truth , he there by erres , and lyes : for when he thinks not at all , he cannot think conformably ; when he speaks not at all , he cannot speak conformally , either to the existence of things , or to his own opinion of them . yea every proposition , every thought will have so many falshoods in it , as there be other truths which it doth not expresse : for if the not-expressing of a truth , be falshood : then to affirm that the sunne shines , is a falshood , because it doth not expresse the fires hea● , or the charcoals burning : and thus that proposition which expresseth not every truth , is a false proposition ; yea contains infinite falshoods , opposite to the infinit number of true propositions possible . object . if you say ( to avoid this ) that it is not the not-expressing of one truth , the not-conformity to one existence , that makes a proposition false ; but the not-expressing of any truth : whereas the conformity to , and the expressing of any truth , makes the proposition or conception true : ans . i answer first , that this is contrary to the generall proposition , which affirms , that perfectio oritur ex integris , imperfectio verò ex particulari defectu : which is applyed to severall kinds of imperfection ; that action is good , whose every circumstance is rightly ordered ; that proposition true ▪ whose every branch doth agree with the thing , &c. wheras one bad circumstance , one false branch makes the action bad , the proposition false . the contrary to which must have been affirmed , if the expressing of one truth , make the proposition true ; and the concurrent not-expressing , or not-conformity to all truths be requisite to make it false . . again , if there be requisite a not-expressing of any truth to make it false ; then must this ( and the like propositions ) be true , if i affirm virgil & homer to be greek poets , if i affirm a stone to be a reasonable creature : for it expresseth one truth , viz ▪ that it is a creature although it be not reasonable , ( as likewise the one was a gre●k poet , though not the other : ) and the not-expressing of a further truth , doth not hinder its expressing of this. then must that action be good whose one circumstance is good ; if the intention be right , though the formality of the action be never so unlawfull , yet will not the act be blamable . logicall falshood therfore is as positive , as logicall truth ; the one consisting in a positive conformity , the other in a positive difformity to the things . yea , of the two , the nature of truth is rather negative , thē the nature of falshood ; for a not-conformity makes not a proposition false ; but the not-difformity makes it true. for that is a true proposition that is not opposite to any truth ▪ though it do not expresse all truths . neither can there be a medium between truth and falshood , as there is between good and evill ; for though there may be an indifferent action , which is neither good ( positively ) nor evill ; yet is there not an indifferent proposition which is neither true nor false . truth and falshood in propositions , are opposed as lawfulnesse and vnlawfulnesse in actions , ( whereof lawfulnesse , as i have said , is negative ; ) rather then as good and evill , laudabile & vituperabile . yet if we desire a medium , i can shew you one ; but then it must not be actus , but negatio actûs . and that is , in abstraction ; when the understanding conceives of one thing , without considering of another ▪ for then it doth neither affirm , nor deny , and so that conception is ( thus farre ) neither true nor false ; as likewise the proposition expressing this thought . when i conceive of the ayr , not regarding whether it be light or dark ; of a man not considering whether he be learned or ignorant : this abstracting , or considering the ayr without considering light in it ; considering aristotle to have been a man , not considering withall that he was learned ; is neither true nor false : according to that , abstrahentis non est mendacium : wheras if i affirm the ayr ( in the day time ) to be without light , or aristotle without learning ; the proposition is false . falshood and truth therefore being relations , equally reall , equally positive ▪ the understanding may be said as well to act falshood , as to act truth , while it produceth that absolute act , in which these relations are founded . otherwise ▪ what will be the difference between ignorance and errour , between silence and a lye ? . there is yet another question , to which by his lor● . i am invited ; the same ( saith he ) may be said of pain ; which he conceiveth cannot act upon the soule , nor the soule upon it ; because it is but a bare privation . and therefore subscribes to the opinion of dr. twisse , ( whom if anagrams may be credited , you may stile wisest ; ) that it is better to be in perpetuall pain , then not to be at all ; because if pain be a bare privation , then is any being more desirable , then for fear of a privation ( a nothing ) to become no being . his ground you may easily perceive ; because if misery be but a privation of happinesse ; then is it better to have the goodnesse of being , without the goodnesse of happinesse , then to want both the one and the other . but i cannot with his lordship ( saving always the deserved respect due to that reverend divine ) subscribe to the opinion of dr. twisse in this particular . for ( beside that thus paena damni , and paena sensus will be all one ) i conceive pain to be as reall as pleasure . motion hath been accounted by all ( if i mistake not ) to be positive , and rest ( quies ) to be only privative , negatio motûs . now in my opinion , ease , and pain or torment , are opposite in the same manner that rest and motion . and so i conceive pain or torment ( whether you speak of dolor corporis , or dolor animi ; the griefe of mind , or bodily pain ) to be reall ; the negation whereof is called ease ; and its contrary , pleasure or delight . neither doth it at all trouble me , that ens & bonum convertuntur ; that all reall entity , hath a reall goodnesse , or the goodnesse of being : for nothing hinders but that bonum metaphysicum , may be malum physicum ▪ that which is reall may notwithstanding be inconvenient ; that which is , in se bonum , may not-be bonum huic , whether you speak of bonum jucundum or bonum vtile . goodnesse of being ( metaphysicall goodnesse ) is but a common subject capable either of ( physicall ) good or evill ; ( like as the same reall action may be morally good or evill . ) and according as the physicall good , or evill ( annexed to being metaphysically good ) doth exceed , so is that being desirable , or not desirable . otherwise , how could it be better for that man ( which betrayed our saviour ) that he had never been born ? i urge not the judgement of sense in this particular ; because his lordship appeals from sense to reason : i shall therefore examine what reason can alledge , why credit should not be given to the judgement of sense . for , ●having a judgement confessed in the court of sense ; i must suppose ▪ it to be in force , till such time as i see it revoked by reason : and when reason hath reversed it , i will grant the former sentence to be voyd . object . you will say being , though miserable , hath some goodnesse : whereas not-being hath none : and therefore being , though with misery , is more desirable . ans . i reply , misery hath much evill , not-being hath none : therfore misery is more to be shunned then not to be. but if this satisfie not ; i desire to know whether there be not the same strength of reason in this argument , that is in theirs . viz : a sinfull act hath in it the goodnesse of being ; and its sinfullnesse i● only a privation of further goodnesse , the goodnesse of conformity to gods law. therefore , it is better to sinne then not to act ; to commit a sinne then not to commit it : for if i sinne , i produce ●ome good ; because it is a reall action , and so hath the goodnesse of being ; but in not-acting , not-committing , i produce no goodnesse at all . therefore it is better to sinne , then not to sinne : because acting , though sinfull , hath some good , but not-acting hath none . now if this argument do not hold good to prove it better to sinne ( be the sinne as great as can be possible ) then not to act , not to sinne : then must i needs think that their argument , being exactly in the same form , is of as little force , to prove misery ( though never so great ) to be better then not-being . but let us heare his lordship plead at reasons barre , for the revoking that sentence which hath past in the court of sense . reason telleth us ( saith he ) that paine must be somthing , or nothing : if nothing , then it is but a privation ; ●f something , then must it be good or evill ; if good , it cannot hurt us ; if evill , it is either a nominall evill , or reall ▪ if named an evill and is not , it will not be disputed ; but if it be a reall evill , then is it nothing ▪ for evill is only a privation of good. i answer to this discourse ; that paine is somthing , it is evill , it is a reall evill , ( malum physicum . ) and this reall evill is also posi●ve , and not a bare privation of good : for i conceive not a stone to be in pain , though it have not pleasure , ( bonum jucundum ; ) nor to be greived , though it do not rejoyce . there is one great rubbe that yet remains against what i have said , concerning these three last mentioned questions ; which i have referred to the end , that so once mentioning might suffice , without particular repetition in the discussing of each question . and it is this . if falshood and evill , whether morall or physicall , have a being , ( if it be reall ) then must we with the manichees make two sources of being ; or else god must be the author of it , which none will affirm . for answer to this , i intend not ex professo to handle at large that question , whether , and in what sense , god may be called the author of sinne , of evill , of falshood . for , if i durst to encounter that difficulty , which hath troubled able divines ; yet would it be too tedious to insert here , especially when i have allready transgrest with over much prolixity . only thus . all relations , you know , have their originall , not from any peculiar act whereby they are produced , distinct from that act by which is produced that in which they are grounded ; but arise and flow from that absolute being , upon which they depend , per nudam resulta●tiam , by a resultation from it , without a new intermediate act. the father doth not by one act beget his sonne , and by another act ( he , or his sonne ) produce filiation : but the terminirelationis being once produced , the relation doth unavoidably follow : two white things being produced , it is impossible ( etiam per divinam potentiam ) but that they must ( in this ) be like . now falshood and truth , good and evill , being ( as i have said ) relations ; and consequently having no other production , but their resultance from their foundation ; i leave it to others to judge , how farre god doth concurre with the operation of the creature in producing that act , which is good or evill , true or false ; and how farre the efficient of this act may be affirmed the cause of that relation which doth result from it . chap. xiii . the consequents of this assertion , that all things are one truth . whether usefull in practicalls . i have now done with his lordships thesis layd downe in the full extent in the severall branches of it . the chapters ensuing are but a declaration of the consequents , the vsefullnesse of this position . which , saith he , if we consider , viz. that all things are but one emanation from divine power ; it would make our lives more cheerfull , more christian , both in the practicall and theoreticall part . that all things are but one emanation , if he speak of unum per aggregationem , i grant ; and so i suppose will all else . god alone hath his being of himselfe , and gives being to all his creatures : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . and whatsoever being they have , it is only a communication of that being which he hath in him selfe . but that the parts of this one aggregatum are not really distinct from each other ; hath not yet been so clearly proved as to convince mee . his arguments , if they prove any thing , will prove , that god cannot produce creatures really distinct . for if it be enough to prove , all things that now are to be really the same , because the fountain of them all is god ; the thing communicated , their own essence ; and the recipient , themselves ; ( because the essence produced , receiveth of god 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 esse : ) then is it impossible for god to produce any thing that shall not be the same with these : for whatsoever can be possibly produced , if god be the author of it , then must hee be the fountain , and it selfe the recipient , receiving from god 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 esse . this being premised , i ask , whether this one emanation which his lordship seeks to establish , be really distinct from god or no ? if not , then must not his lordship blame those that confound the creator with th● creature , making it to be god. but if this one emanation be distinct really , if this fountain have sent forth one stream really distinct from it selfe , what hinders but that it may send forth more streams ? hath god ( like isaack ) but one blessing ? or can he produce more but will not ? if he can ; then is it possible that two emanations , two creatures , may be really distinct , though receiving their essence from the same fountain . and if any creatures may be possibly distinct from other , why not these creatures that now are ? there being no more to be alledged for their vnity , then for the unity of all possible . gods 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , his power also , and the emanation of it , is so uniform , as that it is equivalent to an infinite variety . he proceeds to this purpose . in the practick part of our lives ( saith he ) if we knew that all things were one , with what cheerfullnesse , what courage , should we undertake any action , any difficulty ; knowing the distinction of misery and happynesse , to have no being but in the brain ; that misery is nothing , and cannot hurt us , that every thing is good , and good to mee , because i and it are beings and so good , and these two goods falling under no other difference but of degrees , good and good must needs agree , that which is good is good to mee : yea how void of envy at anothers good , and of thoughts of revenging injuries ; since i have a propriety , a possession of that which is anothers , hee and i being one ; injuries are nothing and cannot hurt ; good things , though anothers , doe serve me . that all things are one ; that the difference between happinesse and misery is only in the brain ; that misery , that injuries , are nothing and ▪ cannot hurt ; that whatsoever is good must be good to mee ; and ( which is the ground of it ) that good and good , ens & ens , admit of no difference but of degrees : i have allready denied . i will only adde , that by this discourse you prove the devills as happy as the blessed angels : and if it be a good consequent of this position . that it will make us no● be afraid of misery and danger : i am sure it is as bad a consequent , that it will make us not afraid of sinning . the devills are beings , and therefore good ; every thing that is , is good , and good to them , for both they and it being good , and admitting of no difference but of degrees , good and good cannot but agree , and so , be good to them : the happinesse of the blessed angells doth serve them , since ( as his lordship speaks ) it is not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , they have a propriety in it : their own misery and torment is nothing , and cannot hurt them ; and ( which is the onely difference which you can imagine ) if they think otherwise ( i use still his lordships expression ) this must be a lye , and cannot hurt . and if this be hell ; who will be afraid to sinne ? my judgement cannot assent to make the torments of the damned , onely imaginary ; to make hell a fansie . yea to affirm , that it is good to sinne , because the act of sinning is a reall good ; and its evill , only imaginary , a lye , and cannot hurt . chap. xiv . whether knowledge and sciences receive benefit from this assertion . he proceeds to shew the usefulnesse of unity in theory ; and complains , that learning is broken into so many sciences : wishing that it were all like the chain fastened to jupiters throne , all of a piece . and indeed i wish as heartily as his lordship , ( whether all things be one emanation , or many ) that comenius his designe , ( of which his lordship speaks ) of reducing all into one , might proceed : of reducing , i say , all knowledge into a body , all sciences into one system ; ( for this is it comenius designes ; he never fancied his lordships unity . ) and great pity it is , that so worthy a design is not prosecuted at a publike charge , that such a shining light should be extinct for want of oyl ; if there may be hopes of effecting it . he shews what a multitude of inquiries we must needs make for the perfecting of knowledge , whilst we acknowledge a distinction in things ; which labour might be much contracted , if we could be content to see all things to be but one , bearing onely different shapes . but though this were allowed ; yet must we then , either look at all things with a confused eye ; or else shall be as much troubled in taking notice of different shapes , as we are now in observing different things . he reckons up many doubts , as not yet determined , concerning the existence of beings ; what things there are , and what they are ; qu●nam sunt , & qualia ( vel quid ) sunt . but i see not how his doctrine , of vnity in all things , will resolve any of these . for granting all things to be one , yet how shall i know , whether there be an vnicorn● , a phoenix a mermaid , or ebur f●●●il● ? whether the philosophers stone , or a perpetuall motion , be possibile ? whether dictamnum be a soveraign balm ? whether tobacco be hot or cold ? what are the degrees of heat or cold in this or that simple ? if then this opinion serve no way to inform us concerning these questions wherein we doubt ; how can he commend this opinion , as usefull , from the manifestion of our ignorance in these particulars ? if he would exhort us , not to enquire ; this he may doe though they may be many ; if he would have us search , whether or no there be these severall shapes , how doth their common vnity help forward the enquiry ? you see ( saith he ) in what a maz● you are meandred , if you admit of any division . i wish we could see how to help it , by allowing his vnity . yet notwithstanding their multitude ) he accounts the knowledge of existences , and the being of things , to be necessary ; although those things are all of one nature , variegated only in our apprehension . ( but for ought i see , it is as little labour for us to find , that there are so many things , as for his lordship to find out so many shapes . ) but to enquire the causes of these beings , is ( in his lordships opinion ) to become majestatis rei ▪ for prying into th●se arcana imperii . in my judgement , there may be as great a vanity and emptinesse in the curious enquiry after the being of things , as in the too nice search of their causes . vain philosophy may be as well in the historicall as in the discursive part . a modest inquiry both into the beings , and into the causes of things , is both lawfull and commendable ; a nice curiosity is blamable in either : it will prove but vanity , if not vexation ; weaving a spiders web , if not hatching a cockatrices egge . t●las quasdam doctrinae pariunt , t●nuitate fili operisque admirabiles , sed quoad usum frivolas & inanes . bacon . l●ke a razor of too keen an edge ; as seneca speaks of chrysippus , magnum ●●hercle virum , sed cujus acumen nimis tenue retunditur , & in se saepe replicatur ▪ etiam cùm agere aliquid videtur , pungit , non perforat . chap. xv. whether confusion in the knowledge of causes be redressed by this vnity . of causes ▪ he tells us ) there are two lye open to our view , the vniversall efficient of all things , god ; and the materia prima , 〈…〉 common essence ; other causes ( saith he ) are better known by name then in the natures of them ; ( as efficient , finall , materiall , formall , &c. ) we are ignorant , i grant , in the particular causes of divers things ; and therefore when we have no other but those two generals , we must rest there . but if the other appear and shew themselves ; we need not shut our eyes for fear of seeing them . it is not like to cost us so dear as ovid's , or act●on's sight , or as those that saw medusa's head. till numeri platonici ( saith he ) cease to be a proverb , in vain shall any undertake to teach him how and whence it is , that the various rowlings of the tongue should send forth so many articulate voices , and so many severall languages . we say already , that the different articulation of sounds , ariseth from the diverse figuration of the organs . if his numeri platonici can give us a better account , i would be glad to heare it . till then , he will give no credence to any who promiseth an account of the estuation of the sea ; whether from the moon , &c. that numeri platonici will furnish us with a better reason ; i will then beleeve , when i see it . in the mean time i see nothing to hinder us from an enquiry after a physicall cause . and i doubt his lordship will have a hard task to give a reason in numbers , why the sea ebbes and ●lows . cha● . xvi . whether divisions in other parts of learning be remedied by it . next he shews us many doubts in morall philosophy , as well as those precedent in naturall philosophy . but i doe not see that his lordships position will help to clear any one of them whatsoever . whether the vnderstanding and the will be really the same , or distinct , is nether materiall nor determinable , in morall phylosophy : it belongs only to naturall philosophy , viz. to that part of physicks that treats de animâ . how the will may somtimes omit the prosecution of the understandings direction ; i have already shewed , without making the will an vnderstanding . he glanceth at aristotle's maintaining the eternity of the world against hermes , orpheus , anaxagoras , &c. for my own part , i would be thankfull to him , that would solidly demonstrate the worlds creation from principles in nature , and make it appear from naturall light , that the world could not have been from eternity . for though i deny not , but that there may be in nature , demonstrative arguments ; yet i confesse , i have not as yet seen those ( and yet i have examined many ) that have given me so full satisfaction as i desire concernng an absolute impossibility ; but that i have seen ( at least seemed to see ) some just exception . but if his lordships opinion be true , i shall have more cause to doubt then i have formerly had . for if all things did exist in their beings with god , ab omni aeterno ; and their temporall existence be onely imaginary , to our apprehension : ( as his lordship affirms in his . chapter , pag. . ) i cannot imagine any hinderance at all , why that which did really exist from all eternity , might not be without a beginning ; why that which was ab aeterno , might not ( though it did not ) ab aeterno appear to be , and be apprehended . i will not therefore blame aristotle for maintaining the worlds eternity as a disputable probleme , till i see some light which might have convinced him , whilst he enjoyed not the benefit of revealed light ; at least , till this opinion of his lordship be rejected . in the next place , i grant to his lordship that there are doubts also in metaphysicks , in logick , in mathematicks . but i perceive not how this opinion dissolves them . there be doubts also in divinity , ( though i do not see how this doth clear them ▪ ) whether faith , or repentance be precedent : whether faith be a particular application of christ to my selfe : or only a bare spirituall beliefe , that christ is the sonne of god. i as●ent not , to place ( the saving act of ) faith , either with mr. cotton , ( as his lordship cites him ) in the laying hold of , or assenting to that promise , that , hee that beleeveth that christ is the sonne of god , shall be saved ; nor yet in a particular application of christ to my selfe in assurance , or a beleeving that christ is mine : ( for though these also be acts of saving faith , yet they are not the saving act of faith. ) but i choose rather to place it in an act of the will , rather then in either of these fore-named acts of the vnderstanding . it is an accepting of christ offered , rather then an assenting to a proposition affirmed . to as many as [ received ] him , &c. that is , to them that beleeve in his name , joh. . god makes an offer of christ to all , ( else should not reprobates be condemned for not accepting of him ; as neither the devils are , because he was not offered to them ) whosoever will , let him come , and take of the water of life freely rev. . . whereupon the beleeving soule replies , i will , and so takes him . when a guift is offered to mee ; that which makes it to be mine , is my acceptation , my taking it ; not the knowing that it is offered ; nor the knowing that it is mine ; for the one of these precedeth , the other followeth , the appropriating it to my selfe . if you call this taking of christ , ( or consenting that christ shall be my saviour ▪ a depending , a resting , or relying upon christ for salvation ; ( if you speak of an act of the will : ) it is all one. for , taking of christ to be my saviour , and committing my selfe to christ to be saved , is the same : both of them being but a consenting to this covenant ▪ i will be your god , and you shall be my people ; i will be thy father , and thou shalt be my sonne . and if you make this the saving act of faith ; then will repentance ( so farre as it is distinct from faith ) be a consequent of it . confidence also or assurance that christ is mine ariseth from it : for christ must first be ours , before we can know him so to be . then also that , whether faith be a beleeving that i am saved ; ( he meanes , in statu salutis . ) or a depending upon god for salvation , ( to be put into such a condition of salvation , ) will be easily resolved , and bellarmins dilemma soon answered . viz. if beliefe be to beleeve that i am saved , ( that christ is mine , ) then was ▪ i saved without faith : if it be , to beleeve that god will give me grace to be saved , then do i beleeve before ▪ i have grace , before i have faith. i say , it is easily answered , by making the saving act of faith , an acceptance or taking of christ : for although the guift be mine , before i know ; or am assured , that it is mine ; yet is not the guift mine , before my accepting of it , but by my acceptance it becomes mine . if ( with mr. cotton ) we should make faith to save us , only declarativè ( which wee must by no means admit ; ) then , why is it said , that we are saved by faith , and not by works ? why do we allow , that faith doth concurrere effica●iter ad salutem , but deny the same to works ? seeing that good works do save us declarativè , as well as faith. that we are saved not only in the eternall decree without faith , but even in the execution , is strange divinity . for if without faith , then without christ ; for christ is no further ours , then apprehended by faith. as for the eternall decree ( of election , he meanes , ) it is true , we are not ▪ through faith , elected to salvation ; but we are elected , to salvation through faith. faith is not the cause of the decree , but faith is decreed to be the cause of salvation . to that question , whether there be a prescript form of church-government , i shall say nothing ; for it being a question maintained both wayes , i will not oppose either of them , unlesse i had leisure , to confirm what i say , to prosecute what i affirm . only to his argument i may lay an exception . church-government , ( which he presumeth to be enjoined in the second commandement , ) is not of the nature of morall precepts , because not of perpetuall continuance : ( for such a prescript form , as by which the church since christ should be governed , had not its beginning till since christ : and therfore not commanded in the second commandement any otherwise then by consequence ; ( as particular temporary duties are . ) however , it is like , church government is not more expresly commanded in the second commandement , then civill government in the fift ; and yet none ever inferred from thence , a prescript form of civill government . if he ask therfore , doe they leave us any latitude in any other commandements ? i say , yes : and i instance in that . he must search for a prescription , in the evangelists , and apostles writings , if he would find it , not in the second commandement . ( only , by the way , i wish his lordship would do us the favour , from his doctrine of vnity , ( which he makes the salve to cure all controversies , ) to demonstrate to us , whether there be a prescript form , and what it is . and i should then judge his opinion well worth imbracing , though for nothing else . wherein yet i shall wish him to beware , that he say not of this as of the division of quantity , pag. . that all must at last be reduced to an vnity ; nor , as pag. . that it is divisibilis in infinitum . lest we establish episcopacy ▪ ( which himselfe likes not ; ) or become independent ; which others like as ill . ) the distinction between scientia simplicis intelligentiae , and scientia visionis , if it be taken only for distinctio rationis ( and i suppose none ever tooke it otherwise ) may well enough be admitted . by the one , god knows the nature of all things possible : by the other he sees , that these things are. the object of the one , is all things possible , all things intelligible : the object of the other is only , things existent , either past , present , or to come but ( saith his lordship ) if gods power , and will be all one ; if god be p●r●● actus and not potentia ; then all things that ever shall be , were ab aeterno under ● decree ; and so what god could doe , he did doe , and can doe no more . ( hee had said before , pag. . that all things did exist [ in their beings ] ab omni aeterno ; and are they now but under ● decree ? ) but for answer . i grant , that god cannot doe , what he hath not decreed ; for then were his decree either void , or imperfect : and , supposing such a decree , the power of god is limited by his will. but a conditionall , and hypotheticall impossibility , doth not inferre an absolute impossibility and therefore we affirm , that deus potest ea quae non vult . he can doe more then he will , ( in sensu diviso , not in sensu composito . ) god is able ( saith christ ) of these stones to raise up children unto abraham ; yet he doth not . knowest thou not that i can pray to my father , and he will send ●e more then twelve legions of angels ? but neither did christ pray , nor the father send them . the god which wee serve is [ able ] to deliver us ( said the three men in daniell ; ) yet they were not certain that he would doe it . and if media scientia , ( wherby god is supposed to know an hypotheticall proposition ; as that the men of keilah would deliver up david , if he stayed there ) had no other hinderance but this ; it might well enough be admitted . chap. . concerning curiosity in the search of causes . with a close of all . and now he returns again to his former complaint , of too much curiosity in the search of causes . there is ( he grants ) a secondary intermediate being , which we may call a cause ; which doth precede and produce another : the observation of which , saith he , is very ●itting , so that wee search , and puzle not our selves with the grounds and reasons of this precedency . as , to observe , that fire , applied to combustible matter , will burn it : without inquiring how the fire doth work upon the wood , &c. he would have us therefore observe what is the cause of this effect , and what is the effect of this cause ; without any curious search how this cause comes to produce such an effect . there is no generall rule , can be prescribed in this case ; sometimes it is needlesse to inquire so much as , by what cause this or that was produced : sometimes again it is usefull to know , not only what did produce it , but also how it did produce it . thus farre i allow , curiosity in searching trifles , also how it did produce it . thus farre i allow , curiosity in searching trifles , hinders the finding of more solid and profitable truths ; fo● ( as he speaks ) intus existens prohibet alienum . what his lordship hath , concerning the holinesse of time and place , i assent to ; that they are not capable of any other sanctification , then a holinesse of separation , a relative holynesse : and the contrary opinion is disclaimed , by him on whom his lordship fastens it . that the heart also should be always in such a holy frame , as that it be fit for a sabbaths imployment , fit for a sacrament ; i hold for an an undoubted truth . yet are we not always to be imployed in such services of gods worship ; for even adam in paradise had a particular calling , besides his generall calling ; and the exercise thereof , being done in obedience to gods command , was no doubt pleasing and acceptable ●o god. nor can i assent that all things are ordinances , though in all things we should acknowledge god. the rest of the chapter is but a recapitulation of his position , and its consequents ; which needs no further consideration , besides what i have already given you in the examination of those severall particulars . i need not make answer to the conclusion , having already delivered my judgement concerning the premises . but leave it to another to passe censure . and thus , ( sir ) i have finished that task , which at your request i have undertaken : which , beyond my expectation , is grown into a farre larger body then i intended . you expect not accuratenesse , in that which is drawn up in so short a time : nor the judgement of authors in these points ; for that was not the task imposed , to give you account of others opinions , but of mine own . i have therefore spared the labour of turning over any other books , save his lordships own ; nor have made any farther use of any , then as my present memory did supply ▪ i may seem too prolix perhaps in some digressions , prosecuting somewhat largely occasionall questions , lighted on by the way : but if i have discovered any truth , though with some breach of method ; if ( with samson ) i can impart to my friends some honey , though i step a little out of the way to fetch it ; if , ( as he found that honey in the conquered lion , which yet was not of it , but only accidentally there , so ) i in the examining the main question , have withall cleared some doubts , which though not directly contained in it , were yet occasioned by it ; i hope a small errour in methode will be passed over . sir , i am sorry it so falls out , that the first occasion , wherein i should have to doe with so noble a lord , should be by way of encounter . but being partly injoyned by your request , which is to me a command , ( whom therefore it concerns , to excuse my presumption to his lordship ; ) and having also so fair an invitation in mr. sadlers epistle prefixed to his lordships treatise ; as being that , then which nothing could be more gratefull to this noble lord ; i have adventured to commit this , with my selfe , to be at your service . j. w. a postscript . sir , i sent you ( a while since ) certain animadversions upon my lord brook's treatise concerning the nature of truth . which ( briefly ) tend to this purpose . by truth , or light , his lordship understands , that light whereby the soule and understanding is able to see or understand : which can be no other then the light of reason . which he considereth first in it selfe , then in its operations : that is truth in the fountain , this in the streams ; ( that the spring , this the off-spring . ) propositio . arg. . chap. . which truth or light ( of reason ) he contends to be the same with the understanding , because the understanding in man is that ray of the divine nature , enlivening the creature , or making it rationall , whereby it is conformed to the creator , who is the primitive light , or fountain of knowledge . now that which doth thus enform animal rationale , enlivening it , or making it rationall , is reason ; and therefore reason ( which he calls truth ) is the same with the understanding . but this ( if i mistake not ) none will deny ; for reason and the understanding-faculty are all one , ratio and facuitas ratiocinandi is the same . 't is true , they say sometimes , that reason is in the understanding , or that the understanding is indued with reason : but then by vnderstanding , they doe not mean , the understanding-faculty , but the soule it selfe quatenus intelligens . and so this proposition , intellectus est subjectum rationis , is the same with this anima intelligens est subjectum intellectûs . anima , intellectus , and ratio , are not three . arg. . chap. , . his second argument to prove it is drawn from hence , that there is required to the constitution of every being , an essence received ▪ a fountain imparting , and a channel receiving . the which channel or recipient must be the same with the essence received ; because every thing is the recipient of its own essence ; nothing can receive the essence of a stone , but by being a stone , for to be stone , and to have the essence of a stone , is all one . therefore the understanding being the recipient of truth , must needs be truth , that is , reason . propositio . chap. . which truth , or reason , whether it be in the understanding , or be the understanding ; yet it cannot make the soule to be rationall , unlesse it be also in the soule : for how can reason make the soule reasonable , if it be not in ●t , but in somewhat else . and if it be in the soule , then must i● be the soule : because to be in the soule , and to be the soule i● all one ; every thing being its own recipien● . thus truth , or light ( of reason ) will be the same with the understanding ; and both that and this the same with the soule . but i hope his lordship will not deny , but that there is another kind of receiving ▪ beside that receiving that he speaks of . ( they tell us in logick of ●cto modi habendi ; and there are as many manners of receiving , as there are of having . ) to receive the essence of a man , and to be a man , is all one ; to have the essence of money , and to be money , is all one ; but yet , i hope , a man may receive money , without being coined , and made money . to receive the essence of water , and to be made water ; to receive the essence of a vessell , and to be a vessell , is all one ; yet a vessell may contein water , without being made water . thus a substance may receive an accident , a subject may receive a form , without being made that accident , that form. thus datur animae esse animam datur rationi esse rationem , ( each being its own recipient : ) but withall datur animae habere rationem , though the soule be not reason , nor reason ( in this sense ) its own recipient . if there be any strength in this argument , it lies in this , that if reason ( or truth ) be only in the soule as an accident , and not the soules essence , then it cannot make an essentiall difference between the rationall and irrationall soule . and to this we must answer , ( if we maintain reason , and the rest of the faculties , to be distinct from ●he soul ) that it is not the faculties , it is not reason , that makes the essentiall difference ; but the substance or essence of the soule from whence these faculties proceed as essentiall consequents . like as it is not heat , and cold , and the rest of the primae qualitates , which make the essentiall difference between one element and another ; but that essence or form , from whence these qualities doe proceed . corollarium . . chap. . from hence he proceeds to a further corollary , that not only the soule , but all things else , are also the same with truth . but why so ? because every thing is its own recipient ? if it be ; it doth not follow that every thing is the recipient of truth . if every thing be the recipient of its own essence , must therfore this essence needs be truth ? if his lordship had well considered , that truth , as he hath formerly spoken of it , is but the same with that which others call reason ; he would scarce have made this consequence , unlesse he could think to perswade us , that all things whatsoever are reasonable creatures ▪ there is therefore too great an hiatus , to make this proposition , a corollary of the former . but indeed his lordship is by this time fallen off from his former acceptation of truth . for having ( as he supposeth ) proved reason to be the soules essence , the soules entity ; he begins to take that word ( which formerly signified reason , ) to signify entity , or being : so that truth now , must be the same with entitas . and the emphasis of this last assertion lies in this , not that the essence of all things is truth , or entity , ( for that were no great news , ) but that the essence of all things is this one truth : meaning , that all entity is homogeneall and of the same nature . he was proving before , that truth or reason was the same thing with the soule : he hence infers , not that all things are the same thing ; ( for i cannot understand him to speak so harshly , as that one drop of water were the same drop with another drop of water , though homogeneall ; that the soule of peter is the soule of judas , though of the same species ; ) but that they are alike things , or things of the same nature . the consequence , ( that all things must be of the same species , because the soule and its faculties are the same thing ) will not hold . the thing it selfe , hath only this ground ( so farre as i can discover , ) because all being proceeding from god , who is in his actions uniform , must therfore be alike : for the same agent , acting in the same manner , cannot but produce like effects . but this uniformity in god ' is equivalent to an infinite variety ; and god can by one act in it selfe simple , produce effects variously distinct ▪ and if his lordship grant , that this uniformity hinders not but that god may produce various shapes , i see not why he may not produce various species . corollarium . . chap. . but from hence he draws a further consequent . he is not contented to say , that the nature of all things is one , but that it is vnity . and heer is as great an hiatus as the former . the essence of all soules is one and the same ; but that this one essence is unity , i have not formerly heard , nor doe yet beleeve . and i am so farre from thinking that vnity is the essence of all things , that i esteeme it selfe to be nothing . unity , is but a negative term , a negation . vnus indeed , as it is opposite to nullus , is positive , and is the same with nonnullus , or aliquis : but vnus , or vnicus as it is opposed to multitude , ( and so we now take it ) is negative . else , where is the fault in this syllogisme ? quod est in angliâ , est in europâ ; sed rex vnicus est in angliâ ; ergo rex vnicus ( veltantùm vnus ) est in europâ . propositio . . chap. . ▪ he returns next , to his former discourse ; and what he had said of the light of reason , he saith also of the light of knowledge , both habituall and actuall . hee allows not that habits , either infused or acquisite , are any thing new brought into the soule , but only former principles enlightened : and therefore rejecting aristotle's rasatabula , he imbraceth plato's reminiscentia , which may be thus expressed ; he supposeth the soule to be as a table , wherein be many rare lineaments , and lively colours described , but hanging in the dark they appeare not till such time as they be illustrated by some advenient light ; which light doth not bring with it any new colours , or more lineaments , but only illustrateth those that were formerly there but appeared not : whereas aristotle rightly supposeth it as a table prepared , void of any , yet capable of all ; or rather as a glasse , which having of it selfe none of those colours , is yet fit to receive and reflect all those rays or visible species , which from the adjacent objects fall upon it . and indeed , as for historicall knowledge , i suppose , his lordship himselfe , if he well consider of it , will not affirm that to have any idea's originally in the soule : it being utterly impossible by discourse to find out a by-past history , without historicall relation . and if there may be new idea's of historicall truths imprinted in the soule which were not there before , why not also of discu●sive knowledge . but his lordship stays not here , dissenting from us in the nature of habits , whether they be new idea's , or the illustration of former idea's ▪ but in effect , he takes away all habits wholly . telling us , that we seem only by frequent acts to help the soule , and create new habits , but that indeed all actings are but new discoveries . now this is not to establish plato's reminiscentia ; but to take away all memory whatsoever . how can we be said to remember ? how is one said to be learned , another ignorant ? what is the benefit of study , and of experience ? if former acts doe not at all help future acts , but only seem so to doe ▪ how comes it to passe , that wee are able out of our own memories to furnish our selves with historicall truths formerly heard or read , without a second relation , which at the first wee could not doe ? if our former acts doe not at all help latter acts , but all things be new discoveries . proposition . . chap. . and what hath been said of naturall and habituall light of reason and habituall knowledge , he now affirms of actuall knowledge . the severall operations of the soule , in apprehensions , affirmations , negations , &c. the severall actings of truth , are also the souls essence . and why ? but because the soule is actus primus , and therefore its essence must be action ; this action likewise must exist ; which what else can it be but rationall workings ? and so the same with actus secundus . but his lordship is much mistaken to think that actus primus is latine for action . actus is of as large an extent as potentia : now there is potentia ad esse , and potentia ad formam , as well as potentia ad operari . when ens in potentiâ becoms ens actu , when that which was possible , is actually produced ; it s own essence o● being is that actus , which makes it ens actu , which was before ens in potentiâ : and this we call actus entitativus , and it is better translated actuality , then either action , or activity . again the matter is capable of this or that form , which we call potentia ad formam ( substantialem ; ) whereby it is potentiâ tale ( in genere substanti● ; ) as materia putris is in potentiâ ad formam vermis : now when this form whereof it is capable is actually introduced , that which was before potentià tale , becoms now actu tale ( in genere substantiae ; ) and this form is called actus substantialis ▪ ( but not actio substantialis , ) or actus primus ; and ( thus ) the soule is actus . again , a substance of this or that species , constituted by this or that form , is capable of this or that accident , and is therefore potentiâ talis , accidentaliter ; or in potentiâ ad hanc formam ac●identalem ; as water is potentiâ calida , when heat is produced , it becoms actu calida , and the heat is this actus whereby it is actu talis ; and it is actus primus accidentalis , ( though perhaps some would call it actus secundus : yet none call it actio ) this actus acciden alis , or forma accidentalis , if it be operative , stands in a double relation ; to its subject , and so it is actus informans ; and to its operation , and so it is actus operativus ( but not operatio ) and belongs either to the first , or the second species of quality , it is either a habit or a faculty ; this , if you please , you may call activity , though not action ▪ now a subject indued with this actus operativus is in potentiâ ad operandum : when this power is reduced into act , it is actu operans ; and this actus whereby it doth actu operari , is properly actus secundus , actio , or operatio , and belongs to the praedicament of action . but such an actus the soule is not , and therefore its operations cannot be its essence . objectio . . chap. . but now least by making the soules operations to be the soules essence , he should make so many soules as there be acts ; ( which is indeed a good consequence ; ) he is put upon another invention , to make all these operations to be but one ; the second action is but the same with the former : ( so that with him , one sinfull act is all one with a continued course of sinning . ) and therefore tells us , that actions performed in distinct times and places are not therefore distinct actions , because time and place are nothing , but meerly imaginary . but this p●aister is not large enough to cover the sore ; for , it is true indeed , different actions may receive an externall denomination from difference in time and place , but they receive not their difference from hence , but from themselves : time and place can neither make different things to be the same , nor the same to be different . a man is the same to day that he was yesterday , the same at london that he was at york ▪ yet both time and place be different : againe , two angels being at the same time coexistent in the same place are not therefore the same angel. so that whether time and place be any thing or nothing , yet this man is not the other man , this action is not the other action . but if difference of time and place be only imaginary ; then why do we deny to the papists , that christs body is corporeally present in the sacrament ? since if it be any where , it must be every where , all places being indeed the same , admitting onely of an imaginary difference . why doe we cry down the lutheran consubstantiation , as absurd ? for if severall bodies may be in severall places , then may they be in the same place , if difference of place be only imaginary : if the same body may be at severall times in severall places , why not at the same time ? since difference of time is only imaginary . object . . chap. . there is another objection as strong as this former : if acting truth be the soules essence , then what becomes of the soule when it doth either not act , or act falsely ? to the first he applyes his former remedy ; any one act is able to give the soule a being at all times ; for succession of moments being onely imaginary , that which at all is , must be alwayes , and whatsoever hath at all a being , is indeed coexistent to all eternity ; succession , beginning , and ending being onely imaginary : ( so that a childe that is new born , had lived as long as the most aged , if he could but think so . and as for the other , he denyes that the soul can at all act falshood , because falshood is onely privative , it is nothing ▪ now to act nothing and not to act is all one . which he affirms likewise of evill , and of pain ; and tells us , with dr. twisse , that it is better to be miserable , then not to be : which is grounded upon this , that evill is only a privation of good , and therefore to have the goodnesse being without the goodnesse of happinesse , is better then to want both the one and the other . but withall i wish them to consider , whether the same argument do not prove , that it was better for david to commit adultery , then not to commit it ; for the substance of the act , in its physicall essence , was positive , and therefore good ; the fault was only the want of a further good , to wit , the goodnesse of conformity to gods will ; now to produce the goodnesse of an act , without the goodnesse of conformity , is better then to produce neither the one nor the other . corollaria . chap. . &c. this is his lordships opinion . which he commends to us as usefull to make our christian life more cheerefull both in the theoreticall and practick part . for if we knew , that all things are one , what need we feare either difficulty or danger ? knowing , that misery is nothing and cannot hurt us , and hath no being but only in the the brain ; that whatsoever is , is good , and good to me , because both i and it are beings , and so good ; and these two goods falling under no other difference but of degrees , good and good must needs agree , that which is good is good to me. yea , how void of envy at anothers good , and thoughts of revenging injuries ? since that i have a propriety , a possession , in that which is anothers , hee and i being one : injuries are nothing and cannot hurt ; good things , though anothers , doe serve me . but to this good consequent of his lordships tenet , i can oppose another every way as bad : for as it would make us not afraid of misery , so withall , not afraid to sinne. it proposeth such an impunity to sinning , as that it makes the devils as happy as the blessed angels . for thus we might argue ; the devils are beings , and therefore good , because ens & bonum convertuntur : every thing that is , is good , and good to ●hem ; for both they and it being good , and good admitting of no other difference but of degrees , good and good must needs agree , and so be good to them : the happinesse of the angels doth serve them , since ( as his lordship speaks ) it is not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , they have a propriety in it ; all things being one. their own misery and torment is nothing ▪ and cannot hurt : and ( which is the only difference can be imagined ) if they think otherwise , ( i use still his lordships expression ) this must be a lye , and cannot hurt . and if this be hell , who will be afraid to sinne ? my judgement cannot assent , to make the torments of the damned only imaginary , to make hell a fancy ; yea , to affirm , that it is good to sinne , because the act of sinne is really good , and the evill of it is only imaginary , a vanity , a nothing , and cannot hurt . as for the theoreticall part ; it is confessed , that there be many doubts in naturall philosophy , concerning the being , the nature , the causes of things ; there be doubts also in morall philosophy , in metaphysicks , in mathematicks , in divinity : but in telling us this , his lordship advanceth nothing for the commendation of his new invention ; except he could shew us how this tenet will resolve them . and thus sir , i have given you a short account of the chief things in his lordships treatise , and my reply , so farre as concerns the state of the main question controverted : wherein you may take a briefe survey of what is there more largely prosecuted . which may give some light for the better discovering the principall intent of his lordships tenet ; and may be a guide in your pe●using the larger discourse that you loose not your selfe in the prolixity of the prosecution , and the variety of digressions . when i first undertook the taske , i intended no more in all , then some such briefe notes as these , to satisfie your desire : but being once entred i have not alwayes the command of my own pen ; variety of matter carrying me beyond my intended bounds . the faults if you will be pleased to pardon , and to accept the rest , i shall commit the whole to be as i am , that is yours to command , j. w. aprill . . . finis . dum haec qu● praecedunt sub praelo erant , subiit animum cogitatlo ea quae sequuntur prioribus subjungendi ; ( theses nimirum aliquot aliquando in academiâ habitas : ) partim quòd subjecto sint non adeò dispari ; partim quòd , ut ut puerilia , ejusmodi tamen sint quae ●on ab omnibus attendantur . non tanti ( fateor ) sunt , ut in iucem prodeant ; nec ( forsan ) tan●illi tamen , ut nemini placeant . sicui displi●●a●t , excuset ut puerilia ; sicui placeant , fruatur . propositio singularis in dispositione syllogisticâ semper habet vim vniversalis . nihil in●e●icius est iis in e●iis ( si scaligero credamus ) quae mordi●us sentiunt , majores nostros nihil ignorâsse ; quae ▪ que pettinaciter tuentur errores , quos ii qui commisere , si viveren ▪ emendarent . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . unde mihi nunquam absurdum visum est , a communi sententiâ cum ratione dissentire . propositio singularis , apud logicos , vel pro particulari , vel pro no●● quadam specie semper habita est : cùm mihi tamen ad universalium classem pertinere luce meridiana clarius semper vi ●m est . cujus in examine pro lemmate habeatur ; formalem rationem propositionis constare in compositione praedicati cum subjecto ? quod statuit smiglecius , disp . . qu. . ( quae compositio sive nexus p●aecipuè in copulâ attenditur . ) ex va●io igitur modo compositionis horum extremorum , alius atque alius prepositionis modus oritur . ubi itaque compositio seu nexus praedicati cum subjecto verè fit , & ut se res habet , propositio vera est ; ubi nexus seu applicatio falsè fit , e● falsa est propositio , sint partes ● . e. termini simplices , sive verae , sive falsae : unde haec propositio [ hircocervus est quoddam con●latum ex hirco & cervo ] vera est , licètuterque terminus falsus , falsitate scilicet simplicium terminorum , h. e. non-ens , sive ens rationis ; ens enim & verum convertuntur : illa verò [ lapis est homo ] falsa est , licèt termini veri veritate simplicis app●ehensionis , quia falsò applicantur . item , quum necessarius est nexus terminorum , propositio necessaria est ; sint licèt termini entia contingentia : & sic in reliquis affectionibus propositionis . ●ùm autem compositio sive ne●us terminorum , in quâ constat formalis ratio propositionis in vinculo atte●datur , hinc sequitur , affectiones propositionis judicandas esse , non ratione terminorum , sed poti●s respectu vinculi . unde axioma affirmatum a ramo definitur , cujus vinculum affirmatur ; negatum , cujus vinculum negatur ; sive termini sint affirmat● sive negati , parum interest . haec propositio igitu● [ omne non rationale est non homo ] est propositio affirmativa , licèt extremum utrumque sit negans ▪ hoec verò [ lapis non est homo ] est propositio negans , ex terminis utrisque affirmativis . idem dicendum est de propositione simplici , & compositâ ; ad vinculum scilicet attendendum esse . unde gutberlethus hanc propositionem [ animal est vel homo vel brutum ] inte● axioma simplex esse statuit , non disjunctivum , cùm uno verbi vinculo contineatur ; licèt posterior terminus sit disjunctus ; hanc verò propositionem [ omne animal vel est homovel est brutum ] credo illum inter inter axiomata composita numeraturum . hinc colligo ▪ ut alias propositionis affectiones , ita etiam universalitatem & particularitatem sumendas esse , non a terminis , sed a terminorum compositione & nexu . affectiones enim formam sequuntur , non materiam . malè ●gitur a plerisque logicis distribuitur axioma , seu propositio , in universalem , cujus subjectum est universale ; particularem , cujus subjectum est particulare ; & singularem , cujus subjectum est singulare : cùm distributio petenda esset a modo compositionis , quod est formale in propositione , non a quantitate terminorum , h. e. a parte materiali . propositio ergo universalis , est in quâ applicatio praedicati ad subjectum est universalis ; particularis , in quâ applicatio est particularis : nec alias species agnosco . quid a● tem velim per praedicationem vel applicationem universalem & particularem , mel●ùs ex graecâ aristotelis appellatione , quam ex latinâ interpretum , elucescet . quod enim nobis est universale & particulare , illud aristoteli est , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , de toto , & parte , sive secundum partem , h. ● . de subjecto vel toto , vel secundum partem ; non autem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , de omnibus & quibusdam . quare non minùs rectè interpretaretur totalis & partialis praedicatio , quàm universalis & particularis ; nisi quòd mos aliter obtinuerit . universalis ergo praedicatio est quando praedicatum dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , de toto subjecto , ( ●otum intelligo praedicationis , sive totam ejus latitudinem & ambitum praedicandi , ) quando scilicet praedicatum totaliter attribuitur subjecto , non partialiter cum restrictione ad aliquam subjecti partem , seu ad peculiare quiddam intra subjecti ambitum comprehensum , tunc nimirum quando de quocunque dicitur subjectum , de eodem dicatur etiam & praedicatum . igitur haec propositio [ omnis homo est animal ] est universalis , quia nihil continetur sub ambitu hominis , seu de nullo dicitur homo , quin et de eodem dicatur animal : haec autem [ aliquis homo est doctus ] particularis , quia non de totâ hominis specie dicitur , sed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , secundum partem aliquam , h. ● . de aliquo individuo sub eâ specie . non autem ideo universalis est prior propositio quia nota omnis praefigitur , & posterior particularis quia ei praeponitur aliquis , ( uti nonnulli , ex tyronibus praecipuè , arbitrantur : ) non enim propositio ideo universalis est , quia notam habet universalitatis , sed quia universalis est , ideo nota praeponitur , ut agnoscit dounamus . nota igitur universalitatis designat aliquando universalem propositionem , non autem facit . idem dic de notâ particularitatis . iam verò , ut ad praesentem controversiam accedamus ; in propositione singulari necesse est ut praedicatio sit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , de toto , cum subjectum singulare 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , sit & indiuiduum in partes ; ( subjectivas intelligo , loquimur enim de toto p●aedicationis , non integrali ; ) impossibile enim est ut aliquid 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 secundum partem dicatur , de illo quod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 est & partes nullas habet . neces●e igitur est , ut quicquid de individuo dicitur , sive subjecto singulari , dicatur de toto ; & per consequens propositio singularis semper erit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . atque hoc ipsum est quod vult aristoteles ; & qui aliter aristotelem exponunt , detorquent non interpretantur . audiamus igitur aristotelis mentem de propositione universali , sive , quod idem est , de dicto 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , de omni & de nullo : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quid dissertiùs dici posset pro causâ nostrâ ? tunc demū 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( non 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) de omni sive de toto dicitur aliquid , quando nihil subjecti accipere licet , de quo alterum h ▪ e. praedicatum non dicetur . assumo ; in propositione singulari affirmante , nihil subjecti sumere licet , de quo praedicatum non dicatur . concludo igitur ; propositio singularis affirmans , est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ( eodemque modo propositio ▪ singularis negans erit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ) v. g. si dixeris [ socrates est doctus ] quaero , quidnam illud est intra ambitum socratis . c● quo non dicatur doctus ? si nihil , igitur erit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 per aristotelis definitionem ▪ at verò cùm socrates de uno solo homine dicatur , & de illo etiam dicatur doctus , nihil aliud socratis superest , de quo negetur , ut patet . idem licet concludere ex ipsius rami definitione ; cùm definiat axioma speciale ( quod postea subdividit in particulare , & proprium ) esse , quando consequens non omni antecedenti attribuitur . sed quàm benè convenit haec definitio axiomati proprio , quod tamen illi est altera species axiomatis specialis ? si in axiomate proprio consequens non omni antecedenti attribuatur , ostendat quaeso , ●ui non : si autem hoc ostendi non possit ( ut quidem non potest ) quâ ratione dicat non omni attribui non video , cùm non omnis & quidam non idem valere , ex regulis aequipollentiae certissimum est . vel igitur ostendat ramus axioma proprium affirmans alicui non attribui , velego illi negabo , non omni attribui , & per consequens definitionem axiomatis specialis non convenire axiomati proprio ; mala igitur definitio illa sit necesse est , quando definitio generis non convenit utrique specie . imò ve●ò , si rem expendamus , inveniemus alteram speciem , s● . axioma particulare , quod contradi●ti●guitur axiomati proprio , ejusdem prorsus esse latitudinis cum genere , sive axiomate speciali . nam axioma speciale est , quando consequens non omni antecedenti attribuitur ; particulare , quando consequens particulariter antecedenti attribuitur . tantum igitur distant axioma speciale & particulare , ( h. e. genus & species ) quantum non omni & particulariter : quod quantillum sit , ex gutbe●letho discas , qui explica●urus quid velit ramus per particulariter , expressis verbis confundit ; particulariter , inquit , h. e. non omni . patet igitur , quam leviter agant ramis●ae , dum genus a specie illis vocabulis distinguant inter quae ne ipsi quidem ullam agnos●unt differentiam . sed ad aristote●em revertor : qui duos tantùm agnoscit modos praedicandi , de toto , & de parte , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , universalem & particularem . nec quidem potuit plures admittere : quicquid enim de alte●o dicitur necessarium est ut vel de illo toto vel de ipsius parte aliquâ dicatur ; quicquid etiam ab altero removetur , vel a toto vel a parte tantùm remov●a●ur necesse est . nec enim possibile est medium invenire , quod de altero dicatur , nec tamen de toto , neque secundum pa●tem . pro certo igitur & indubitato principio pona●ur , omnem propositionem ( categoricam intelligo ) quaecunque demum ipsa sit , vel universalem esse , vel particularem ; h. e. vel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , vel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . atque hinc patet , perperam fecisse ramum , ipsisúque sequaces , dum praeter syllogismum generalem & specialem , proprium adjunxe●in● . quum enim propositiones proprias seu singulares non potuerunt particularium regulis co●ree●e , commenti sunt novam quandam syllogismi speciem alis antea inc●gnitam , quam proprium appellant : & axiomata p●op●ia , quae illi inter specialia numerabant , a reliquis specialibus discrepare videntes , ab omni syllogismo●um specie antea notâ abhorre●e arbitrati sunt ; nescientes interim , saltem non advertentes , iisdem quibus general●a regulis contineri . patet etiam , quid judicandum sic de quadrupli●i propositionis divisione , in universalem ▪ particularem , indefinitam , & singularem ; nimirum , species sine necessitate multiplicari ; cùm singularis semper reducenda sit ad universalem , indefinita verò nunc ad hanc , nunc ad particularem . atque hoc secundum mentem aristotelis ; qui quadrifariam illam divisionem nusquam ( ni fallor ) tradidit . nominat , fateor , indefinitam propositionem , praeter praedictas duas species , universalem & particularem , non autem acsi quid esset ab utrisque distinctum , sed quòd ex ipsis propositionis verbis vix satis constet , ad utram duarum reducenda sit ( cùm signum indicem non habeat appositum , ) & pro subjectâ materiâ nunc ad hanc nunc ad illam referenda sit , semper tamen ad alterutram . de singulari verò propositione ne verbum habet ; nec opus est , cùm semper reducenda sit ad universalem ; perperam verò a logicis plerisque intruditur quasi nova species , omnino contra rationem , mentemque aristotelis . atque hactenus probata est thesis nostra a priori , & quidem demonstrativè ; subnectam & argumenta a posteriori nonnulla . ut lucidiús appareat veritas . sed praemonendum est , eorum aliqua universaliter concludere de omni propositione singulari : alia verò particulariter , ita tamen ut quod illic concluditur de unâ , potuit de qualibet ; atque haec inductione factâ idem valerent ac si ▪ concluderent universaliter : alia denique ducta esse ab ejusmodi proprietatibus quae solis universalibus conveniunt non autem omnibus , unde n●c omnibus singularibus ; quae licè t vi suâ probent tantùm aliquas singulares universalium vim habere , cùm tamen hoc concesso pauci sint qui reliquum negarent cùm nulla sufficiens ratio assignari possit cur quaedam sint universales non autem aliae , valebunt & haec argumenta non multò minùs quàm si essent universalia . primò igitur . major in primâ & secundâ figurâ semper est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( ut a pluribus antehac demonstratum est , ) at aliquando est singularis ; ergo aliqua saltem singularis est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . vel sic ; quaecunque propositio potest esse maior in primâ vel secundâ figurâ , ea est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . sed quaelibet propositio singularis potest esse major & in primâ & in secundâ figura . ergo. &c. insto in primâ , in barbara . bar - augustus fuit imperator . ba - octavius fuit augustus . ergo ra . octavius fuit imperator . in secundâ , in camestres . cam ▪ virgilius fuit romanus . es . homerus non fuit romanus . tris . homerus ergo non fuit virgilius . et idem fieri posset in quibuslibet modis utriusque figurae : imò in quocunque modo cujuscunque figurae assumtâ quacunque propositione singulari in locum universalis ; ut experienti videre erit cuilibet . secundò , ex puris particularibus nihil concluditur , at ex puris singularibus aliquid concluditur : ergo singularis non est particularis ; & , per consequens , est universalis , cùm antea probatum sit nullam posse fieri praedicatione● quin erit vel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . major in confesso est . minor exemplis suprà adductis probata est . non solùm autem ex singularibus puris concluditur aliquid , sed ex mixtis singulari cum particulari , non minùs quám ex universall & particulari : sed ( ut illic ) semper concluditur particulariter , cùm particularis propositio sit debilior pars . v. g. da - virgilius fuit doctus . r● - aliquis poeta fuit virgilius . i. ergo , aliquis poeta fuit doctus . item , fes - virgilius non fuit graecus . ti - aliquis poeta fuit graecus . ergo no - aliquis poeta non fuit virgilius . ubi notandum obiter , hos syllogismos & hujusmodi alios ▪ constantes ex singulari & particulari in praemissis , ad nullos rami modos reduci posse , cùm tamen consequentia & satis firma sit & perspicua ; nostrâ tamen hypothesi positâ facilè ad aristotelis modos reducuntur . ( in tertiâ figurâ non insto ; cùm enim intertiâ figurâ idem sit subjectum in utrâque praemissarum , fieri non potest ut altera ●●t propositio singularis , altera particularis , quoniam de subjecto singulari non potest praedicari particulariter . ) tertiò , tres ponuntur gradus necessitatis , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . confessum est etiam apud omnes , super●orem gradum necessitatis semper etiam includere inferiorem ▪ unde propositio 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 est etiam propositio 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , propositio verò 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 est & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . at propositio singularis saepe est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ergo & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . v. g [ socrates est animal , plato est substantia , bucephalus est equus ; ] sunt propositiones essentiales in primo modo dicendi per se : sunt ergo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . quartò , omne genus praedicatur universaliter de suis speciebus , ( ut & essentialiter ; ) at individuum ( saltem secundum ramum ) est species ; ergo de individuo praedicatur genus universaliter . au● ▪ si non sit species , tamen u● se habet genus ad speciem ita species ad individuum ; at genus praedicatur universaliter & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 de suâ specie ; ergo & species de individuo ▪ potestergo individuū universalis propositionis esse subjectum . quintò , probatur e● regulis conversionum . [ socrates non est equus ] est propositio negans , eaque vel universalis , ut nos dicimus , vel particularis , ut alii : non autem particularis ; ergo &c. probatur minor ▪ quia propositio particularis negans convertitur tantum●odo per contrapositionem ; at haec propositio convertitur , primò conversione simplici , [ nullus equus est socratis , ] secundò per accidens [ aliquis equus non est socrates . ] utroque hoc modo convertitur universalis negans , ( eaque sola , ) neutro verò particularis negans : est ergo haec propositio non particularis sed universalis . patet etiam ulteriùs ex hac ipsâ conversione ; convertitur enim singularis negans in universalem , at in conversione nunquam augetur quantitas , saepe minuitur . iterum , [ socrates non est plato ] convertitur [ plato non est socrates , ] at particularis negans non convertitur nisi per contrapositionem . sextò , ex regulis reductionum . propono enim hunc syllogismum ; ces - qui interfecit hectoremnon supervixit bello trojano . a - omnes graeci reduces supervixere bello trojano . ergo re . nullus graecorum reducum interfecit hectorem . dico hunc syllogismum esse in c●sar● ex majori universali , duplici ratione : primò , si major esset particularis , conclusio esset particularis , ( quia semper sequitur debiliorem partem ; ) at non est ; ergo. secundò , per modum reductionis , r●●ucitur enim ad celarentt per simplicem conversionem majoris ; sic ce - nullus qui supervixit bello trojano fuit interfector hectoris . la - omnes graeci reduces supervixere bello trojan● ▪ ergo rent . nullus graecorum reducum fuit interfector hectoris . hic syllogismus si esset ex majori particulari , non esset in ullo modo ; nec usquam apud ramum invenietur hujusmodi syllogismus , ( cùm tamen & verissimus sit & utilissim●s , ) imò nec ( positâ illorum hypothesi , scil . quòd sit particularis ) reduci posset ad alium modum . alium accipe , ces - author epistolae ad hebraeos non fuit auditor christi , heb. . . a - omnes duodecim selecti fuerunt auditores christi . ergo re . nullus ex duodecim selectis fuit author epistolae ad hebraeos . impossibile autem est in ullo ex rami modis per hoc medium probare hanc conclusionem . septimò , hunc syllogismum propono , omnes magnanimi sunt fortes . thersites non est fortis . ergo thersites non est magnanimus . hic syllogismus vel est in camestres ex minore & conclusione universalibus , vel in baroco ex iisdem particularibus . sed non esse in baroco , sic probatur . syllogismus in baroco non potest reduci nisi reductione per impossibile ; at hic syllogismus reduci●ur ad ceiarent reductione ostensivâ , eo modo quo camestres , scil . transpositis praemissis ▪ & minore conclusion●que simpliciter conversis , hoc modo , ce - nullus fortis est thersites . la - omnes magnanimi sunt fortes . ergo rent . nullus magnanimus est thersites . erat igitur in camestres ex minore & conclusione universalibus , non in baroco ex iis particularibus . infinitus essem si singulis insisterem quae hac in redici possent : unico argumento concludo . octavò igitur & ultimò , propositio singularis nec fortiorem nec debiliorem vim habet quàm universalis ; ergo eandem & aequalem . non fortiorem , quia ex praemissis universali & singulari aliquando concluditur singulariter , quod non esset si universalis esset debilior , quia conclusio semper sequitur debiliorem partem . ut in hoc & similibus innumeris . cam - omnes magnanimi sunt fortes . es - thersites non est fortis . ergo tres . the●sites non est magnanimus . nec debiliorem habet , quia ex singulari & universali , aliquando concluditur universaliter , ( quod non esset si singularis esset pars debilior : ) ut in hoc syllogismo , & aliis , ces - interfector hectoris non supervixit bello trojano . a - omnes graeci reduces supervixere bello trojano . ergo re . nullus graecorum reducum fuit interfector hectoris . cùm igitur nec fortiorem , nec debiliorem vim habeat singularis quàm universalis , sequitur necessariò propositionem singularem eadem vim in disposition● syllogisti●â semper habere quam habit universalis ▪ quod erat demonstrandum . corollaria , & objectiones . hinc sequitur primò , propositionem singularem affirmantem & negantem opponi immediatè , hoc est , contradictoriè . nam sublatâ universalitate affirmantis ponitur negans 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , quoniam praedicatio partialis non potest esse de eo quod est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . sequitur secundò , propositionem universalem affirmantem converti conversione simplici , & particularem affirmantem convertibilem in propositionem ▪ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ▪ quoties praedicatum convertendae est individuum . posito enim praedica●o in loco subjecti , quicquid de individuo subjecto dicitur , dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . sequitur tertiò , conclusionem in tert●â figu●â esse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( contrà quàm docent logici , ) quoties minor terminus syllogismi , h. e. praedicatum minoris , est individuum . quia praedicatum minoris in tertiâ figurâ est subjectum conclusionis , quod cùm sit individuum , de eo quicquid dicitur , dicitur universaliter . objiciet forsan aliquis ; an igitur [ socrates est doctus ] perinde est ac [ omnis homo est doctus ? ] non est . at , inquie● , quidni ? cùm utratraque propositio sit universalis . rectè . sed replico ; an [ omnis homo est rationalis ] idem valet ac [ omne animal est rationale ? ] negabit credo . at , inquam , quare ? annon utraque est universalis ? est certè . conjicio quid responsurus est ; utraque propositio est quidem universalis , non tamen aequipollent , quia in alterâ rationalitas universaliter attribuitur homini , & rectè , in alterâ verò universaliter attribuitur animali , sed malè . pariter ego , non ( inquam ) perinde est socratem doctum dicere & omnem hominem ; subjectis enim differunt , quamvis utraque propositio sit universalis . doctus universaliter praedicatur de socrate non de homine . urget , dici universaliter , est dici de multis . fateor , in praedicatione simplicium terminorum , non in praedicatione propositionis . aliud est dici de multis , in tractatu de praedicabilibus , aliud dictum de omni , in tractatu de propositione . at nunc agitur non de quantitate simplicium terminorum , sed de quantitate propositionis , & terminorum nexu . universale , seu vox communis , potest est subjectum propositionis particularis ; & individuum pariter , seu vox singularis , subjectum propositionis universalis . fatendum tamen est , propositionem singularem leviculam aliquam discrepantiam habere ab aliis universalibus ( ut in corollariis videre est ) non tamen talem quae illas ex universalium numero eximat . tria sunt , nec scio plura , ( & ple●ique forsan ne haec attenderent , ) quae discrepant●ae speciem exhibent : ubique tamen provenit a materiâ propositioni substratâ , potiùs quàm a formali propositionis dispositione ; nusquam tollitur illud in quo formale propositionis universalis consistit , quod hoc est , ut nihil inveniatur intra subjecti ambitum de quo no● dicatur praedicatum . exp●ndam singula . primum hoc est ▪ universalis propositio affirmans & negans opponuntur contrariè : earum utraque potest esse falsa , harum non ita . siquis hinc argueret , propositionem singularem , vim universalis non habere , respondeo primò , eodem argumento probari posse non esse particularem ; quia neque propositio particularis affirmata & negata opponuntur contradictoriè , sed subcontrariè , & earum utraque potest esse vera , harum non ita . sicui ramus videatur satis cavisse , dum syllogismum proprium diversam speciem constituit tam a generali quam speciali : regero , . ad hominem . malè pro ramo arguitur ex iis quae ipse pro nugis habet , & ex logicâ suâ exulare fecit : ille enim de oppositione , aequipollentiâ , & conversione propositionum nihil habet , ut nec de reductione syllogismorum : . novum praedicandi modum facere non potest , cùm impossibile sit aliquid de alio dici , quod tamen nec de toto necsecundum partem dicatur . ut supra fusiùs explicavimus . respondeo secundò . non singularibus tantùm hoc accidit , sed & aliis universalibus quibusdam . nam . in materiâ necessariâ & impossibili , ex negatione & affirmatione universali , altera semper vera est altera falsa . unde regula illa , quòd contrariarum in materiâ contingenti utraque potest esse falsa . . idem accidit in propositionibus factis per omne collectivum ; quas tamen universales esse , nemo quem scio negavit . ( possent tamen , fateor , eâdem ratione quâ negant singulares ; sunt enim reverâ universales , cùm praedicatum non nisi uni antecedenti attribuatur . ) hujusmodi namque propositiones [ omnes apostoli sunt duodecim , & , omnes apostoli non sunt duodecim ] item [ omnes planetae sunt septem , & , omnes planetae non sunt septem , ] non minùs sunt contradictoriae , quàm [ virgilius est poeta , & , virgilius non est poeta . ] si igitur illas pro universalibus agnosc●nt , cu● non & singulares . respondeo tertiò . ratio hujus contradictionis inter propositionem singularem affirmantem & negantem , pendet ex necessitate materiae , potiùs quàm ex ipsa propositionis naturâ & formâ . quoties enim subjectum universalis propositionis est divisionis capax ( ut in distributivis , & de materiâ contingenti , ) & praedicatum sigillatim applicatur subjecti partibus , affirmans & negans universaliter , non opponuntur immediatè & contradictoriè , quia licèt aliquid de toto non rectè affirmetur , de parte forsan affirmari poterit , ergo nec de toto negabitur : ubi verò materiae necessitas particularem praedicationem omnino prohibet , & necessariò requirit ut quod de illo subjecto dicitur dicatur de eo toto , ut in materiâ necessariâ & impossibili , & in universali collectivâ , ut & in prositione singulari , ▪ ibi praedicatum vel de toto dicitur , vel de toto negetur , cùm de parte dici de parte verò negari non posset propter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & indivisibilitatem subjecti . respondeo quartò . consequitur hoc ex nostrâ thesi , non oppugna● . si enim quicquid de individuo dicitur dicatur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , impossibile est ut secus esset quin affirmatio & negatio sint opposita immediata , particularis enim intermedia eo ipso excluditur . nec aliunde patet ratio hujus oppositionis immediatae , quàm ex hoc fundamento . vel enim semper 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 praedicatur ( prout nos afferimus ) vel semper 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , vel aliquando de toto aliquando secundum partem . si semperde parte ▪ licèt de unâ parte dicatur , quid impedit quin de aliâ negetur , ita ut & affirmatio & negatio sint simul verae ? cùm affirmatio particularis quoad unam partem non impediat negationem partialem quoad aliam partem . si aliquando 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aliquando 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( prout ramistarum doctrina videtur innuere , qui quoties una praemissarum propria est eam pro particulari habent , non autem si utraque sit propria ; ) si sic , inquam , ( quamvis gratis dictum sit , nec ulla appareat ratio cur haec & nonilla sit universalis , imò cur eadem promiscuè nunc sit universalis nunc particularis , ) oppositio nec sic esset immediata : licèt enim affirmatio 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 falsa sit , posset tamen quoad aliquam partem ( si aliquando partialiter praedicetur ) vera esse , unde nec negatio 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vera ; possent ergo & negatio & affirmatio simul esse falsae , & non contradictoriè oppositae . necesse est igitur ut , si opponantur immediatè , ideo sit quia singularis propositio semper est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , unde vel de toto dicetur vel de to●o negabitur . confirmat igitur thesin nostram , non oppugnat , quod videbatur primâ fronte debilitare . et hoc telo repercusso eâdem operâ repercutientur & reliqua . secundum sequitur . propositio particularis affirmans converti aliquando potest in singularem . unde singularis videri posset non majorem habere quantitatem quàm habet particularis , quia in conversione non augenda est quantitas . v. g. [ aliquis homo est socrates ] ergo [ socrates est homo . ] respondeo . vi conversionis , sequitur [ hominem ] dici de [ socrate : ] necessitate materiae , dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , quoniam de 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nihil praedicatur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ▪ hinc sequitur , necessitate consequentis , convertens 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 conversae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . idem fieri necesse est , quoties propositio singularis affirmans convertenda est in singularem . v. g. [ virgilius est maro ] ergo [ maro est virgilius . ] quae conversio non est ex particulari in particularem ( ut plurimi autumant , ) nec ex universali in particularem , sed ex universali in universalem . ubi , necessitate consequentiae sequitur , virgil●um de maron● dici , necessitate verò consequentis , sequitur dici catholi●è . respondeo . . eadem esset difficultas , si pro particulari haberetur : nam singularis negans convertitur in universalem negantem ; v , g. [ socrates non est brutum ] ergo [ nullum brutum est socrates ; ] quare , si prior esset particularis , in conversione augenda esset quantitas . singularis igitur negans convertitur simpliciter ( ad modum universalium ) nunc in singularem , nunc in universalem . v. g. [ socrates non est plato ] ergo [ plato non est socrates : ] item [ socrates non est brutum ] ergo [ nullum brutum est socrates : ] sicut è contrà [ nullum brutum est socrates ] ergo [ socrates non est brutum . ] sin essent hae propositiones negant●s particulares , non essent convertendae nisi per contrapositionem . respondeo . . non in singulares tantùm , sed & in alias universales aliquando convertitur particularis . v. g. [ aliquot homines sunt omnes apostoli ] ergo [ omnes apostoli sunt homines ] vel [ omnes apostoli sunt aliquot homines . ] hactenus vidimus , quomodo singulares differant a reliquis universalibus in affectionibus propositionis , oppositione , scilicet , & conversione ; & istius differentiae rationem reddi non posse , ni ex nostrâ these ▪ propugnat igitur thesin nostram , non adversatur . utut autem maximè nobis adversaretur , ramistas tamen nequaquam adjuvat , ( quos habeo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 opponentes ; reliqui tacitè adversantur dum in paradigmatis modorum propositiones singulares ponunt pro particularibus ; ) ramistae namque oppositionem , conversionem , &c. nihil curant : si igitur in reliquis , de quibus ipsi agunt , cum universalibus conveni●ent satis est cur ipsi saltem nostram thesin admittant . tertium sic est . proposi●io universalis non concluditur in tertiâ figurâ , ( h. e. secundum ramum , in syllogismo simplici contracto ; ) at propositio singularis hic concluditur . sed neque hoc ramistis opitulatur magis quàm priora , illi enim rem negant , nec admi●tunt conclusionem propriam in syllogismo contracto : qui definitur a ramo , quando argumentum pro exemplo ita subjicitur particulari quaestioni , ut utramque partem antecedens , & assumptione affirmatum intelligatur ; ( si ergo quaestio semper sit particularis , cer●è nunquam propria secundum illos : ) explicat hoc dounamus ; quaestio , inquit , debet esse particularis , non generalis , aut propria ; item , rationem reddens cur syllogismus proprius esse dicitur ex ut●âque prop● â non autem ex omnibus propriis , hanc assignat , quia in contracto syllogismo conclusio semper particularis est , etiam quum utraque pars antecedentis est propria . hoc igitur a ramistis non urgendum muni dici praedicatum , nondum constat an ea praedicatio universalis sit an particularis , quoniam utriusque capax est . dari vero conclusiones singulares in tertiâ figurâ certissimum est ( lic●t vix quisquam hoc adverte●it . ) ba - da - maro est poeta . ras - rap . maro est virgilius . ergo ta . ti . virgilius est poeta . item , ce - fe - maro non fuit ovidius . las - lap - maro fuit virgilius . ergo ten . ton . virgilius non fuit ovidius . etiam quum neutra praemissarum sit singularis . v. g. ce - fe - nullum brutum est socrates . lip - ris - aliquod brutum est bucephalus . en . on . bucephalus ergo non est socrates ▪ item , ba - da - omne brutum est animal . tip - t is . aliquod brutum est bucephalus . ergo a. i. bucephalus est animal . ( ubi , si major esset particularis , nihil conclude●et , esset enim ex puris particularibus . ) hoc toties fiet quoties praedicatum minoris est individuum . consequentiae horum syllogismorum ex se satis patent : quod si non , possent ( si opus esset ) ad primam figuram reducendo demōstrari . sed neque hoc officit nostrae assertioni ; nam respondeo , ( ut priùs . ) vi consequentiae sequitur de [ bucephalo ] praedicari [ animal ] affirmativè [ socratem ] negativè , &c. necessitate consequentis praedicantur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , quoniam subjectum est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . sed & in aliis quibusdam universalibus eadem est difficultas . v. g. deseptem planetis , hi septem sunt stellae erraticae . sed hi septem sunt omnes planetae . ergo omnes planetae sunt stellae erraticae . triplex igitur haec differentia in propositione singulari ab aliis universalibus , neutiquam enervat assertionem nostram , nec debilitat quicquam , ( nisi propositionem singularem ideo diceremus universalem non omnino esse , quia semper est , ) sed supponit & confirmat . in singulis enim instantiis , posito ( vi consequentiae ) de tali subjecto fieri praedicationem , supposito interim quicquid de hoc subjecto dicitur dici 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , infertur hujusmodi praedicatio universalis : quod ubi subjectum est vox communis secus accidit , posito enim de subjecto communi propositio ergo categorica , vel est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , vel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . haec 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quae non de subjecto toto dicitur sed quoad partem aliquam subjectivam : illa 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , quae de subjecto dicitur quoad totam ipsius latitudinem praedicandi . h. e. de partibus singulis subjectivis . cujus subiectum si sit vox communis & multis applicabilis , iis omnibus applicatur etiam praedicatum , prout in plerisque universalibus ; sin vox sic singularis & uni tantùm applicabilis , huic uni & praedicatum applicatur ; prout in singularibus , & in propositionibus per omne collectivum ; ( non enim eodem modo dicitur [ omnes planetae sunt septem ] & [ omnes planetae sunt stellae ▪ ] alterum enim collectivè dicitur , alterum distributivè : omnes distributivè idem est ac singuli ; omnes collectivè est singulorum collectio , at singulorum collectio est singularis , est que totum ( non universale ▪ sed ) integrale ; planetae sunt septem , at planetarum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unica est : omne distributivum est syncategorematicum , omne collectivum est categorematicum , est que pars subjecti ; unde non rectè concluditur , [ omnes planetae sunt septem , sol & luna sunt planetae , ergo , sol & luna sunt septem , ] nisi assumeretur [ sol & luna sunt omnes planetae ] non enim [ planetae ] sed [ omnes planetae ] est subjectum majoris , essetque praedicatum minoris , su●itur enim collectivè . ) sive autem de singulis quibus attribuitur subjectum universale , sive de uno cui attribuitur subjectum singulare , dicatur praedicatum , ●trobique tamen nihil subjecti accipere licet de quo non dicetur praedicatum , quod secundum aristotelem est formalis ratio propositionis universalis ; quare & propositio de subjecto singulari est praedicatio 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , sive dictum de omni. quod erat demonstrandum . quantitas non differt realiter a re quantâ . ad quaestionis resolutionem , necessarium est de distinctio . nibus in genere , aliquid praemittere . distinctio ergo est vel realis , rationis , vel modalis . realis , quando extrema differunt ut res & res , sine aliquâ intrinsecâ dependentiâ unius ad aliud ; unde statuuntur vulgò per divinam potentiam posse mutuò separari . modalis , quando differunt quidem ex parte rei ▪ ita tamen ut alterum includat essentialem ▪ respectum seu con●exionem ad alterum ; unde non possunt separatione mutuâ ( h. e. ut utrumque separatum existat ) separari ; est que inter rem & modum , vel ( secundariò ) inter modos ejusdem rei , ( modi tamen plerumque separari possunt mutuò , ab invicem , non a subjectis . ) distinctio rationis , quando unum aliquod a parte rei , concipitur ab intellect● ut diversum ; est que vel rationis ratiocinantis , vel ratiocinatae ; haec ●it per inadaequatos conceptus ejusdem rei , & fundamentum aliquod habet in re ; illa verò quando quid intelligitur sub diversis conceptibus sine fundamento in re . per rem quantam , intelligo materiam , quae est adaequatum subjectum quantitatis , cui primò in●ae●et , sic thomas . . q. ● . a. . forma nempe substantialis non est per se subjectum quantitatis , neque extenditur aut dividitur per se , sed ad extensionem & divisionem materiae , non secus ac existentia , & praesentia localis , aut situs , aliique modi , ut & accidentia absoluta , calor , color , &c. ( unde vel est modus substantialis , vel in hoc saltem imitatur naturam modorum . siquis mallet totum compositum dici subjectum quantitatis , mihi non nocet . assertio prima ▪ quantitas non diff●rt a substantiâ quantâ plus quàm modaliter . probatur ex natu●â modi , quam assignat suarez . disp . . sect . num . . ubi supponit in rebus creatis praeter enti●ates earum quasi substantiales & radicales ( ut appellat ) inveniri quosdam m●dos reales , quae & sunt aliquid positivum , & afficiunt ipsas entitates per seipsos , dando illis aliquid , quod est extra e●istentiam totam ●● individuam & existentem ; hi tamen modi sunt ejusmodi entitatis ut non addant propriam entitatem novam , sed solùm modificant praeexistentem : & sect . . n. . tam essentiale est , inquit , modo esse actu affixum & modificantem rem cujus est modus ut repugnet de potentiâ absolutâ conservari sine illâ re , seu aliter quàm actu modificando illam . e contra verò , quae realiter differunt ut res & res , possunt saltem per divinam potentiam separari , ut n. . & seq : unde sic disputo , quae non possunt per divinam potentiam separari separatione mutuâ , e● non differunt realiter ; sed quantitas & substantia quanta &c. ergo. major patet ex supra dictis . minor probatur ; repug●at enim ▪ quantitatem separatam a re quantâ existere , propter intrinsecam dependentiam quantitatis a materiâ ; sive enim essentia quantitatis consistat in mensurabilitate , sive in divisibilitate , sive in extensione & positione partium extra partes , semper tamen manet necessaria connexio cum partibus materialibus ; quomodo enim erit pars extra partem , ubi partes nullae sunt ? quomodo mensurabitur aliquid aut dividetur ubi nulla extensio , nullae partes ? quomodo dabitur figuratio & situatio seu partium positio ubi partes non sunt . dices , dantur partes quantitativae , licèt non materiales . sed contra , vel partes extensae sunt partes materiales , vel materia non est quanta : sin per quantitatem materia est quanta , erit quantitas extensio partium materialium , quod quî fieri potest ubi non est materia ? iterum , figura & situs necessario conjunguntur ; hinc suarez d. . s . ● . ● . . figura ut sic non est positio ( seu situs ) sed illa dispositio totius in ordine ad locum secundum talem ordinem partium ex quâ sequitur talis figura ; ( quis non hic videt partes figuratas & sit●atas easdem esse ? ) si ergo figura sequitur ad sitū , non erit ubi non est situs , situs autem cùm sit modus substantiae non potest esse ubi non est substantia , & per consequens nec figura , ergo nec quantitas , quae sine figurâ non est . dices , quidni quantitas possit esse sine figurâ ? h. e. res sine modo ? respondeo , potest esse quantitas sine qualibet figura , non sine omni ; sicut & corpus potest esse sine quolibet particulari ubi , non tamen ita quin sit alicubi ; nec tamē ubicatio definit esse modus ; possunt ergo modi quilibet in actu exercito abesse a re modificatâ , non semper in actu signato , nempe quoties formaliter resultant ex it sà naturâ rei positâ : datâ verò tali extensione & dispositione par tium per quantitatem resultat talis figuratio v. g. tribus lineis taliter dispositis , resultat protinus figura ●ringularis . argumentum secundum . quorum modi non differunt realiter ea nec ipsa differunt realiter ; at modus substantiae & modus quantitatis non differunt realiter , ergo nec ipsae . majorem suppeditat ●uarez , d. . s . n. . ubi statuit duos modos ejusdem rei differre modaliter , duos autem modos diversarum rerum differre realiter ; modi , inquit , in re distincti , ut sunt praesentia localis v. g. & subsistentia humanitatis ▪ aut comparantur tantum ut sunt in ●âdem re , & sic distinguuntur solùm modaliter , qui quum ex se non habent propriā entitatem , etiam ex se non habent unde plus quam modaliter distinguantur , neque ex re quam afficiunt plus distinguuntur , quia supponimus esse eandem , non habent ergo majorem distinctionem quàm modalem , & confirmatur , quia unusquisque eorum habet identitatem aliquam cum illa re quam afficit , ergo in illâ & per illā habent aliquam identitatem inter se , ergo retinent solùm distinctionem modalem ; at verò si inter se comparentur modi afficientes res diversas , sive illi modi sint ejusdem rationis ut duae subsistentiae duorum hominum , sive diversarum rationum ut sessio unius & subsistentia alterius , sic distinctio est realis , non ratione ipsorū , sed rerum in quibus sunt , nam unusquisque habet identitatem aliquam cum re quam afficit , & illae res distinguuntur inter se realiter , ergo & modi ratione illarum . haec ille . realis igitur identitas modorum arguit realem identitatem rerum modificatarum . ad minorem devenio , quòd modus quantitatis non differt realiter a modo substantiae ; insto in figurâ & situ . figura enim est modus quantitatis , & situs modus substantiae , nec tamen differunt realiter . quòd figura sit modus quantitatis , in confesso est apud omnes ; sic smiglecius , figura non est terminus quantitatis , sed terminorum quantitatis dispositio . quid hoc aliud quàm modus ? scheiblerus in metaph. figura , inquit , est qualitas modificans quantitatis terminos , unde ●● non convenit quantitas , ei consequenter nec figura , quae modus illius est , convenire potest . scaliger etiam ait , figuram non esse quantitatem , sed in quantitate . suarez item disp . . s . . n. . est ergo figura modus quantitatis ▪ situm esse modū substantiae non minùs patet . smigl . situs est dispositio partium corporis in loco ; quid hoc aliud quàm modus ? scheiblerus , ex●stimo , inquit , situm non significare peculiarem entitatem , sed significare modum quendam in ●â re quae denominatur , neque enim apparet indicium unde sumatur realis distinctio ; unde definit situm , accidens secundum quod corpus habet ordinem suarum partium in ubi . suarez , relinquitur , inquit , ut dicamus situm seu positionem esse aliquem intrinsecum modum corporis situatia quo sic denominatur sedens au● jaciens aut aliquid simile . est ergo situs modus substantiae . figuram verò & situm non differre realiter patet ; nam eadem partium dispositio quae in ordine ad totum dicitur figura , in ordine ad locum dicitur situs ; quod cum sit tantum respectus rationis , non sufficit ad distinctionem ●ealem , imò vix rationis ratiocinatae . hinc smiglecius , est situs , inquit , figura quaedam corporis prout existit in loco , eademque figura ut respicit corpus in seipso est figura corporis pertinens ad qualitatem , ut verò est figura corporis in ordine ad locum se● figura positionis partium corporis in loco , ita pertinet ad praedicamentum sitûs . nec aliter suarez ; quum enim inter species sitûs enumerâsset asperum & laeve , hinc , inquit , videtur sequi etiam curvum & rectum , prout praecisè oriuntur ex positione partium in loco pertinere ad praedicamentum sitûs , quia etiam illae differentiae dicunt quandam dispositionem totius consurgentem ex positione partium , quod , inquit , admittere non est magnum inconveniens , nam revera statio & sessio ratione rectitudinis & curvitatis maximè differunt , non quòd ipsa figura ut sic sit positio ( seu situs ) & pertineat ad hoc praedicamentum , sed illa dispositio totius in ordine ad locum secundum talem ordinem partium , ex quâ sequitur talis figura . figura ergo & situs , quorum illa quantitatis , hic substantiae modus est , non magis differunt quàm ratione ; quare nec eorum subjecta . argumentum tertium . entia realiter distincta non possunt fundare ●undem modum ; sed substantia & quantitas fundant ●undem modum . ergo. praecedens argumentum processit de subjectis adaequatis , quòd duo modi in diversis subjectis realiter differant , hoc procedit de subjectis partialibus & inadaequatis , quòd duo entia realiter distincta non possint esse subjecta partialia ejusdem modi ; sed substantia & quantitas sunt subjecta partialiae ejusdem numero modi . ergo. majorem ponit suarez , d . s . . n. . patet etiam : sic enim idem realiter differ●et a seipso : nam situs v. g. si fundatur in substantiâ simul & quantitate , cumutrisque identificatur , quae si realiter distinguantur , ●a , quae cum his sunt realiter eadem , realiter inter se differunt , & situs , si utrisque idem , a seipso differet : dices , unio formae cum materiâ est modus , fundatur tamen in utroque extremo quae realiter differunt , nam materia & forma uniuntur , quare & idem modus in rebus realiter distinctis . respondeo , unio qua uniuntur materia & forma non simplex est , sed duplex , una in materiâ per quam ipsa unitur formae , alia in formâ per quam ipsa unitur materiae . sicut in relationibus , v. g. socrates & plato sunt similes ( puta in albedine ) non tamen per eandem similitudinem sed per diversam , relatum enim & correlatum referuntur ad invicem per relationes diversas ; nec enim relatio patris ad filium eadem est cum relatione filii ad patrem ; & licèt in relationibus ejusdem nominis res non sit adeò perspicua , ratio tamen eadem est , habent enim distincta fundamenta ; sic similitudo socratis ad platonem fundatur in albedine socratis , similitudo platonis ad socratem in albedine platonis , quae fundamenta cùm sint realiter distincta , ita & relationes quae cum fundamentis identificantur : ut autem socrates & plato sunt similes per duas realiter distinctas similitudines , ita materia & forma uniuntur per duas realiter distinctas uniones ( si saltem ipsae materia & forma realiter distinguantur . ) minor sequitur , insubstantiâ simul & quantitate fundatur idem modus . quod enim fundatur in subst●●tiâ quatenus qu●tâ , & resultat ex ips● quantitate , illud fundatur in substantiâ simul & quantitate ; sed sic figura , & situs . ergo. quòd figura sit modus quantitatis , suprà ostensum est ; quòd non ultimatim fundetur in quantitate quin & substantiam modificet , patet ex ipsâ descriptione quam habet suarez , disp . . s . . n. . quòd sit , `` modus quidam resultans ex corpore `` ex terminatione magnitudinis ; est ergo modus in corpore resultans ex quātitate , substantiā pariter & quantitatē modificans ▪ nec enim negari potest , ipsum corpus , ejusque partes substantiales & entitativas ( quas vocant ) eandem figurationem & eosdem terminos habere quos habet quantitas . idem de situ dicendum est . quòd ●itus sit modus substantiae ita notum est ut nihil magis ; quòd autem non in substantiâ purâ fundetur , sed in substantiâ quantâ ▪ aequè patet . smiglecius , restri●gitur ( inquit ) situs ad corpus ; ad situationem enim requiruntur extensio , & multitudo partium materialium , at extensio & materialitas non reperiuntur nisi in materialibus . duo nempe requirit ad situationē , extensionem , quae est a quantitate , & partes materiales , a substantiâ ; fundatur ergo situs in substantiâ simul & quantitate . pariter suarez . disp . . eâdem ratione negat situm substantiis incorporeis , nempe quia partes non habent sed sint●otae in toto & totae in qualibet parte ▪ figura igitur quae est modus quantitatis , & situs , qui est modus substantiae , non fundantur vel in substantiâ solâ , vel in solâ quantitate , sed in substantiâ simul & quantitate , seu in substantiâ quantâ ; cùm autem idem modus non fundetur in diversis realiter subjectis ne quidem partialibus sequitur , substantiam & quantitatem non esse realiter diversa . nec dicendum est , unum esse situm substantiae , alterum quantit●tis : si corpus enim tuetur a proprio situ sine quantitate ( idem valet de extens●one , positione partium extra partes , & reliquis officiis quan●i●atis ) quid opus est aliâ situatione à quantitate ? imò substantia esset quanta sine quantitate , situs enim ponit partes extra partes in toto , quod est formale quantitatis ▪ confirmari posset ulteriùs ex ●o quòd figura sit modus quantitatis , situs verò modus substantiae , figura autem & situs non differant realiter , nedum modaliter , & quidem vix ratione ratiocinatâ ; idem ergo modus in substantiâ fundatur simul & quantitate ; sed de his supra . atque hactenus assertio prima . assertio secunda . probabile est neque modaliter differre substantiam a quantitate , sed tantùm ratione ratiocinatâ . ad distinctionem rationis ratiocinatae requi●itur distinctio conceptuum cum unitate & indistinctione a parte rei : hinc suarez , d. . s . . n. . ut distinctio ( inquit ) judicetur rationis & non rei , satis est ut praeter distinctionem conceptuum nullum inveniatur signum ad distinctionem modalem aut realem cognoscendam , nam cùm distinctiones non multiplicandae sint sine causa , & sola distinctio conceptuum non sufficiat ad inferendam majorem distinctionem , quandocunque cum illâ distinctione conceptuū non adjungitur aliud signū majoris distinctionis , judicanda semper est distinctio rationis & non rei : hinc infert , `` quandocunque constat aliqua , quae in re unita & conjuncta sunt , ita esse in conceptibus objectivis distincta , ut in re & individuo sint prorsus inseparabilia , tam mutuò quam non mutuò , tum magnum & fere certum est argumentum non distingui actu in re sed ratione ratiocinatâ . haec ille . cum ergo in materiâ & quantita re nullum appareat signum realis aut quidem modalis distinctionis , separationis mutuae vel non mutuae , tam ex potentiâ ordinar●â quàm absolutâ , cùm quantitativa extensio formaliter resultet ex partibus entitativis ; probabile est , non differre plus quàm ratione . atque hoc concedit suarez paenè , nisi quod mysterium eucharistiae impediret , dist . . s . . n. . per mysterium ( inquit ) eucharistiae certiùs nobis constat , quantitatem esse rem distinctam a materiâ , quàm per cognitionem naturalem constare potuisset . videmus ergo unde jesuitarum pertinacia de reali quantitatis distinctione , ne scilicet periret mysterium transubstantiationis ; quod illi de fide tenent , nos pari confidentiâ negamus . adjungam argumentum ipsius suarez , quo probat ille durationem non distingui ex parte rei ab existentiâ rei durantis , dist . . s , . n. . quia existentia inseparabilis est a parte rei a duratione ▪ & ● contrario duratio ab existenti● , & in unaquaque re utraque est aequè variabilis vel invariabilis , ut si existentia sit omnino necessaria , etiam duratio ; si illa corruptibilis vel incorruptibilis , haee similiter ; si altera permane●s , etiam altera ; si una successiva , etiam altera ; ergo a parte rei non distinguitur . haec ille , de existentiâ & duratione . pariter ego desubstanti● & quantitate , ubi materia ibi quantitas & contra , si materia non existat sine quantitate ( ut fatetur ipse , d. . s . . n. . ) nec etiam quantitas sine materiâ ( quicquid ille contrà garriat in transubstantiatione , ) si materia ingenerabilis & incorruptibilis sic quantitas , si in augmentatione acqui●itur aut in diminution deperditur aliquid materiae sic & quantitatis , si in raresactione & condensatione manet eadem materia sic & eadem quantitas , si in his motibus variantur termini materiae sic & quantitatis , denique cùm sint aequè separabiles aut ●nseparabiles , aequè variabiles & invariabiles , nullum apparet indicium cur plus quàm ratione ratiocinat ▪ distinguantur . concludo igitur , quòd materia & quantitas non distinguuntur inter se realiter , ut res & res , & ( probabiliter ) neque modaliter , sed tantùm ratione ratiocinata , h. e. ut inadaequati conceptus ejusdem rei . alia prae manibus erant quae put●ssem annexuisse ; sed editio posthuma , esto & abortiva . finis . mr. de labadie's letter to his daughter, mrs. delabadie, nurse to the pretended prince of wales written in characters and deciphered by dr. wallis ... : which said letter is referred to by mr. fuller in his two narratives, and is a plain demonstration of that horrid imposture : with reflections upon it, and a full answer to the material objections, in a late pamphlet entituled, the truest account of mr. fullers discovery, &c. / by another hand. another hand. approx. kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from -bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : - (eebo-tcp phase ). a wing m a estc r ocm this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons . universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase , no. a ) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set ) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, - ; : or : ) mr. de labadie's letter to his daughter, mrs. delabadie, nurse to the pretended prince of wales written in characters and deciphered by dr. wallis ... : which said letter is referred to by mr. fuller in his two narratives, and is a plain demonstration of that horrid imposture : with reflections upon it, and a full answer to the material objections, in a late pamphlet entituled, the truest account of mr. fullers discovery, &c. / by another hand. another hand. fuller, william, - ? wallis, john, - . labadie, james de. labadie, mary anne de. p. s.n.], [london? : printed in the year, . probably by william fuller; mary anne de labadie, nurse to james ii's son, was the wife, not daughter, of james de labadie, james's valet; but the circumstances of discovery (p. - ), if authentic, make it appear unlikely that he was the author. cf. nuc pre- . place of publication from bm. this item appears at reel : as wing l a (number cancelled in wing nd ed.), and at reel : as wing m a. reproduction of original in harvard university libraries. created by converting tcp files to tei p using tcp tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between and available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the , texts created during phase of the project have been released into the public domain as of january . anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. % (or pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf- unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p , characters represented either as utf- unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng james, -- prince of wales, - . fuller, william, - ? truest account of mr. fullers discovery. - tcp assigned for keying and markup - apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images - jonathan blaney sampled and proofread - jonathan blaney text and markup reviewed and edited - pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion mr. de labadie's letter to his daughter mrs. delabadie , nurse to the pretended prince of wales . written in characters , and deciphered by dr. wallis , professor of geometry in oxford . which said letter is referred to by mr. fuller in his two narratives , and is a plain demonstration of that horrid imposture . with reflections upon it , and a full answer to the material objections , in a late pamphlet , entituled , the truest account of mr. fullers discovery , &c. by another hand . printed in the year , . mr. de labadie's letter to his daughter mrs. de labadie , &c. that madam de labadie's letters and papers domonstrating the management of the suppositious birth of the pretended prince of wales ; were found in her fathers trunks some years ago , and put into the hands of the government , is very well known , the memory whereof being lately reviv'd by mr. fuller , in his two books on that subject , and the truth of it called in question by another , published since , in favour of that pretended prince : it is thought fit , for the satisfaction of the nation , to publish the following copy of one of those letters from mr. labadie to his daughter , with some remarks upon it ; to make it appear , that what mr. fuller hath advanc'd concerning that horrid imposture , is as well demonstrated as a thing of that nature can be , except those who were actors in the affair would confess it , which we have now no reason to expect . the reader is desired to take notice , that the following letter directed to mrs. de labadie , is one of those that the late q. of blessed memory ordered to be printed , but the performance of the same was prevented by the l. n. pretending they were mis-laid , as mr. fuller acquaints us , in his further confirmation , pag. . and being in cyphers , was amongst other papers of that sort , committed to the care of dr. wallis , professor of geometry in oxford , and by him deciphered . the letter is thus . to mrs. de labadie , present . i am so troubled about what you told me last time i saw you , that i cannot forbear any longer writing to you ; to know how her majesty behaves her self in that hazardous undertaking . i must confess , the only thoughts of it makes me tremble . i hope nevertheless , that the ingenuity of her country , and the goodness of her cause will bring her off . lord what a happy thing it would be , if we could get a successor for our king , that would settle our fore-fathers profession in our country , which can never be but by this means . i am afraid of those hereticks that are about her , if these could be put out of the way it would be a very good thing . adieu , my dear , and don 't fail to write to me by the bearer , and in the same hand . i rest your ever loving , having accounted already for the authority of this letter , it remains that we proceed to our remarks . in the first place , the intreigue concerning the sham prince is so plainly express'd in the letter , that it can admit of no other gloss , yet to obviate such cavils or evasions as the faction abounds with ; we shall make the following animadversions upon it . here 's , in the first place , an hazardous matter to be undertaken by her majesty , that mrs. de labadie is acquainted with , and which she imparts to her father . now her majesties being really with child , could not in common sense be called an undertaking ; but her counterfeiting to be so , might very well be express'd by that name , and have the epithet of hazardous as properly adjoin'd . and mrs. labadie being design'd for her nurse , she was the fittest person in the world to bear a part in the management , and that the queen was only to act the matter , is evident from mr. de labadie's concern to know how she behaved her self : whereas had there been a real pregnancy , and a natural birth , there had been no need of any such enquiry , nor no cause for his trouble , but rather for his joy. but that the only thoughts of it should make him tremble , as he expresses it in the second paragraph , is yet a plainer demonstration of the hazard and danger to which he was apprehensive their party would be expos'd , if her majesty did not behave her self as she ought ; which yet nevertheless he is in great hopes she will , because of the ingenuity of her country , and the goodness of her cause . it 's true , that the ingenuity of the italians , in matters of love , has been noted for many ages , of which the book written by her countryman , ovid de arte amandi , is a famous instance ; but that there 's any other ingenuity , in childbearing among the italians , than what is natural to all other women , is a thing not so much as pretended to ; and then , as to her being brought off by the goodness of her cause , it plainly discovers that her cause was not the common cause of all mothers , which is , by the appointment of the almighty , to replenish the earth ; but hers was to replenish the church of rome : and this is a fresh instance of the principles of the romish party , that there are no means , how unhallowed soever , which they don't think lawful to put in practice for the advancement of their cause . his next paragraph contains a plain declaration what that cause is , viz. to get a successor for their king , that would settle their forefathers profession in their country . this is truly very pleasant ; other kings use to get successors for themselves ; but k. iames , poor prince ! must have one got for him . if there were not other circumstances which prove this imposture to be a cheat of another nature , we should be tempted by this expression , to think that our monarch had , like henry king of castile , got some body else to lie with his queen , seeing he was not able to get her with child himself ; but if that had been the matter , there had been no need of the queen's being so very circumspect in her behaviour , nor of making use of the ingenuity of her country , to counterfeit a big-belly , but it was plain that a king of clouts , in the strictest sense , was to be paum'd upon the nation , and that was the true reason which made all this precaution necessary . we are at a loss , to understand , whether by the last sentence , viz. which can never be but by this means , the author understood , that the popish religion could never be establisht in england without such a successor ; or that there was no other way to procure a successor but by this means : if it be the latter , then it is a plain demonstration , that they knew the queen to be impotent as well as the king , or otherwise they might have made use of the king of castiles means above-mentioned , which the goodness of the cause , and her majesty's italian ingenuity , would soon have perswaded her to ; but if it be the former , then we hope it will open the eyes of our protestant iacobites , and convince them , that the chief thing aim'd at by this intrigue , was the overthrow of the protestant religion . but the concluding paragraph gives us the finishing stroke , viz. he was afraid of those hereticks that were about the queen . why what 's the danger from those hereticks ? why truly they suspected , that the queen , like the grecian-horse , was big , with designs against our troy ; but they , poor souls , were attended with cassandra's fate , viz. they were not believed till the plot discover'd it self : but if there had been no imposture design'd , why should they be in such a mortal dread of the hereticks ; could they kill , with a bare look , like the basilisk ? might not the queens naked breast and belly have been exposed to the view of the heretical ladies without any danger ? might not such persons have been present at the labour , and have been admitted to see the child actually delivered from the queen's body ? or was it below the queen of england to have been delivered on a pallat-bed in the view of the next heiress , any more than it was below the late queen of france to be delivered of the present king upon a pallat-bed , the duke of orleance , who was the next heir , being an eye-witness . but the case is plain , the protestants who were concerned in conscience and interest to be strict observers , were more likely to discover the imposture then others ; and therefore it was necessary they should be put out of the way . so that we have the true reason from mr. delabadies pen , why no protestant lady was ever admitted to view the queen's breasts , and try the reality of her having milk , either before , or after the pretended birth ; and that same is the reason why no ladies of the reformed religion were ever admitted to see , or feel her belly : and , in short , this unfolds the mystery of all those precautions made use of to amuse the world , and to prevent a discovery , as her different reckonings , the keeping of the place of her lying-in uncertain , and the methods taken to have all her physicians and servants absent at the time of her pretended delivery , except those concerned in the intrigue : and for that very same reason it was that she pretended to be delivered in bed covered , and that the protestant ladies might have no opportunity to satisfie themselves , it was ordered , that the king and council should be present in the room when all things were prepared for the imposture , that so there should be a necessity of the queen's being covered and a plausible reason why the ladies should not desire the contrary : and by this means it was impossible that they could be either eye-witnesses of the birth , or actually discover the cheat. we come now to examine the arguments advanced by the author of the pamphlet , intituled , the truest account of mr. fuller's discovery of the true mother of the pretended prince of wales , born the th of june , ▪ by a person of quality . but before we touch on the particulars , it is necessary that the author should be a little unmaskt . he pretends , page . that the succession of the crown is otherwise legally and sufficiently secured against any title or plea from the said prince , and that it may reasonably be thought , that the noise some little writers have lately made about this affair , has proceeded only from some sordid desire of lucre , by the sale of their copies , and of rendring themselves popular and gracious with the unthinking mob , rather than out of any zeal to serve the government . and , page . that the persons supposed , or declared our enemies , have true faults enough to imploy our censures , and therefore 't is neither a part of generosity , nor christian charity , to charge 'em with uncertain suspicions , or any thing but what will bear the test of a visible proof . all this is only an amusement , by which the author would impose upon the world , as if he were no enemy to the present government ; and that he had only undertaken this province out of a respect to truth ; but they must be very silly birds indeed , who are caught with such chaff : the whole design of this pamphlet is to fix a note of injustice upon the present government , as having charged such things upon the late king , as he was never guilty of , and particularly in relation to this counterfeit prince . we come now to consider his arguments , which are , pag. . that whether the birth of the pretended prince of wales were legitimate or supposititious , has not yet been thought a question worthy enough to be examined by publick authority , which is a downright untruth ; for the late king iames , thought it worthy to be proved by such depositions as he was able to procure , and to have the said depositions , how lame and defective soever , entred on a publick record in chancery ; as our author owns himself , pag. . and . and that they were publisht by authority , just before the revolution , pag. . by which its apparent , that the question was thought worthy of a decision on his side , by all the authority that he was master of , which does naturally imply that the truth of the matter was questioned by some authority or other , and that it was really so , is plain to the view of the world by the prince of oranges declaration , wherein he desir'd that the examination of this question might be referred to a free parliament ; and this he was impowered to demand by the authority of our laws , according to which his princess was the presumptive heiress to our crown . but king iames durst not adventure to bring the matter to this touch-stone , and therefore its apparent that instead of alledging , that this question has not been thought worthy enough to be examined by publick authority , our author ought to have said , that the late king iames durst never submit the matter to such an examination . but we shall suppose the gentlemans meaning to be this , that neither the convention nor any of the parliments , since the revolution , have thought the matter worthy their examination . and if it be so , it 's the less for the credit of his party , for then it must of necessity follow that they thought the matter so palpable that it needed no further enquiry . but if he mean that the parliament or convention ought to have made a scrutiny into this affair , before they had proceeded to the settlement of the crown : he may be pleased to consider , that they were not under the least obligation to do so , for the late king had so much diffidence of the justice of the english nation ; that he durst not trust them with the determination of the point , but immediately sent to france his queen with her pretended son , nurse , midwife , and other servants , who must have been examined if the matter had been submitted to their enquiry , and having , in stead of calling a free parliament , according to the princes desire , recall'd the writs for summoning of one , which he had endeavour'd to make for his interest , and then withdrawn in person from the kingdom , the succeeding convention , and following parliaments , had all the reason in the world to take it pro confesso , that he own'd the imposture , and therefore there was no reason that they should give themselves any further trouble about it . the gentleman is likewise desir'd to consider , that the late k. iames , had by the methods above-mentioned rendered any such examination wholly impracticable ; for if the parliament had been entrusted with such a national concern , the queen , the child , and all the deponents , then in being , ought to have been personally present , that they might have answered such interrogatories , as the wisdom of the nation should have thought fit to propound to them , but whereas instead of ordering it so , the late king sent the principal persons out of the way , who could best have attested the reality of the birth , or of the imposture ; it 's an argument sufficient to convince an indifferent person , that there were some deeds of darkness in the case , which could not abide the test of an examination . if it be answered that the parliament however ought to have summoned those witnesses to appear before them , or at least to have examined such as remain'd behnid . we reply that the late k. iames having thought it his interest to carry off the witnesses , would certainly never have suffered them to come , for that had been a direct owning the convention , parliaments authority and power , to examine and decide that question which he would never have submitted to , tho they had been call'd by himself , and much less when they were called by another ; and therefore it had been very imprudent in them to have deferred the settlement of the nation upon that account , especially seeing the late king did never desire that they should make an enquiry into that affair ; and as to the examining of the witnesses that were left behind , it was to no purpose , seeing the most material witnesses were carried beyond sea , so that it if it should have happened upon the cross examination of those that were left here , that the imposture should have been discovered , the party would still have raised a clamour that justice was not done them , because the most material witnesses were absent . our author , page . says , he will now lay before us , some proofs of another nature from a numerous troop of honourable eye-witnesses , whose testimony is on publick record , and which , tho contradicted by mr. fuller and his secretary ; yet never was retracted and much less condemned , nor any other equivalent contradictory testimony entred as yet in the like records against it , these all unanimously declare the late queen to be his true mother . a very plausible story , and a handsome skreen indeed to cover the imposture , but will no more abide the test of an examination , than the pretended birth ; the gentlemans confidence is truly superlative to impose upon us in this manner , as if the depositions imported that the deponents , been made by such as were all of 'em eye-witnesses of the prince's birth , when by the same depositions it's plain and evident , that the queen was covered in her bed , and pretended to be so delivered , so that it was morally impossible for any of them to be eye-witnesses of the delivery ; and this the gentleman may soon be convinc'd of , if he do but cast his eye on the very first of his depositions , which is , that of the countess of sunderland ; wherein we are told , that the midwife pull'd her ladyship by the coat , which was the sign agreed on betwixt them , to let her know that it was a son , which had been altogether needless if the countess had been an eye-witness ; and it is plainer still by the reason of the private sign , which was , that the queen had charg'd the midwife not to let queen dowager know presently , whether it was a son or a daughter , so that neither the countess of sunderland , nor yet the queen dowager , whose religion and character entitled her to a pretence of seeing all that could be seen , were eye-witnesses of the birth , tho present all the time of the pretended labour . hence then it appears , that our author does plainly equivocate in a jesuitical manner , for the support of his popish cause , for every body will easily perceive the difference betwixt being eye-witnesses , that a child lately born was taken out of the bed from the queen , where she lay covered ; and being eye-witnesses that the child was really born of the queen's body . then whereas he says that they do all unanimously upon oath declare the late queen to be his true mother , it is notoriously false . there are many of 'em indeed who talk of the queens being delivered , but that proceeded only from the common idea which all mankind form to themselves in such cases , when they see or hear of a womans being in child-bed , but that they could justly depose upon oath , that the queen was his true mother , was morally impossible , seeing they were not eye witnesses of his being born of the queen's body . as to their evidences never being retracted , we know no reason why it should be expected , many of the witnesses were so devoted to the cause as wilks iurini de labadie , &c. that to make use of the common expression , they would swear through an inch-board to serve it ; and as for that part of the evidence which relates to the seeing of the queen's shift wet with milk , and a child taken out of the bed from her , there 's no need of retracting it , for no body questions the truth of it ; as to the milk , it might either be counterfeit or real , without prejudice to our cause , it being no extraordinary phaenomenon in nature for those to have milk who have had no children for several years , tho there 's more reason to suspect a counterfeit in this case , and as to the child there 's no doubt of it , being taken out of the queen's bed , but all the question is how it came there . the author tells us , pag. . in mrs. dauson's depositions , that the queen was wholly left alone immediately before her ( pretended ) labour , and that while she was in her imaginary pains , she saw the fire carried into the queen's room in a warming-pan to warm the bed , though all agree that the pan was covered ; and the author knows the report which did then universally obtain , that the child was brought in the same from a neighbouring apartment ; and now that mr. fuller has discovered mrs. mary greys being brought to bed in the narrow gallery , between the queen's apartment and the great chapple at the very same time , there 's no room left to doubt but her child was conveyed to the queen's bed ; and if there was not some such abominable cheat in hand , why should the queen have been left alone in such adangerous condition as she was then pretended to be in ? why should the king have gone to the other side of the house with all the men ? why should all her own servants be sent to the chappel , as if there had been no reason to attend upon the queen , but that the imposture might be carried on with the more secrecy by the few that were to be actors in the intrigue . what other reason can there be assign'd for the queens sudden removal to st. iames's , and that also in the night ; and why there was no more publick provision made for her lying in , and that it was not so much as talkt of , or seemingly apprehended by her servants that very morning , in so much that they were all sent from about her , but because they could not be certain whether mrs. grey should bring forth a dead or a living child , or a son , or a daughter , till the very critical minute ; that so if it had either been a female or a dead child , they might have found some other way either to carry on the imposture , or drop it at that time , but as soon as mrs. grey was delivered of a boy , then all of a sudden the queen's pretended labour comes on : we don't know what de facto proof would satisfy our author , but certainly all those things , together with the queens being covered in bed , and that neither of the princesses nor their deputies , nor none of the privy councellors , nor ladies , protestants , or papists , were suffered to be the eye witnesses of the childs being actually taken out of her body , as they ought to have been , considering the strong and violent suspition there was of a cheat , i say , that all those things being considered , it is as strong a proof of the imposture , at least , as his depositions are of the real birth , for which there is but one single witness who swears positive , and that is the midwife ; a begotted papist , and a tool fitted for the design , so that he has no reason to object against the single testimony of mr. fuller , when the title of their pretended prince has no more but one to support it , and that also the evidence of such an one whose testimony cannot be reviv'd in a civil cause . we would moreover , desire our author to reconcile the contradiction between the depositions of the said mrs. wilks and the lady bellasis , the former swears that she cut the childs navel string in bed , and that as soon as it was cut , the child cried ; the latter swears , that she saw the child taken out of the bed with the navel-string hanging to his belly ; and opening the receiver , saw it was a son , and not hearing the child cry , and seeing it a little black , she was afraid it was in a convulsion fit . now this lady deposes she stood behind the midwifes chair , and therefore it 's strange she should not have heard the child cry , as well as the midwife . but for these things , we refer to the compleat history of the pretended prince of wales , where the depositions are considered more at large . then as to the testimonies being on publick record ▪ he must give us leave to tell him , that there can be no less laid on that examination , where the king was defendant , the papists maintainers , so that his majesty sat as judge , and the popish defendants were examined for themselves , and none to interrupt them . by that same rule which the party think his present majesty , and the parliament were obliged to have summoned the witnesses who made those depositions , in order to have made an enquiry into that affair , the late king was obliged to have made publick proclamation , that all who know any thing concerning the matter should come and depose upon oath , such their knowledge , with his royal promise to indemnify and not molest them , and the examination ought to have been made in presence of the two princesses , and the princes their husbands , who should have had liberty to put such cross questions to the evidence as they thought fit . but nothing of this being done , and the late king having also declin'd to submit the enquiry into the whole affair unto a free parliament , our author must give us leave to retain our suspicion ; notwithstanding his strenuous endeavours to amuse the world with his numerous train of eye-witnesses . the instance of a forged bond from a gentleman in grays-inn , to his laundress after he was dead , and to which the witness swore positively at first , pleads strongly for the necessity of cross interrogatories , seeing upon the rebound the same witnesses who swore that they saw him sign the bond , did afterwards discover that it was by a pen put in his hand , and guided by another after he was dead . then as to their testimonies never being condemned , nor any other contradictory equivalent testimony entred , it 's plain from what is already said , that king iames hath rendred that impracticable in ordinary course of law , nor is it indeed necessary . our author being a person of quality , cannot be ignorant that the imposture designed by the former queen mary , was never , for any thing we know , condemned by publick authority . nor did queen elizabeth cause any contradictory equivalent testimony to be entred against it , and yet the truth of the imposture is generally believed , nor would it have failed of coming as great a length as this , if philip ii. had not been of a more generous temper than iames ii. and lewis xiv . it was certainly much better founded than this last imposture , for not only the privy-council sent orders abroad to make prayers for the child , but the parliament was so far impos'd upon as to enter into the consideration of provisions for the child , which was far greater circumstance of the reality of the pregnancy , than any thing that can be pretended to in this of the last prince of wales , and therefore iti snot to be wondred at that so many lords and ladies should be deceived in this case , seeing they were not allowed to see the actual delivery , and so they have rendered the birth of their supposed prince , for ever uncapable of being proven that way by any but the tool of a midwife , who cannot be admitted as a witness in law , so that all the proof which they can pretend to now is only that the child was taken out of the queen's bed , &c. whereas all this might have been prevented had the princess of denmark , or any other protestant ladies been allowed to see the child taken out of the queen's body . it is also observable , that the former queen marys imposture was managed in the same manner , for none during her pretended bigness was admitted , on behalf of the lady elizabeth , to view her breasts or belly , and several persons were put out of favour and discarded for speaking plainly in the case , there being a general suspicion amongst protestants then , as there was now , as appears by bakers history , and foxes acts and monuments ; it must be own'd that queen marys game was much harder to play then the late queens , because king philip was an utter enemy to the imposture , but it cannot be so said of the late king iames , for it is evident that he was a zealot in it . it may be objected , that queen mary tudors design having miscarried , there was no need of making any enquiry into that affair , or of entring a contradictory testimony against it . we answer that it 's true , there was not the same need as in the present case , yet if the matter could have been detected ; it must be own'd that it would have been of great use , and a convincing instance to future ages , that the papists think no means unlawful , how wicked soever , if they can any way subserve to promote their church , for this supposed pregnancy was by the privy council ascribed to providence , and the divine care of christs only flock , for the throwing down of the protestant heresie , and the physicians , ladies of honour , &c. justify'd the queens conception as to all signs , so that it would have certainly been of very great use at that time , and have tended much to bring the popish idolatry into disrepute , if the methods of the imposture , how they rais'd her belly , and how they impos'd upon the privy council and parliament , had been fully displaid . and therefore seeing the particulars of that imposture , tho allowed to be one , on all hands , neve● came to light , nor that none of the cabal did ever confess it on their death beds , or otherwise ; we are not to wonder if this intrigue should never be fully discovered , especially now that they have prevented the evidence of mrs. mary grey , who there 's all the reason in the world to believe , was the true mother of our pretended prince . our author after having finished his account of the depositions tells us , page . that none of the witnesses were under any force , neither were they all of one religion , yet they unanimously gave in their testimony upon oath , and suffer it without any contradiction to be publickly recorded in the court of chancery , as their standing testimony , that the late queen mary , was the true mother of the pretended prince of wales . to all which it 's answered , that their not being all of one religion , is nothing at all to the advantage of his cause ; for it must be own'd to our shame , that there are a sort of protestants in england as bad , nay , worse than the papists themselves ; charnock , king , keys , rookwood , louick , parkins , friend , and cranborn , were not all of one religion , yet they were all in one design against the laws and religion of the nation ; and it 's obvious to any man that peruses their tryals and last speeches , that such of them as professed themselves to be protestans , were a great deal the worse fmen and christians , than those of 'em that died papists , and we have a very late instance of one who calls himself a protestant , and a very devout one , who forswore himself at his tryal , and denied such things with the most dreadful of imprecations , which he hath since confessed to be true . then as to the witnesses being under no force , it is as little to the purpose , they were all of one faction , a very few of them excepted , and so willing to promote the design , that there was no need to force them to an attestation , and whereas he will have it , that they gave their unanimous testimony upon oath , that the queen was the true mother , he will find it otherwise upon a second perusal of the depositions , as has been already noted , they only swear what they heard and saw , but not one of them deposed , that they were eye witnesses of the birth , though our author has the confidence to say so again and again . — and upon the whole it is demonstrable , that of all the thirty seven witnesses , there 's only the widwife who swears to the thing it self , and all the rest swear only to circumstances , which being his own exception against mr. fullers evidence , pag. . he must needs allow it to be as valid against theirs . he alledges , ibid , that most of the witnesses were of high quality , and that others of them had intimate knowledg in the truth of the fact. as to their quality we shall say nothing ; but certainly iudith wilks , when she gave in her evidence at the chancery bar , did not appear like one who deserves that character , and it was indeed observable that she went at other times richly apparelled , yet then she came habited in a green apron , and a tattered scarf , that her seeming simplicity and meanness might create a belief in the spectators , that she was neither capable of managing such an intrigue , nor fit to be intrusted with it ; and she being the only witness who swears home , and having no pretensions to quality , that big word is of no significancy to our author . but because we would not be understood to reflect upon those of quality , or were undoubtedly of the protestant religion , and yet made use of as evidence in this case ; we desire it may be observed , that let their probity and quality be never so eminent , matters were so ordered that they were not allowed to be witnesses of the birth ; but having been then at court , they could neither handsomly nor safely refuse to give an account of what they heard and saw when the king desired it : but as we have already said , the examination was neither fairly nor impartially managed . nor durst any of them , but with the hazard of their lives , have at that time said any thing which could administer the least ground of suspicion , and tho we will grant our author that none of 'em were under any force , yet he cannot pretend but they had cause enough of fear ; and whereas he alledges that others of the witnesses had intimate knowledge in the truth of the fact : it is a notorious falsehood , for none of 'em pretend to it but the popish midwife . his ridiculing the escape , examination and tragical fate of mrs. grey , is but a very ordinary piece of wit. does he think that lewis xiv . and mary of modena are persons of such a refin'd honour and tender conscience , that they would scruple the murder of such an insignificant woman as mrs. grey , when it 's plain to the world that their boundless ambition and zeal for idolatry , hath involv'd europe in blood and flames ? was it of no concernment to those two persons , to prevent the discovery of the horrid imposture by such a material evidence ? was it below the french kings grandeur , to enquire whether her escape had been favoured by the prince of oranges friends , as we are told by mr. fuller they did at first suspect it to have been ? is lewis xiv's . conscience , which is so much hardened with blood and destruction , that it can digest the assassination of soveraign princes , become so very tender of late , that it cannot away with the blood of a private woman ? or is it reasonable to think that they would trust this poor creature to our authors oublies , when they had before-hand condemn'd her to perpetual oblivion ? were not coleman and plunket hang'd to prevent telling of tales , and what reason can our author assign , why mrs. grey should have more favour ? or supposing she should have escap't into england , and there made a discovery , does our author think that his extraordinary invention of charging it as a forgery of the prince of orange , and his friends , would have satisfied the world , and was it not more wisely done in the french king and his messalina , seeing our author has put us in mind of it , to prevent the occasion of such a superlative piece of wit , then to venture the need of making use of it ? might it not have been possible for mrs. grey , if she had got into england , to have directed us to other concurrent testimonies to have strengthened her own ? how does this person of quality know that she could not have brought the true father , as well as the true mother for a witness , or why may we not suppose that mrs. grey could have quoted such circumstances , as might have turn'd a great part of his thirty six circumstantial witnesses , against his supposititious prince ? tho our author could not or would not foresee such dismal consequences , of mrs. greys elopement from the fat bellied monks , to whom she was married , yet lewis xiv . and his messalina could see further , and therefore rather than the whole catholick cause should suffer , it was expedient that one woman should perish , and thus his messalina . ne scelerata fit , facit scelus . the gentleman is so hugely addicted to the apocrypha , that none but apocryphal authors will down with him ; in the beginning he attacks us with the noble zorobabel , and he brings up his rere with the cheva lier lestrange , but we would have our author to know that tho sir roger was formerly quoted from the pulpit , the commissioners of enquiry , who were imployed to examine whether his works were to be found in the canon , have made an unanimous return of non est inventus ; and thus we bid our author farewel . finis . a brief letter from a young oxonian to one of his late fellow-pupils upon the subject of magnetism wallis, john, - . approx. kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from -bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : - (eebo-tcp phase ). a wing w estc r this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons . universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase , no. a ) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set ) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, - ; : ) a brief letter from a young oxonian to one of his late fellow-pupils upon the subject of magnetism wallis, john, - . [ ], p. : ill. (woodcut) printed for s. keble at the sign of the turks-head in fleet-street, london : . a young oxonian = john wallis. reproduction of the original in the exeter college library, oxford university. created by converting tcp files to tei p using tcp tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between and available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the , texts created during phase of the project have been released into the public domain as of january . anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. % (or pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf- unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p , characters represented either as utf- unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng magnetism -- early works to . - tcp assigned for keying and markup - aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images - judith siefring sampled and proofread - judith siefring text and markup reviewed and edited - pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a brief letter from a young oxonian to one of his late fellow-pupils upon the subject of magnetism . london : printed for s. keble at the sign of the turks-head in fleet-street , . a brief letter from a young oxonian , &c. sir , since my last opportunity of discoursing with you , ( which is now some months past ) my thoughts have run continually upon the subject we were then engag'd in , which was the nature of magnetism ; and what with the dignity of the matter and the indearments of the party who argu'd so rationally upon it , whereof the one facilitated the remembrance of the other ; i have hardly talk'd of any thing else waking , nay , ( as i am told ) sleeping too , and all this at last without the success that might justly have been presum'd of such frank endeavours ; but that you may know how much i am the wiser , and be diverted by my example from lavishing too great a portion of time upon such gordian-knots , i have ventur'd to send you the summ of my acquisitions . it is a question which we know has employ'd and prov'd too hard for the pens of the most eminent philosophers , and is to be rank'd among those misteries of nature , which neither the thoughtful ancients , the laborious school-men , nor our acute virtuosi , could ever make a compleat discovery of : not but that the peripatetick is verily persuaded he has seen farther into it than other people , as long as he can answer your demands with occult quality or its elder sister substantial form ; and if this does not lay it all bare , what does ? there is says he , very gravely , something whereof we cannot with confidence affirm any thing , which either within the magnet or from without , disposes it in such and such a manner ; and then there is another what do you call it , with which according to the determination of its poles , it attracts or repels a body congenial ; and think you sir , this answer is not very worthy of a philosopher ? others have entertain'd an opinion , that the magnet accomplishes its operations by the emission of effluviums out of its own continuum ; and this the learned have so rationally disprov'd already , that i shall think it sufficient , if not superfluous , to offer but one objection against it , which shall be grounded upon the nature and structure of the load-stone . it is to be remembred that as that stone is for the most part fetch'd out of iron-mines and foster'd in beds of iron ore ; so in its nature it scarce varies from that metal , save in the eminence of one quality which is compactedness ; for altho' in other qualities it dissents from iron , as in its gravity , inductility , and microporosity or littleness of pores , yet in these it rather differs from the metal consequentially than essentially , since the original and fountain of them seems to be the quality of compactedness , for the comprehension of more univocal matter in less space , which is but a periphrasis of compactedness unecesarily requir'd to gravity ; and then as for its inductility , 't is confessed that the most compact and heavy of all known bodies which is gold , is the most ductile and malleable , but it is not reasonable to conclude from thence , that the most ductile and malleable bodies are always the most compact and ponderous ; ductility or malleableness as i conceive , requiring no more than that the parts should be of such a figure as would be least impatient of those impressions , suppose of an aequilateral quadrangular superficies , whereas such a similitude and correspondency of parts seems not to be absolutely necessary to a bodies becoming heavy and compact , so their connexion and union be but such as admits of the smallest interstices and pores ; not but a coincident figure of parts , such as that i just mentioned an aequilateral quadrangular , contributes much to compactedness , for which reason all architects take care their materials be of such a form . but the parts of the load-stone are in all probability so far from aequilateral-quadrangulars , that they are rather to be supposed of a branchy stragling figure as the parts of iron , yet because those branches are better and closer plaited and connected one with the other than those of iron , which are so loosly dispos'd as to be even thorough fares for heterogeneous matter , they become more inviolable and inflexible than those of the latter ; nor is there any farther occasion to prove as much of the tenuity of its pores . seeing therefore the magnet and iron have so near an affinity as to be in respect of magnetism , two species of the same genus , and their difference chiefly to consist in the dignity and degrees of some accidents , on account of which iron may be reputed an imperfect and bastard load stone , and the load-stone the most pure and noble iron ; there will be found but few phaenomena which may not be attributed to both indifferently , wherefore it ought to be a general prolegomenon in disputes upon this subject , that magnetism , not of the magnet only properly so called , but of all magnetical bodies is the theme . magnetical bodies being therefore naturaly unapt for malleableness and ductility , though one species less so than another ; it will follow that notwithstanding they are tight and compact , yet that the parts of them are of no quadrangular regular shape , but on the contrary of a stragling branchy one , though strongly interwoven and connected ; whence it is demonstrative that the effluviums of magnetical bodies flow not from within themselves , for by such a procession and expiration , it is certain there must be a very considerable and visible expence of the parts : for though slightly considering the matter , it may be answered that the evaporating particles are few and slender , yet when their mutual dependence and concatenation is weigh'd , it will appear that one single particle cannot escape without the attendance of its whole chain , so that in a short time there would necessarily succeed a very sensible and obvious decay of parts ; and this may suffice you for the confutation of the opinion of perspiration . i shall not worry you with the rest of those hypotheses and notions which some mens brains have teem'dwith ; such as the influence of the stars , or the entire magnetism of the earth and the like , which instead of giving a light into the question , is but meer building new extravagancies and errors upon our antecedent ignorance . i have therefore only a word to say to des cartes and the materia pennata men , and so shall go on to perform my promise . the latter of them seem to be offenders against all reason and rule too ; it is a receiv'd maxim or postulatum among philosophers , that entities without a necessity are not to be multiply'd , and if so , then certainly are those philosohers to blame , who have invented a new species of matter , of an unaccountable extract and production to effect those operations which another species of matter , the existence whereof is evidently known has power to effect . but as for the ingenious des cartes , it were an unpardonable peice of ignorance and envy , not to acknowledg his hypothesis to be the most satisfactory and adequate account hitherto published ; but yet as a man's having good eyes when he walks in the dark , will not save him from stumbling some times , so neither could the perspicacity of this great man , ensure him from many mistakes in the trace of so profound a secret. for not to mention to one who knows them so well , the many perplexities which the learned have discover'd in his philosophical principles , altho' the reality of his magnetical system must unavoidably stand or fall with those principles : i say not to mention any thing of this ; there are yet some difficulties observable in the system it self ; take one for all , for his instruments , he supposes a sort of fine matter to issue out of both poles of the earth after such a manner , that those that come from one pole take a compass round the superficies of the earth and enter in again at t' other , which matter he has denominated corpuscula striata , because of the strias impressed upon it by being drain'd thro' the apertures or interstices necessarily left-between the contacts of the globuli of his second element ; this matter he supposes to be a species of his first element , which he defines thus , quoe tantam vim habet agitationis , ut aliis corporibus occurrendo in minutias indefinitae parvitatis dividatur , & figur as suas ad omnes angulorum , abijs relictorum angustias implendas , accommodet ; it is , says he , so agil a kind of matter as upon encountring other bodies , to dash into innumerable particles , and conforms it self to the spaces which are left between those bodies . but how is it possible to conceive , that matter of so easy and yeilding a nature should not be as susceptive of an impression from , and as conformable to the pores of bodies compounded of third elementary matter , in the number of which are magnetical bodies , as it is to the interstices of the globuli of the second element , which if it be , then cannot it act with any force or impulse , but must glide ineffectualy thro' the passages of the magnet , and like a winding stream comply with the luxuriancy of its channel ; nor will it avail to say that this matter upon approaching the poles of the magnetical body is congregated , and acts with an united force , since we cannot see why it should more readily congregate and confederate upon such an accession than before or after it , unless , which this learned philosopher i am sure will not admit , it is collected by some sympathetical attraction of the magnetical body . thus sir , you see one difficulty , and were it needful perhaps i could make you sensible of many more ; but i am unwilling to attempt a dispute , which would be as endless as the ropings of the welchman's toasted cheese . now be pleased to hear what i can say for my self . it is apparent that there can be no such thing as motion without an impulse , and that upon such an impulse a motion greater or less must ensue ; from whence we gather that all magnetical bodies require some impellent to enable them to perform those various feats and operations observable in them ; and here an inquiry will arise , were we shall meet with an agent confessedly existent in nature , neither too gross not too feeble , but in all respects qualify'd for such undertakings , corpuscula striata or pennata , as has been already shewn , are fabulous or impotent if not both , and the daily testimonies of mens eyes assure them that no visible conspicuous agent is in the cause ; of necessity therefore it must be something of a midling kind between these two , which cannot be any other than the aethereal or subtile matter incorporated in the atmosphere of our terraqueous globe , which matter by the diurnal motion of the earth is rapidly devolv'd from west to east perpetualy : now you will presently wonder , i do not doubt , how that which moves from west to east should direct any magnetical body so as that its poles should point directly north and south , but have a little patience . the existence of such aethereal matter i am confident you will not call in question , and that it is endu'd with a scrutinous penetrating nature may , were it not trivial , be demonstrated from the very end and essence of it ; but still this agent suffers under the imputation of insufficiency and variability equally with that of des cartes , and considered by it self undoubtedly it does so , but considered with circumstances as the precipitance of its motion , the disposition of the parts of its patient and the like , it will answer your expectation and demands . thus the wind can manage the sails of a windmil , and turn them round with ease , but has no power upon a rock or a mountain ; from hence it is evident therefore that this agent must be driven with a due force of motion , and also that the patient must have some of its parts adapted for receiving and suffering the impulse . whoever takes a just estimate of the earths celerity in her diurnal motion , must be convinced that the violence of such a motion is able to effect great things , and whoever remembers that the motion of the aethereal matter about the earths superficies must be proportionably quicker as that is degrees fluider , must also be satisfy'd of the abilities of such matter to penetrate all the accessible passages of those bodies , which occur in its course and to rage and aestuate in them , if they be not very regular and open . having thus obtain'd an agent ; there are two things next to be examin'd , the one is whether this agent when it is free and uninterrupted is capable of such an administration ; the second is , whether though it be so of its self , yet external diversions and disturbances may not frustrate and evacuate its influence , which queries being both answered , i hope no further difficulties will remain . in order to clear the first , i must give you to understand that many of the particles of magnetical bodies are like so many tendrils or little springs , taper and tortuous , which in regard of the internal disposition and posture of magnetical bodies , and the many anomalous ramosities into which the parts of them spread themselves , i may expect to be easily granted . the body of the aethereal matter therefore rushing into the pores of the magnetical bodies , and there labouring to exert its self on all sides , and obtain a free passage or a convenient receptacle , distends and explicates these little springs which lie ranged in one and the same order , from this pole to that pole of the magnetical body , the consequence of which distention can not be a direct progressive motion of the body , because then all parts of these springs must equally resist the impulses of the aethereal matter , but being of a taper form , larger and stronger toward the radix of them than toward their summity or cuspis , ( forgive my pedantry where i cannot help it , ) the finer and weaker parts of them suffer a readier or more forcible expansion or diastole than the larger and radical , whereupon ensues insted of a progressive motion a deflexion or distortion of the springs themselves , and of the continuum to which they adhere . for instance , if the radix of the spring of a watch were fastened to a peice of wood or iron , when the summity or lesser parts of that spring were distended and display'd , it would not carry the wood or iron at the end of it in a direct motion to any point just before it , but it would turn and move it round within the limits of the same area , on which it lay before the terminating weaker parts were expanded ; and this distention may very easily be effected by the vehemency and agitation of the aethereal matter , which ( to make a gross comparison ) acts as vigorously upon them as the wind in a crop of corn , or among the sprigs of trees . when therefore the poles of magnetical bodies are thus deflected to the points of north and south , the equal urgency of the influx of the accessory aethereal matter upon all parts of the magnetical body , destroys the strength of the impression , and stays its motion at just that instant ; for it must be remembred that the sides of the magnet have not pores fit to receive the aethereal matter , which therefore upon impaction flows round it in a vortical manner , as shall be better explain'd hereafter . so the first dificulty disappears , the second follows , whether though our agent be capacitated , yet external diversions and disturbances may not frustrate its influence . the cartesians i hope will not be the men that start this quere , their doctrine of the loadstone labouring under the same or a worse disadvantage ; for if external commotions as of the wind , &c. can confound the order and irritate the operation of our aethereal matter , whose motion is so certain , regular , strong and unintermitted ; what will become of their corpuscula striata or pennata , they being not only obnoxious to accidental ruffles and perturbations , but continually thwarted and transverst by this flux of our subtile matter ? but i am persuaded we are both out of danger from storms of every kind , and need not shrink at the rage of whirlwinds and hurricans , for such is the minuteness and velocity of our agents that they make their way thro' all opposition : like an arrow in the aire , or a good keel through the waves , or as the sunbeams directly dart thro' the atmosphere many times when 't is vext and tost with the winds ; which last similitude carries the most in it , on account of the vicinity between the matter of the sunbeams and our subtile or aethereal matter ; and thus we are past the two impregnable wards of this inchanted labyrinth . you will look perhaps that i should examine all the instances and energies of magnetical bodies , and should solve every particular phaenomenon by this hypothesis , but if you do you will be deceived , for i am not yet so prodigal of my time or of my paper , which of late is very considerably risen , as i suppose you have e're this experienced , and therefore am of opinion that the explication of these five properties following may suffice . first , the magnet ( for now we come to particular cases ) if it be unrestrain'd and have its just liberty , will turn about till its north pole directly answers the south pole of the earth , and its south pole the north pole of the earth : of which conversion i need not repeat to you the cause , having already so lately and largely spoke of it . secondly , if two magnets lye at a convenient distance one from the other , and their poles be disposed for their accession , as when the north pole of the one faces the south pole of the other , or the south pole of the one faces the north pole of the other , they will close , and if their poles are laid just contrary wise they mutually retreat , for you must know the aethereal matter which effects to move in a mathematicaly circular line , upon invading the sides of the magnet , finding few or no pores to receive it , the main course or grain of the pores lying extended from pole to pole , deviates from its regular line of motion and flowing round all parts of the magnets superficies , falls into a kind of vortex on all sides of the inclosed body ; when therefore two magnets are situate at such a distance off each other that the intermediate space is too close and narrow to transmit the influxes of so much of the aethereal matter as is carried round the approximated poles of both magnet's , the influxes unite and generate one vortex common to them both , which cannot come to pass but at the same time the deviation of the aethereal matter from its regulare line of motion will encrease , and consequently with it its propensity to recover it again , whereupon must ensue a stronger impression and protrusion than ever upon the exteriour poles of both magnets , they being the points of its widest deviation , and to their impression the magnets giving way immediatly close , so that the nearer they lie to one another , the stronger is the impression upon their exteriour poles , the weaker the resistance of the interposing matter , the fuddainer their concourse , and the firmer their unition , & vice versâ . the requisiteness of their dinominal poles facing one another is plain , because that position which is natural to them , separately consider'd , cannot but be the most suitable for their unition ; and the reason of their flying one another when their cognomininal poles are approximated is this . the central parts of the vorticle wherein both magnets are immers'd , conform as in all vortexes whatsoever to the motion of the exteriour parts , and that is as we have just observ'd , a deviation or distraction or equal division of the vortex it self toward either point north or south , and such by consequence must the distribution be of the central parts of the vortex , and therefore acting with equal strength on both sides , if those of one side , that is toward the polar parts of the magnet , on one side meet with so disagreable a texture of parts , as obliges them to retire unsuccesful , and those which act on the other side or toward the polar parts of the opposite magnet are more mildly received , as it will be when their denominal poles are placed over against one another , this would be apt to drive away one of the magnets from the other , were not the impression of the external parts of the same common vorticle more powerful than that of such central parts ; but when the cognominal poles of both magnets face each other , the impression of the central parts of the vortex on both sides will be equal , and their mutual renitency will as easily overpower the impression of the external parts of the vortex , as a man that should be to bend the body of a young tree , though with one hand singly he were not able to move it , yet when he set his other hand against the body of another tree of equal growth , would find it in his power to bend them both . the following draught will illustrate this . thirdly , if two magnets be duly dispos'd , one will support and sustain the other in the air , as also a magnet will in like manner sustain a peice of iron , which is very easily accounted for , the second phaenomenon being well understood , for being first united in the manner there describ'd , their cohaesion must be as valid and tenacious by reason of the pressure of the aethereal matter upon their superficies , as is the cohaesion of two polished marbles thro' the compression of the external air ; and the same is to be said of iron , which as was hinted before to you , seems to be but a bastard loadstone . fourthly , a loadstone will communicate its faculties and affections to iron : for you are to remember that iron is of a congenial nature with the magnet it self , and that therefore it requires but a little modification to render it compleatly magnetical , which modification it under goes from the loadstone as it lies in its proper posture , for altho' the loadstone does not then abound with or discharge the aethereal matter in such plenty as when it is laid with it poles east , and west , yet a more moderate concoction and ebullition of the same kind of matter continues , which concoction being effected among the springs of the magnet , the aethereal matter which is agitated and concocted must of necessity receive such a peculiarity of motion as the passages lying among and between those springs will model it into , and issuing out of the magnets poles in such a motion it enters the pores of the applicated iron , where finding at once a larger liberty ( the pores of iron being more lax than those of the magnet ) and also new recruits of other aethereal matter , which enters the large pores of iron at all parts of it alike till such iron is magneticis'd , it aestuates with greater vigour , joins forces with the aethereal matter that it finds in the iron , communicates to it the same species of motion , and both in conjunction , purge , polish , frame , and in all respects prepare those particles of the iron which are capable of being wrought into magnetical springs , and when by such a course they are wrought into those springs , the iron becomes compleatly magnetical ; for as the coadjution of the cock is required toward the perfectionating those seminal principles the matter whereof rests in the ovary of the hen , and without such coadjution would prove at best abortive : so there appears a necessity of the irons receiving the influx of the aethereal matter , which was model'd in the magnet , to beget such a motion of its own aethereal matter as might compleat its magnetism , which analogy i think fairly explains the whole supposition . fifthly , magnetical bodies are divested of their qualities either by rust or excandefaction , or if they are confin'd any length of time to a forc'd and violent position : the first partly corroding , partly distempering , and partly incumbering the little springs ; the second utterly destroying them , and the third suffering malignant and heterogeneous matter to disturb and choak them . so much good friend , for our physical consideration of magnetical bodies , for i am very loath to examine all those other phaenomena , which patienter naturalists in better times have enumerated , especially since those already discussed are the most difficultly solv'd of any of them . if you are angry to see coarse fare garnished with such variety of hard words , which i must confess is a fault much in vogue among our philosophers , and after all is no more than a vacuum disseminatum in their books , i must e'n tell you i could not help it ; delicacy of subject and newness of notion ( such as it is ) would have it so ; nor can i take offence if my opinion in a matter whereof many have wrote much to little purpose , merit not your approbation . to feed my imagination with hopes of success after the disappointments of such heroes of philosophy , were as sawcy and presumptious , as it would have been in one of hercules's wives to pretend to beat her husband after he had conquered his twelve labours ; nay , so little do i promise my self of any thing like it , that i am very apt to believe all our inquiries into the causes of magnetical operations are next to desperate , and will ever be so . indeed the all-wise authour of nature seems to have design'd them not so much objects of our curiosity , as matter of our admiration , and i might add of our imitation ; for where is there that emblem or hieroglyphick which in so lively colours represents the passions and morals of mankind ? the malicious and quarelsome world see themselves mock'd while they behold two stones fly on another for no other reason than an innate natural aversation . again the covetous may blush to see in the manner of the magnet's communication the picture of one at home , who instead of spending any part of his treasure upon himself , spends himself wholly upon that . again it 's perpetual affection of the same points of the hemisphere , exposes the ambitious and voluptuous , whose souls are so link'd to greatness and pleasure , that they seem to have forfeited the priviledge of a free will. on the other hand it tacitly teaches rational and sober men the necessity of directing their designs and actions all to one end , and in order thereto of preserving a mutual unanimity amongst themselves . as therefore the magnet seems primarily , and especially to be deputed to this moral use , for in the whole republick of nature , there is not an inanimate body more edifying , nor certainly an animate more inscrutable , so does it discharge this function in a manner most punctual and at the same time most unintelligible . and in this instance as in many others , the commodiousness and utility of the phaenomena compensate for their latency and obscurity ; for as for those artificial purposes we have taught it to serve , particularly in navigation , they do not appear to have been the genuin and natural ends of it they being altogether precarious and contingent ; so that the study of its instructions is much more safe and benificial than the study of its construction ▪ and did philosophers observe this rule in all their philosophical enquiries , it would make much more for the credit of their profession , and be of greater advantage to mankind in general ; we should have less of their errors and more of their reason ; and that science which has lost its reputation by its fallacies and presumptions , would by these means more than recover it ; nay , doubtless a clear knowledg of the true uses of things , would give us a better light into the nature of them , then their nature gives us into the uses of them . but i decline the prosecution of this argument as having been so particularly and elegantly manag'd in the case before you , by a learned gentleman of the last age ; this only i will add , that whether any or all our disquisitions of this kind succeed or fail , we shall have still new motives of expressing our praise and veneration to the almighty lord of all things ; our praise when they succed for his having permitted the children of men to know so much of the methods of his providence , and our veneration where they fail . for who can do other than adore and revere the infinite power and wisdom of the creator , when the noblest of humane faculties are not able with the nicest inspection to make any satisfactory discovery of the frame and constitution of the creature . let therefore that orizon with which we lately terminated our discourse , conclude this letter . that the omnipotent authour of all things would bestow on his rational creatures with their knowledg a proportionable largess of grace to use it to his honour and glory , and our own spiritual improvement . i hope all our friends in the country thrive . march , / . i am , sir , yours , &c. finis . a sixth letter, concerning the sacred trinity in answer to a book entituled, observations on the four letters, &c. / by john wallis ... wallis, john, - . approx. kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from -bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : - (eebo-tcp phase ). a wing w estc r ocm this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons . universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase , no. a ) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set ) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, - ; : ) a sixth letter, concerning the sacred trinity in answer to a book entituled, observations on the four letters, &c. / by john wallis ... wallis, john, - . [ ], p. printed for tho. parkhurst ..., london : . reproduction of original in huntington library. created by converting tcp files to tei p using tcp tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between and available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the , texts created during phase of the project have been released into the public domain as of january . anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. % (or pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf- unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p , characters represented either as utf- unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng nye, stephen, ?- . -- observations on the four letters. trinity -- early works to . - tcp assigned for keying and markup - aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images - mona logarbo sampled and proofread - mona logarbo text and markup reviewed and edited - pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a sixth letter , concerning the sacred trinity ; in answer to a book entituled , observations on the four letters , &c. by iohn wallis , d. d. professor of mathematicks in oxford . london : printed for tho. parkhurst , at the bible and three crowns , in cheapside , . a sixth letter concerning the sacred trinity . sir , i find from my socinian adversary , observations ( as he calls it ) on my four letters ; ( he might have said five , if he pleased . ) which i saw not till yesterday , mar. . nor do i see any great need of publishing a hasty answer . there being so little in it that deserves an answer , which had not been answered before it was written . and i may perhaps ere long meet with some such like observations upon my fifth ; and then i may at once answer both . his first head he calls the design of the letters . that which i undertook to maintain , was clearly stated thus , that it is not inconsistent with natural reason , that there may be three somewhats which are but one god ; and that what in one regard are three , may in another regard be one. to prove this ( and this only ) i brought those arguments or instances at which he cavils . this he now tells me ( p. . ) the socinians will grant me this . ( that is , they grant what i undertook to prove . ) and of which , he says , no man ever was so foolish as to doubt . and my arian adversary in like manner , ( in his answer , p. . and his vindication , p. , . ) that none but a madman would ever deny it . and that he cannot say , there is any contradiction in saying , there may be three persons in god. thus far therefore we are agreed on all hands . but he now tells me , p. . that this is not the question . yes ; this is the question that i undertook . 't is true , there be other questions between us and the socinians . but the question i undertook was that . and he knows it was so . well ; but what says he , is the question ? 't is this he says ( p. . ) whether there be three gods , or but one god. no : this is not the question . for in this we are agreed also . the socinians ( he says ) affirm there is but one god. and so do i. the proposition , he says , which ( in favour of the trinity ) i should have proved , ( that is , the task he sets me , not what i undertook ) was this , that what are in one regard three , may in another regard be so one , that all of them ( together ) are but one , and yet each of them ( singly , and by it self ) is that one. now , i think , i had proved this ; this corpus longum , corpus latum , and corpus profundum , is one cube . the corpus longum is a cube ; the corpus latum is a cube , and the corpus profundum is a cube : and yet this corpus longum , latum & profundum , is ( altogether ) but one cube . but this is latin : and his challenge is , ( p. . ) shew me that trinitarian that dares dispute the question in plain english. i 'll endeavour that too . david the son of iesse was a man ; and david king of israel was a man ; and david the father of solomon was a man : yet david the son of iesse , the king of israel , and father of solomon , was ( altogether ) but one man. and this is plain english , without the words of abstract , concrete , paternity , personality , ( at which he there cavils , ) or other hard words than what his tankard-bearer might understand . well but ( says he ) we may indeed say , this long body is a cube , meaning thereby , this long body , which is also broad and high , is a cube ; and if it were not broad and high it were not a cube : but we cannot say so here . i 'll try if i cannot hit this too . the all-wise god , is god all-sufficient ; the almighty god , is god all-sufficient ; the everlasting god , is god all-sufficient : meaning by the all-wise god , the god who is also almighty and everlasting ; and if he were not also almighty and everlasting , he were not all-sufficient . yet this all-wise , almighty , and everlasting god , is ( altogether ) but one god all-sufficient . but supposing ( says he ) the doctor 's instances do satisfy this difficulty , ( as i think they do ; ) does he not know there are many more , ( yes , he doth know it ) to which these instances are not applicable ? very true . and therefore they were not brought to prove all points which concern the trinity . they were brought to prove this point in particular , that it is not inconsistent with reason , that three somewhats may be one god. and if they prove this , it is what they were brought to prove . ( when i undertake other points , i may use other arguments . ) and this hath been said so often , that ( if he have any thing else of moment to say ) it is strange , that repeating the same objection ( without any further strength ) he should put me so often to give the same answer . his next head is of somewhats and persons . we are told , that christ and the father are one , joh. . . and these three are one , joh. . . without giving a name to these three . nor what shall we call them ? these three — what ? not three gods ; for that 's false : ( there is but one god. ) and three persons he will not allow me to call them , because it is not a scriptural word . ( person he grants is scriptural , heb. . . but not persons . ) i must not call them three nothings . ( for certainly it was never meant to be thus understood , these three nothings are one : and when christ said i and the father are one , he did not mean we two nothings are one. ) and if they be not nothing , they must be somewhat ; and three such , must be three somewhats . and i could not think of a more innocent word , to design them by . and therefore ( that we might not quarrel about words ) i was content to wave the name of persons , and ( without fixing a new name on them ) design them by the word somewhat . ( presuming that those who do not take them to be nothing , would allow them to be somewhat . ) but neither will this word pass with him . now this is a hard case . the scripture says these three , without giving them a name . and then , we must not give them a name ; because that name will be unscriptural . and yet if we do not give them a name ; he tells us , they be three somewhats , without name or notion : and that no two can agree , what this is , or what is thereby meant ; but as many writers , so many explications . p. . . to which i say ; as to the notion , i think the orthodox are all , thus far , agreed ; that they are three such somewhats in god , as differ from each other more than what we commonly call the divine attributes , but not so as to be three gods. and though ( within these limits ) divers men may diversly express themselves , yet in this notion the orthodox i think do all agree . and this i had before declared , ( let. iv . p. . ) though he please totake no notice of it . ( so that we are not without a notion of it . ) and if he will allow us to give a name to it ; that name ( whatever it be ) is so to be understood as to denote this notion . and we think the word person , a fit name to denote this notion by . but if we may not give it a name ; we must then say , the notion is such as was but now explained . but they will not allow us to give it a name . and as to our agreement or disagreement , i think the trinitarians do less disagree amongst themselves , than do the anti-trinitarians . but he says , ( p. . ) i own the word persons ( when applied to god ) to be but metaphorical ; and not to signifie just the same as when applied to men , but somewhat analogous thereunto . true ; i do so . and i have given my reasons why i do so , more than once . because two of them being represented to us in scripture under the names of father , and son , and this son said to be begotten of that father : ( which words are therefore not to be quarrelled with , because scripture language : ) no man thinks that the one is so a father , or the other so a son , or so begotten , as these words signifie concerning men ; but somewhat analogous thereunto . and in what sense they are father and son , they are ( in a sense analogous thereunto ) two persons , and the holy-ghost a third . for father and son in a proper sense amongst men , are such relatives as the latins did denote by the word persona in the first and proper signification of that word : and consequently father and son in this analogical sense , are ( in a continuation of the same analogy ) persons in a like analogical sense . but he says further , that in the explication of the athanasian creed , ( let. iii. p. . ) i interpret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , by truly persons , or properly persons . i do so : because i suppose it was intended to call them truly or properly such persons as are there meant , ( answering to the greek hypostases ; ) that is in such a sense as they are there called father and son , and that the word person is a true and proper continuation of the same analogy . i have before declared , more than once , ( in the places by him cited , p. , . ) that the true and proper sense of the latin word persona , is not to denote a man simply ( for this with them was homo , not persona , ) but such quality , state , or condition of a man , whereby he is distinguished from , or stands related to , other men . as a king , a father , a iudge , and the like . and accordingly the same man , may sustain divers persons . ( he may be a king , and a father . ) and according as such condition varies , the person also varies . 't is true that in english , ( for want of a word that answers to homo , ) we sometimes make use of the word person , when we speak indifferently of man , woman , or child ; as when a man , or woman , and an infant are spoken of as three persons : but these the latins would not have called tres personas , but tres homines . ( but if consider'd as father , mother , and child , they may , as thus related , be called tres personae . ) and the schoolmen sometimes ( and some others in imitation of them ) do in a like sense use the word persona , for want of a latin word which did indifferently respect men and angels . but these are new senses of the word persona , quite different from what the word signified in the purity of the latin tongue ; and unknown ( i suppose ) to the fathers , who first applied the word personae to those of the sacred trinity : as i had before shewed at large . let. v. p. . &c. but at this rate , he tells us , ( p. . ) the socinians will allow , god the creator , god the redeemer , and god the sanctifier , or god the father , son and holy-ghost , to be three persons . and i am not sorry to hear it . but then i would not have him say ( as here ) that i make them to be only three names , nor yet ( as p. . ) three gods. they are more than three names , but not three gods. for even amongst men , to be a father , is more than a name , or title : and , in the godhead , the father , son , and holy-ghost , differ more than so many names . and , though i will not take upon me to determine precisely , how great the distinction is , ( which is what at p. . he cites out of my let. ii . p. . ) because i would not be positive where the scripture is silent ▪ yet certainly 't is not so great as to make them three gods , but greater than merely three names , or even that between what we commonly call the divine attributes . his next head is about my explication of the athanaan creed . which he finds ( he says ) to be an explication of the damnatory clauses therein . and he is not much amiss in that observation . he was told so in the first words of that explication , and in the last words of the postscript , that it was in pursuance of a clause in a former letter to that purpose ; and that ( though other things are explained in it ) it was chiefly intended for the satisfaction of those who do believe the doctrine of it , ( but stumbled at those clauses , ) to shew that they need not ( for these clauses ) to reject that creed . he tells us ( p. . ) there is a difference between necessary and requisite . be it so . but the word there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , oportet ( not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) which i had rendred ( p. . . ) by these words , it is necessary , it is mainly necessary , 't is a principal requisite , he ought to believe it . and certainly , if he had not a great desire to cavil he would not have quarrelled at this exposition , as not full enough for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . i had said , this creed was part of the catholick faith ; the whole of which i took to be the whole word of god : which a man is obliged to believe as to the substantials of it ; but may be saved notwithstanding an ignorance or mistake as to some particulars of lesser moment . now he would have it to be understood , that this creed is the whole , not only a part of the catholick faith : that nothing must be added to it , nothing taken from it : and that every man and woman shall perish everlastingly who doth not believe and profess this , without taking ought from it , or adding ought to it . why i think otherwise , i have shewed before , and need not repeat it . but leave it to the reader to judge , whether this or that be likelier to be true . and , whether he take it to be the meaning of this writer , that all must needs be damned , who lived and died before this creed was written ; or who possibly never saw it or heard of it , ( though they should believe all the substantials of the christian faith , or word of god , and held nothing destructive of it ; ) or , who do not believe just so much and no more . but if that be his opinion , he doth interpret it more severely against himself than i would have done ; or ( i think ) any man who had not a mind to cavil . his next head is , about the opinions charged upon socinus and the socinians . concerning which , i do not think it needful to trouble the reader with repeating what i had said of those opinions , let. iii. p. , , , , . and let. iv . p. , , , , . or what he now brings in excuse of it . but shall leave it to the reader , to judge ( upon what is said on both sides ) whether i have not thereby fully proved the charge ; of the slight opinion they have of the scripture ( in competition with reason ) when it crosses any of their beloved tenets . and yet , if that be not enough , himself directs , p. . to maresius and lubertus , where ( it seems ) is more to be found to the same purpose . but his plea for himself , p. . i do admit . that if socinus have spoken erroneously , or unadvisedly , or hyperbolically , he is not obliged to defend it ( nor do i know that he is obliged to be a socinian . ) he may renounce of socinus , what he pleases . whether he who defended the thesis at franeker , were a professed socinian , or but covertly so , i tannot tell ( because i do not know the man : ) but i do not think it more strange , to find a socinian at franeker ( notwithstanding the synod of dort ) than at london . and sometime ( p. . ) he will hardly allow himself a socinian , nor any of his party . but i hope he will not deny socinus to have been a socinian . therefore so far , at least , i was right . but he would not have me blacken a man , long since dead , who never did me any injury . very well : he had before challenged me to maintain my charge against the socinians : and he now quarrels with me for so doing . he will now hardly allow any to be a socinian but socinus himself ; and yet i must not blacken socinus . what am i then to do ? i will even leave it as it is , and let the reader judge . and if he doubt , whether i , or my adversary be more fair in our quotations ; let him consult the places and judge accordingly . and particularly that of epist. . ad volkelium . i am at present not at home , nor have books about me . but sure i am , that socinus doth there ( a few lines before what this observator repeats ) directly deny , that the soul after death doth subsist ; according as i had affirmed ( though i cannot now recite the whole sentence because i have not the book at hand . ) but this the repeater ( whether by docking or decapitation ) thinks fit to omit . and then i presume the reader will then find , that per se is not meant so by it self , or of his own nature , as not by the gift and grace of god , ( for so it might as well be said of the soul before death , ) but , so by it self as not in conjunction with the body ; and then the sense must be , that though the soul with the body be praemiorum & poenarum capax , yet the soul of it self without the body , is not so . but i leave this , and the rest , wholly to the readers judgment , to judge ( upon view ) as he shall see cause . adding this also , that he will find it is not onely as to this point of the trinity , that socinus discovers so slight an opinion of the scriptures in competition with reason ; but in other points also where they do not favour his opinions . he had told us before , of some body at oxford , who , maintaining a thesis against the socinians , was baffled by his opponent . who or when this was he had not told us ; nor what that thesis was . he now tells us , p. . it was a thesis against the socinians , that they preferred reason before scripture . perhaps , when he recollects himself , ( or consults his informer , ) he may find ( if any such thing happened as he suggests ) it was on some other thesis ; and not against the socinians , but against the arminians . but , be it as he says ; i know nothing of it , and shall not concern my self about it . but in requital of this story i told him another of sandius , who having proposed a challenge , upon his problema paradoxum ( contrary to the divinity of the holy-ghost ) was so answered by wittichius , that ( as appears by a printed letter published by his friend and partner in that disputation ) they were so convinced , as to change their opinion . i now add , that it so appears , not only by his friend 's printed letter : but by another of sandius himself to wittichius ; which i have not seen ( and i think it was never printed , ) but the contents of it may be seen in another treatise of wittichius , with this title , causa spiritus sancti victrix . printed at london , . but this matter ( he says ) is both vnskilfully and vnfairly related . why unskilfully ? why unfairly ? he says , sandius was an arian ; ( be it so : ) not a socinian . very well : nor did i say that he was ; but a friend of the socinians . he was an anti-trinitarian ; and did promote ( against the trinitarians ) the common cause of arians and socinians , ( though these perhaps might quarrel amongst themselves . ) but this observator thought ( it seems ) because i did not call him an arian , that i did not know him so to be . and this ( i guess ) is what he calls unskilful . but i can give him a better reason why i should not call him so . i did not then know i should have an arian adversary to deal with , ( for my arian adversary did not yet appear : ) but my socinian adversary was already upon the stage , and with him i was now dealing . yet i could not say that sandius was a socinian , but ( that the socinian might be concern'd in the story ) i said , he was a friend of theirs . and what vnskilfulness appears in this ? had i then known ( what since i do ) that i was to be attacqued by an arian also ; i should rather have called him an anti-trinitarian , which had been common to both : but , knowing then of none but a socinian adversary , i chose to call him a friend of theirs . which was neither vnfair nor vnskilful . perhaps he thinks if not vnskilful , 't was at best vnfair to say that his partner and he changed their opinion . but was it not so ? doth not his associate expresly tell us ( in the very title-page of his letter of thanks for those animadversions ) per quas ( animadversiones ) errores suos rejicere coactus est ? ( whereby he was constrained to relinquish his errors ? ) well , but did they change all their opinions ? did they relinquish all their errors ? i believe not : but , that opinion which was then in dispute ; his problema paradoxum , and the errors therein . and , if he consult the book , he 'll find it was so : and , that this paradox was it which he did relinquish . and , what his paradox was , he might there see it as well as i. nor had he told me , who , and when , and upon what question , his supposed anti-socinian was baffled by his opponent ? or , how i might come to know it ? ( and even now , when he pretends to tell me the question , i doubt he is mistaken therein . but what vnfairness was there in all this ? when i had told him where he might find as much of it as i could tell him . but he tells us now , that sandius was satisfied indeed ( as to the point then in question , ) but not of the divinity of the holy spirit . nor did i say that he was . but i can tell him , that he was nearer , even to this , than our observator was aware , or at least nearer than he thinks fit to own to us . if he consult wittichius's latter treatise , entituled causa spiritûs sancti victrix , he will there find an extract of a manuscript letter of sandius to him . in which , to the best of my remembrance ( for i have not here the book at hand ) he tells wittichius to this purpose . that whereas in his problema paradoxum he had been of opinion that by the holy spirit might be meant the whole number of good angels , he did not now think so well of that opinion , as before their disputation : but was considering of two other opinions to be substituted instead thereof : that by the holy-ghost might be meant , not the whole number of good angels , as before ; but either some select number of them , as being a superiour order ; or else some one angel as superiour to all the rest . ( which two he suggests to wittichius's further consideration . ) but , if neither of these should succeed ( as he doubted they would not ; ) he was then inclinable to say , with him : that the holy-ghost was , indeed , the same eternal god with the father and the son. if in reciting this by memory , i have failed in any considerable circumstance , i submit it to be rectified by the book . but if our observator have seen that treatise , and knows it thus to be , i think we have more reason to complain of vnfairness , in his representing it as he doth : as if he remained fixed in this opinion , that the holy-ghost was so a person as the arians always held . i am sorry to detain the reader by following our observator in his so many long excursions which do so little concern the business before us . for what ( almost ) of what hath been hitherto mentioned of his , doth tend to the confutation of what we affirm , that what we call three persons , are more than three names , but not three gods. in ( part of ) his two last leaves , he would seem to come somewhat nearer to the business , but not much . he tells us , p. . that luther and calvin did not like the word trinity . it may be so . ( i 'll take his word for it without seeking the places ; because i do not think it worth while . ) that they say 't is barbarous and sounds odly ( i suppose he knows that by a barbarous word , is commonly meant , a word not used by classick authors , or not agreeable to the usual forms of speech in latin and greek writers . ) be it so . ( and what if i had said so too ? ) suppose a hunter should say , a trinity of hares sounds odly , and another say the like of a leash , and choose rather to say ( in plain english ) three hares : the sense is still the same . and if calvin ( who loved a smooth stile , and pure-latin words , ) should say that trinitas is a barbarous word , ( as not extant in classick authors : ) what great matter is there in all this ? i will not trouble my self to enquire whether trinitas be , in that sense used in tully ; but sure i am that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a good greek word . and words , though not so well contrived at first , yet when once received into common use , and the meaning thereof understood , we chuse to retain , rather than to make a needless change . this the common phrases of , your worship , your honour , your lordship , &c. for one worshipful , honourable , a lord , &c. have been noted long since to be not analogous to the more usual forms of speech in latin and greek writers : yet custom hath made them allowable ; and therefore we do not scruple to use them . so luther and calvin , it seems , thought the word tres to be a better latin word , in this case , than trinitas . and i had allowed our adversary , ( let. iv . p. . ) instead of trinity in vnity , to say ( if that will please him better ) three in one. yet three and trinity ( to my apprehension ) differ no more than ten and a decade ; or twelve and a dousain . but what 's all this to the matter in hand ? doth luther or calvin any where say , that father , son , and holy-ghost , are but three names ? or , that they be three gods ? if they say neither of these ; they do not contradict what we affirm . 't is but as if a man should chuse to say ten commandments , rather than a decade , or half a score ; or to say , there are , in the apostles creed , twelve articles rather than a dousain . and if these be the great disagreements he there complains of , it comes to a very small matter . to his argument , that only the father is god , because of ioh. . . to know thee the only true god ; he says , p : . i give three answers . ( i do so . ) but , he says , the first and third are destructive of one another . not so : they all agree very well . and any of them will destroy his argument . 't is not said , thee only , but the only true god. he would have us think it all one to say , thee only , to be the true god , and thee to be the only true god , i think otherwise . the one gives some seeming colour for his objection : the other , not the least shadow . his argument , the father is the only true god , therefore not the son or holy-ghost , is just in this form , the god of abraham is the only true god , therefore not the god of isaac , nor the god of iacob . which , i presume he will not allow to be a good consequence . he would have it thought i grant , that if it were as this form , the only , thee true god , then the socinians had undoubtedly gained the point . not so . he hath not heard me say so yet ; nor is he like to do . if i should say , he that brought israel out of egypt , and he only , is the true god : my meaning would be but this , that god who brought israel out of egypt , and that god only , is the true god : and this must be understood to be said of him , not as their deliverer out of egypt , but as god. for he was the true god ( and the only true god ) long before he brought israel out of egypt ; and would have been so , though they had never been ; or had never been so brought out . there may be vera praedicatio , which is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . and , of all men living , the socinians are obliged to say , that this title the true god , or only true god , belongs to him , not as father , but as god. for if ( as they would have us think ) our lord iesus christ had no being before his being made man of the virgin mary ; then neither had he a father till that time : but he was the only true god from all eternity ; and therefore not ( with this reduplication ) as father of our lord iesus christ. for he was the only true god ( according to their doctrine ) long before the man christ had a father ; and would so have been , though this man had never been . and though christ speak to him as his father , yet the title of the only true god , he ascribes to him as god. if solomon should have said to david , thou father art king of israel ; he was not therefore king of israel as father of solomon ; for he was so , long before he was solomon's father . which takes away all colour of our observator's ( imaginary ) contradiction here pretended : and leaves not the least umbrage for it . as little force is there in his other cavil , p. . if the father and son be the onely true god , then not the holy-ghost . yes ; the holy-ghost also . for though it be not here affirmed ; yet neither is it here denied . but these objections of his have been so often brought , and so often answered , that 't is tedious to see the same things brought so often over and over again . the like i say of what he repeats from cor. . . which is answered sufficiently , let. iii. p. . nor is it at all strange , or uncommon , that the word father should be sometime spoken of god personally considered , as father of our lord iesus christ , and sometime of god indefinitely ( according to his essence ) without respect to this or that person . father of spirits , heb. . . doubtless thou art our father , thou o lord art our father and our redeemer , isai. . . thou shalt call me my father , jer. . , . which the socinians must not say to be meant as to his personality , as father of our lord iesus christ , ( for such , they say , he then was not , ) but as to his essence . the everlasting father , isai. . . spoken of christ , not as to his personality ( for so , he was son ) but as to his essence . as to what he objects , p. . to that of rom. . . christ ; who is over all , god blessed for ever , amen . i refer to what is said , let. iii. p. . ( too large to repeat here ▪ ) but how amen ( which is a word of asseveration ) should make it nonsense , i do not understand . and what was said of god indefinitely , rev. . . is said particularly of christ , ver . . who was dead and is alive , ver . , . ( which description of christ in particular , he had begun at ver . . and continues beyond this place . ) if he deny it , let the reader judge . as to that of ioh. . . i refer to what hath been said already . i think there is not much more to be said thereof on either side than had been said long before either he or i began to write . and if after all he resolve to hold to his opinion ; he must give me leave to retain mine . and let the reader judge as he sees cause . and so for that of matt. . . as to all , in all those leters to which he makes no reply ; it stands as it did : and if the reader please to read them over again , he will be able to judge , whether it be all so contemptible as to have nothing of weight in it . i have said nothing to his blustring and contemptuous language , his canting ( or rather railing ) against schools , metaphysicks , mother church , alma mater academia , school-terms , gothish and vandelick terms , abstract , concrete , ( as if long and length were all one ; and all one to say david was kingdom of israel , and the kingdom of israel was father to solomon , as to say this of the king of israel ) and other the like . ( to which he is wont to run out when he hath little else to say , but would seem to say somewhat to make a noise . ) because the reader would know ( without my telling him ) that this is raving rather than arguing . and when he tells us , so often , of the brief history of the vnitarians ; why might not i as well tell him , that doctor sherlock had answered it ; and means ( i suppose ) to vindicate that answer , if he think there be need . so , when he runs division upon imperial edicts , confiscations , and banishments , seizing and burning of books , capital punishments , fire , and fagot ; ( with many other things wherein i am not concern'd , ) what is all this to me ? i do not know that i ever did him any hurt ( unless by discovering his errors ; ) i was only arguing as a disputant ; not making laws . as little need be said of a many little things , as little to the purpose : as , whether my third letter were not rather a book ? whether the things which god hath prepared for them that love him , are the onely deep things of god which we cannot comprehend ? or the onely secret things which belong to god , while things revealed belong to us ? whether , what i knew forty years ago , i had been studying and considering forty years ( without thinking of ought else all the while ) ? which certainly i could not be , for i was then forty years old . whether it be better english to say , god the creator , god the redeemer , and god the sanctifier are , or is but one god ? whether vnum ( in the neuter gender , put absolute without a substantive ) do not usually signifie one thing ? whether the word trinitas , be a pure latin , or a barbarous word , ( not to be found in tully , any more than vnitarian ) ? whether tres or trinitas be the better latin-word ? whether , what in his former letter , p. . were but old-fashioned notions , be now ( in this last ) new and cautious ? with other the like . but ( besides in these and many others , he cavils without a cause ) what 's all this to the business in hand ? or how doth it contradict what i affirm ? viz. that , what in one consideration are three , may in another consideration be but one. that , we may safely say ( without absurdity , contradiction , or inconsistence with reason , ) there may be in god , three somewhats ( which we commonly call persons ) that are but one god. that , these three , are more than three names , but not three gods. that , god the creator , god the redeemer , and god the sanctifier , ( otherwise called god the father , god the son , and god the holy-ghost , ) are such three . i see nothing of what he hath said , doth overthrow any of these . march . / . yours , i. wallis . an explication and vindication of the athanasian creed in a third letter, pursuant of two former, concerning the sacred trinity : together with a postscript, in answer to another letter / by john wallis ... wallis, john, - . approx. kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from -bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : - (eebo-tcp phase ). a wing w estc r ocm this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons . universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase , no. a ) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set ) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, - ; : ) an explication and vindication of the athanasian creed in a third letter, pursuant of two former, concerning the sacred trinity : together with a postscript, in answer to another letter / by john wallis ... wallis, john, - . [ ], p. printed for tho. parkhurst ..., london : . reproduction of original in the union theological seminary library, new york. created by converting tcp files to tei p using tcp tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between and available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the , texts created during phase of the project have been released into the public domain as of january . anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. % (or pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf- unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p , characters represented either as utf- unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng athanasian creed. trinity. theology, doctrinal. - tcp assigned for keying and markup - aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images - mona logarbo sampled and proofread - mona logarbo text and markup reviewed and edited - pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion an explication and vindication of the athanasian creed . in a third letter , pursuant of two former , concerning the sacred trinity . together with a postscript , in answer to another letter . by iohn wallis , d. d. london : printed for tho. parkhurst , at the bible and three crowns , in cheapside , . an explication and vindication of the athanasian creed . sir , in pursuance of what i have said in a former letter , concerning ( what we commonly call ) the athanasian creed ; it may not be amiss to express it a little more distinctly . we call it commonly the athanasian creed , not that we are certain it was penned ( just in this form ) by athanasius himself ; ( for , of this , i find that learned men are doubtful , ) but it was penned either by himself , or by some other about that time , according to the mind and doctrine of athanasius . in like manner as what we call the apostles creed , we take to be penned ( very anciently ) according to what doctrine the apostles had taught them , though not perhaps in those very words . but whoever was the compiler ( whether athanasius himself , or some other ) of the athanasian creed , i suppose , the damnatory sentences ( as they are called ) therein , were not by him intended to be understood with that rigor that some would now insinuate , ( who , because perhaps they do not like the main doctrines of that creed , are willing to disparage it , by representing it to the greatest disadvantage they can , ) as if it were intended , that whoever doth not explicitely and distinctly know , and understand , and assent to , all and every clause and syllable therein , could not be saved . ( which , i suppose , neither the author did intend , nor any other sober person would affirm . ) but , that the doctrine therein delivered ( concerning god and christ ) is sound and true doctrine in it self , and ought , as to the substance of it , to be believed as such , by all persons ( of age , and capacity , and who have opportunity of being well informed in it , ) who do expect salvation by christ ; at least so far as not to disbelieve the substance of it , when understood . there being no other ordinary way to be saved , ( that we know of ) than that by the knowledge and faith of god in christ. but what measures god will take in cases extraordinary , ( as of infancy , incapacity , invincible ignorance , or the like , ) is not the thing there intended to be declared ; nor is it necessary for us to know ; but to leave it rather to the wisdom and counsel of god , whose iudgments are unsearchable , and his ways past finding out , rom. . . much less do i suppose , that he intended to extend the necessity of such explicite knowledge , to the ages before christ. for many things may be requisite to be explicitely known and believed by us to whom the gospel is revealed , which was not so to them , before the veil was taken away from moses face , and immortality brought to light through the gospel , cor. . , . tim. . . nor are we always to press words according to the utmost rigor that they are possibly capable of ; but according to such equitable sence as we use to allow to other homiletical discourses , and which we have reason to believe to have been the true meaning of him whose words they are . and i have the more reason to press for such equitable construction , because i observe those hard clauses ( as they are thought to be ) annexed only to some generals ; and not to be extended ( as i conceive ) to every particular , in the explication of those generals . it begins thus ; whosoever will be saved ; before all things , it is necessary , that he hold the catholick faith. where , before all things , is as much as imprimis ; importing , that it is mainly necessary , or a principal requisite , to believe aright ; especially , concerning god , and christ. which , as to persons of years , and discretion , and who have the opportunity of being duly instructed , i think is generally allowed by all of us , to be necessary ( as to the substantials of religion ) in the ordinary way of salvation , without disputing , what god may do in extraordinary cases , or how far god may be pleased , upon a general repentance , as of sins unknown , to pardon some culpable misbelief . it follows ; which faith , except every one do keep whole and undefiled , ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) without doubt he shall perish everlastingly . that is , ( as i conceive ) unless a person ( so qualified and so capacitated , as i before expressed ) do keep it whole or sound , as to the substantials of it ( though possibly he may be ignorant of some particulars of the true faith ; ) and undefiled , or intemerate , ( without adding thereunto , or putting such a sence upon such substantials , as shall be destructive thereof , ) shall ( except he repent ) perish everlastingly . which , i think , is no more than that of mar. . . he that believeth not , shall be damned . and what limitations or mitigations are there to be allowed , are ( by the same equity ) to be allowed in the present clause before us . which therefore may ( in this true sence ) be safely admitted . and here i think fit to observe , that whereas there may be an ambiguity in the english word whole , which sometime signifies totus , and sometime sanus or salvus , it is here certainly to be understood in the latter sence , as answering to the greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . it is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 totam , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sanam or salvam . and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to keep the faith salvam & intemeratam , which is translated whole and undefiled , might ( to the same sence ) be rendered safe and sound . now a man may well be said to be safe and sound , notwithstanding a wart or a wen , or even a hurt or maim , so long as the vitals be not endangered . and so , of the catholick faith , or christian doctrine , so long as there is nothing destructive of the main substantials or fundamentals of it , though possibly there may be an ignorance or mistake , as to some particulars of lesser moment . after this preface ( between it and the conclusion , or epilogue ) there follows indeed a large exposition of ( what he declares to be ) the catholick faith ; ( that is ; to be some part of it : for i take the whole scripture to be the catholick faith ; whereof this collection is but a part . ) beginning with , the catholick faith is this : and ending with , this is the catholick faith. but it is not said , that except a man know and believe every particular of that explication , he shall perish eternally ; but only , except he keep the catholick faith ( as to the substantials of it ) safe and sound . for doubtless there may be many particulars of catholick faith ( contained in the word of god ) which a man may be ignorant of , and yet be saved . it is true , that the name of our saviour's mother was mary ; and the name of the judge who condemned him was pontius pilate : and both these are put into ( what we call ) the apostles creed ; and are part of the catholick faith ; and which ( supposing that we know them to be declared in scripture ) we ought to believe . but i see not why it should be thought ( of it self ) more necessary to salvation ( if he do not know it to be declared in scripture ) for a man to know that her name was mary , than that the name of adam's wife was eve , or abraham's wife sarah , or that one of iob's daughters was called iemima ; ( for all these are declared in scripture ; and , supposing that we know them so to be , ought to be believed as part of the catholick faith. ) nor do i know , that it is ( of it self ) more necessary to know that the name of the judge who condemned our saviour was pontius pilate , than that the name of the high-priest was caiaphus . and though one of these , and not the other , be put into the apostles creed , whereby we are more likely to know that than the other : yet both of them being true , and declared in scripture ; they are , both of them , parts of the catholick faith , and to be believed : but neither of them ( i think ) with such necessity , as that , who knows them not , cannot be saved . and what i say of this general preface in the beginning , is in like manner to be understood of the general conclusion in the end ; which ( catholick faith ) except a man believe faithfully , he cannot be saved . of which i shall say more anon . after the general preface , ( concerning the necessity of holding the catholick faith , ) he proceeds to two main branches of it , ( that of the trinity , and that of the incarnation , with the consequents thereof ; ) which he declares likewise , as what ought to be believed . that of the trinity , he declares thus in general ; and the catholick faith is this ; ( that is , this is one main part of the catholick faith ; ) namely , that we worship one god in trinity , and trinity in unity ; neither confounding the persons , nor dividing the substance . which is what we commonly say , there be three persons , yet but one god. and this general ( which , after some particular explications , he doth resume ) is what he declares ought to be believed . but he doth not lay such stress upon each particular of that explication , though true. he thus explains himself ; for there is one person of the father , another of the son , and another of the holy ghost . ( which persons therefore are not to be confounded . ) but the godhead of the father , and of the son , and of the holy ghost , is all one. that is , one substance , one god. ( which is what he said of not dividing the substance , as if the three persons should be three substances , or three gods. ) according as christ says of himself and the father , iohn . . i and the father are one : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ) that is , one thing , one substance , one god , not one person . and iohn . . these three are one ; ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) hi ires sunt unum , not unus . these three who 's , are one what. they are one thing , one substance , one god , though three persons . and as their godhead , or substance undivided , is all one ; so it follows , the glory equal , the majesty co-eternal . such as the father is , ( as to the common godhead ) such is the son , and such is the holy ghost . the father uncreate , the son uncreate , and the holy ghost uncreate . the father incomprehensible , the son incomprehensible , and the holy ghost incomprehensible . the father eternal , the son eternal , and the holy ghost eternal . for all these are attributes of the common deity , which is the same of all. and yet they are not three eternals , but one eternal . not three eternal gods , ( though three persons ) but one eternal god. as also there are not three incomprehensibles , nor three uncreated ; but one uncreated , and one incomprehensible . one and the same substance or deity , uncreated and incomprehensible . so likewise the father is almighty , the son almighty , and the holy ghost almighty ; and yet there are not three almighties , but one almighty . so the father is god , the son is god , and the holy ghost is god ; and yet there are not three gods , but one god. so likewise the father is lord , ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the word by which the greeks do express the hebrew name iehovah , the proper incommunicable name of god , ) the son lord , and the holy ghost lord ; and yet not three lords , but one lord. ( not three iehovahs , but one iehovah . ) for like as we are compelled by the christian verity to acknowledge every person by himself to be god and lord , so are we forbidden by the catholick religion , to say , there be three gods , or three lords . which are so many particular explications or illustrations of what was before said in general of not confounding the persons , nor dividing the substance . which explications , though they be all true , ( and necessary consequents of what was before said in general ; ) yet to none of them is annexed such sanction , as that whosoever doth not believe or not understand these illustrations , cannot be saved . 't is enough to salvation , if they hold the true faith , as to the substance of it , though in some other form of words , or though they had never heard the athanasian creed . nor is any such sanction annexed to the personal properties , which next follow ; the father is made of none ; neither created , nor begotten . the son is of the father alone ; not made , nor created , but begotten . the holy ghost is of the father , and of the son ; neither made , nor begotten , but proceeding . where , by the way , here is no anathematization of the greek church , ( of which those who would , for other reasons , disparage this creed , make so loud an out-cry . ) 't is said indeed he doth proceed , ( and so say they , ) but not that he doth proceed from the father and the son. and 't is said , he is of the father and of the son ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) some way or other ; ( and even this , i suppose , they would not deny ; ) but whether by procession from both , or ( if so ) whether in the same manner , it is not said ; but warily avoided . ( though indeed it seems to favour what i think to be the truth , and what in the nicene creed is said expressly , that he doth proceed from both ; and , for ought we know , in the same manner ; which yet we do not determine ) nor do i see any reason , why , on this account , we should be said to anathematize the greek church , or they to anathematize us , even though we should not exactly agree , in what sence he may be said to be of the father , and in what of the son. and those who are better acquainted with the doctrine and the languages , of the present greek churches , than most of us are , do assure us , that the differences between them and us are rather in some forms of expressions , than in the thing it self . however , those who would make so great a matter of this , should rather quarrel at the nicene creed , than the athanasian : where it is expresly said of the holy ghost , that he proceedeth from the father and from the son. 't is not therefore for the phrase filioque , that they are so ready to quarrel at this creed rather than the nicene , but from some other reason , and , most likely , because the doctrine of the trinity is here more fully expressed than in that , at which the socinian is most offended . i observe also , that these personal properties are expressed just by the scripture words , beget , begotten , proceeding , without affixing any sence of our own upon them ; but leaving them to be understood in such sence as in the scripture they are to be understood . agreeable to that modest caution , which is proper in such mysteries . it follows ; so there is one father , not three fathers ; one son , not three sons ; one holy ghost , not three holy ghosts . and in this trinity , none is afore or after other . ( that is , not in time , though in order . ) none is greater or less than another : but the whole three persons are co-eternal together , and co-equal . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . the three ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) are ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) truly persons , or properly persons , and co-eternal each with other , and co-equal . having thus finished these particular explications , or illustrations , concerning the trinity , ( without any condemning clause of those who think otherwise , other than what is there included ; namely , that if this be true , the contrary must be an errour : ) he then resumes the general , ( as after a long parenthesis , ) so that in all things ( as is aforesaid ) the unity in trinity , and the trinity in unity , is to be worshipped . and to this general , annexeth this ratification , he therefore that will he saved , must thus think of the trinity : or , thus ought to think of the trinity , or , let him thus think of the trinity , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . and to this , i suppose , we do all agree , who believe the doctrine of the trinity to be true . for , if the thing be true , those who would be saved , ought to believe it . he then proceeds to the doctrine of the incarnation . which he declares in general as necessary to salvation . furthermore , it is necessary to everlasting salvation , that he also believe rightly the incarnation of our lord iesus christ. which is no more than that of iohn . . he that believeth not the son , shall not see life , but the wrath of god abideth on him . and therefore we may safely say this also : there being no other name under heaven whereby we must be saved , neither is there salvation in any other , acts . . after this ( as before he had done of the doctrine of the trinity ) he gives first a general assertion of his being god and man ; and then a particular illustration of his incarnation . for the right faith is , that we believe and confess , that our lord iesus christ , the son of god , is god and man. what follows , is a further explication of this general . god , of the substance of the father , begotten before the worlds . and man , of the substance of his mother , born in the world. perfect god , and perfect man ; of a reasonable soul and humane flesh subsisting . equal to the father , as touching his godhead ; and inferiour to the father , as touching his manhood . who , although he be god and man , yet he is not two , but one christ. one , not by conversion of the godhead into flesh , but by taking of the manhood into god. one altogether , not by confusion of substance , but by unity of person . for as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man , so god and man is one christ. and thus far , as to the description of christ's person and natures . the particulars of which i take to be all true ; and therefore such as ought to be believed , when understood . but such ( many of them ) as persons of ordinary capacities , and not acquainted with school terms , may not perhaps understand . nor was it , i presume , the meaning of the pen-man of this creed , that it should be thought necessary to salvation , that every one should particularly understand all this : but , at most , that , when understood , it should not be disbelieved . that in the general , being most material , that iesus christ , the son of god , is god and man : the rest being but explicatory of this . which explications , though they be all true , are not attended with any such clause , as if , without the explicite knowledge of all these , a man could not be saved . he then proceeds to what christ hath done for our salvation , and what he is to do further at the last judgment , with the consequents thereof . who suffered for our salvation , descended into hell , rose again the third day from the dead . that clause of descending into hell , or hades , ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ) which we meet with here , and in the apostles creed , as it is now read , is not in the nicene creed ; nor was it anciently ( as learned men seem to be agreed ) in what we call the apostles creed . when or how it first came in , i cannot well tell : nor will i undertake here to determine the sence of it . the hebrew word sheol , and the greek hades , which here we translate hell , ( by which word we now-a-days use to denote the place of the damned , ) was anciently used to signifie , sometime the grave , sometime , the place , state , or condition of the dead , whether good or bad . and when iob prays ( iob . . ) o that thou wouldst hide me in sheol ( as in the hebrew ; ) or in hades , ( as in the greek septuagint ; ) certainly he did not desire to be in what we now call hell ; but rather ( as we there translate it ) in the grave , or the condition of those that are dead . but what it should signifie here , is not well agreed among learned men. the papists generally ( because that is subservient to some of their beloved tenents ) would have it here to signifie the place of the damned ; and would have it thought , that the soul of christ , during the time his body lay in the grave , was amongst the devils and damned souls in hell. others do , with more likelyhood , take it for the grave , or condition of the dead : and take this of christ's descending into hades , to be the same with his being buried , or lying in the grave . the rather , because in the nicene creed , where is mention of his being buried , there is no mention of his descent into hell , or hades : and here , in the athanasian creed , where mention is made of this , there is no mention of his being buried ; as if the same were meant by both phrases , which therefore need not be repeated . and though in the apostles creed there be now mention of both , yet anciently it was not so ; that of his descent into hell , being not to be sound in ancient copies of the apostles creed . if it signifie any thing more than his being buried , it seems most likely to import his continuance in the grave , or the state and condition of the dead , for some time . and the words which follow , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , say nothing of his coming out of hell , but only of his rising from the dead . but the words here stand undetermined to any particular sence ; and so they do in the apostles creed ; and are so also in the articles of our church . where it is only said , ( because in the creed it stands so , ) that we are to believe , that he descended into hell , without affixing any particular sence to it . the words , doubtless , have respect to that of acts . . where , thou wilt not leave my soul in hell , ( or hades ) nor suffer thine holy one to see corruption , is applied to christ , ( cited out of psal. . . where the same had before been spoken of david . ) and his not being left in hades , seems to suppose his having been ( for some time ) in hades , whatever by hades is there meant . and verse . his being not so left , is expresly expounded of his resurrection . and so again in acts . . now , as we have no reason to think , that david's being in hell , or sheol , ( though not to be left there ) can signifie , his being in hell among the devils and damned spirits , but rather in the grave , or the condition of the dead ; so neither that christ's being in hell , or hades , ( which is the greek word answering to the hebrew sheol ) should signifie any other than his being in the grave , or condition of the dead ; from whence , by his resurrection , he was delivered . and to this purpose seems that whole discourse of peter , acts . , — . and of paul , acts . , — . but , without determining it to any particular sence , the creed leaves the word hell indefinitely here to be understood , in the same sence what ever it be , in which it is to be understood , acts . , . and psal. . . and so far we are safe . it follows ; h●●scended into heaven ; he sitteth on the right hand of the father , god almighty . from whence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead . at whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies ; and shall give account for their own works . and they that have done good , shall go into life everlasting : and they that have done evil , into everlasting fire . ( of all which , there is no doubt but that it ought to be believed . ) ending with , this is the catholick faith. that is , this is true and sound doctrine , and such as every true christian ought to believe . and , as he had begun all with a general preface , so now he closeth all with a general conclusion : which ( catholick faith ) except a man believe faithfully , he cannot be saved . that is , the doctrine here delivered is true , ( and so i think it is in all the parts of it , ) and is ( part of ) the catholick faith : ( the whole of which faith , is the whole word of god. ) that is , part of that faith , which all true christians do , and ought to believe . which catholick faith , ( the whole of which is the whole word of god ) except a man ( so qualified as i before expressed ) do believe faithfully , ( that is , except he truly believe it ) as to the substantials of it , ( though possibly he may be ignorant of many particulars therein ) he cannot ( without such repentance as god shall accept of ) be saved . which , so limitted , ( as it ought to be ) i take to be sound doctrine , and agreeable to that of iohn . . he that believeth not , is condemned already ; because he hath not believed on the name of the only begotten son of god : and ver. . he that believeth not the son , shall not see life ; but the wrath of god abideth on him : that is , ( according to the words of this creed ) he that believeth not aright ( of god and christ ) cannot be saved . which words of christ , we may safely interpret both with an aspect on the doctrine of the trinity ( because of those words , the only begotten son of god ; ) and to that of the incarnation of christ , and the consequents thereof ; ( because of those words in the beginning of the discourse , ver. , , god so loved the world , that he gave his only begotten son , &c. and god sent his son into the world — that the world through him might be saved : ) which are the two main points insisted on in the athanasian creed . and he who doth not believe on the name of this only begotton son of god , and thus sent into the world , ( the text tells us ) shall not see life ; but the wrath of god abideth on him . which fully agrees with what is here said , except a man believe the catholick faith , ( of which the doctrine of the trinity , and of the incarnation , are there intimated , and are here expressed , to be considerable branches ) he cannot be saved . and what limitations or mitigations are to be understood in the one place , are reasonably to be allowed as understood in the other . and , consequently , those damnatory clauses ( as they are called ) in the athanasian creed ( rightly understood ) are not so formidable ( as some would pretend ) as if , because of them , the whole creed ought to be laid aside . for , in brief , it is but thus ; the preface and the epilogue tell us , that whoso would be saved , it is necessary , or ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) he ought to hold the catholick faith. which faith , except he keep whole and undefiled , or ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) safe and inviolate , he shall perish everlastingly ; or , which except he believe faithfully , he cannot be saved . which is no more severe , than that of our saviour , mark . . he that believeth not , shall be damned . he then inserts a large declaration of the catholick faith , especially as to two main points of it ; that of the trinity , and that of the incarnation . and if all he there declares be true , ( as i think it is , ) we have then no reason to quarrel with it upon that account . but he doth not say , that a man cannot be saved , who doth not know or understand every particular thereof . of the first , he says but this , he that would be saved , ought thus to think , or ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) let him thus think of the trinity ; namely , that the unity in trinity , and trinity in unity , ought to be worshipped . of the second , what he says is this , furthermore it is necessary to eternal salvation , that he believe aright the incarnation of our lord iesus christ : which is no more severe than that of our saviour , he that believeth not the son , shall not see life , but the wrath of god abideth on him ; because he hath not believed on the name of the only begotten son of god , whom god hath sent into the world , that the world through him might be saved , john . , , . beside these , there are no damnatory clauses in the whole . all the rest are but declaratory . and , if what he declares be true , we have no reason to find fault with such declaration . now as to those two points ; that of the trinity , and that of the incarnation , ( which are the only points in question , ) there is a double inquiry , ( as i have elsewhere shewed , ) whether the things be possible ; and whether they be true. the possibility may be argued from principles of reason : the truth of them from revelation only . and it is not much questioned , but that the revelation , in both points , is clear enough , if the things be not impossible . as to that of the trinity ; i have already shewed , ( in a former letter ) that there is therein no impossibility , but that what in one consideration are three , ( which we commonly call three persons , ) may yet ( in another consideration ) be one god. i shall now proceed to shew , that neither is there any impossibility , as to the incarnation of our lord jesus christ. now this consists of two branches ; that of his being born of a virgin ; and that of the hypostatical union ( as it is commonly called ) of the humane nature with the second person of the sacred trinity . as to the former of the two , there can be no pretence of impossibility . for the same god who did at first make adam of the dust of the earth , without either father or mother , and who made eve of adam's rib , ( without a mother at least , however adam may be fansied as a father , ) and who shall at the last day recall the dead out of the dust , may doubtless , if he so please , cause a woman , without the help of man , to conceive a child . there is certainly no impossibility in nature , why it may not , by an omnipotent agent , be brought to pass . and when the scripture declares it so to be , there is no reason ( if we believe the scripture ) to disbelieve the thing . it is no more than when christ cured the blind man's eyes with day and spittle : or when he said , lazarus , come forth , and he did so . or when god said , let there be light , and there was light : and , of the whole creation ; he spake , and it was done , he commanded , and it stood fast . no more than when he made aaron's rod ( a dry stick ) to bud and blossom , and yield almonds : or what is implied in that , let not the eunuch say , i am a dry tree . and not much more than when god gave abraham a son in his old age ; and , notwithstanding the deadness of sarah's womb . i was about to say , ( and it is not much amiss if i do ) it is not much more than what ( pretty often ) ( happens amongst men , when god gives both sexes to the same person , ( such there are , and have been ; and i think there is one yet living , who was first as a woman married to a man , and is since as a man married to a woman ; ) and what hinders then , but that god , if he please , may mingle the effects of both these sexes in the same body ? a little alteration in the structure of the vessels would do it . for when there is in the same body , and so near , semen virile & muliebre , what hinders but there might be a passage for them to mix ? and plants , we know , do propagate without a fellow , though it be otherwise in animals . and whereas this is said to be by the holy ghost coming upon her , and the power of the highest over shadowing the blessed virgin ; it is not much unlike that of the spirit of god's incubation , or moving upon the face of the waters . so that , as to this point , here is nothing impossible , nothing incredible . the other particular , as to the hypostatical union ; how god and man can be united in one person , may seem more difficult for us to apprehend , because we understand so little of the divine essence , and consequently are less able to determine , what is , and what is not , consistent with it . and , when all is done , if we be never so certain , that there is such an union , yet it will be hard to say how it is . but we have no reason from thence to conclude the thing impossible because we know not how it is done . because there be many other things in nature , which we are sure to be ; of which we are almost at as great a loss as to the manner how they be , as in the present case . solomon , as wise as lie was , and how well so ever skilled in natural philosophy , doth yet acknowledge himself , in many things to be at a loss , when he would search out the bottom of natural things , and even when he made it his business so to do . when ( says he ) i applied my heart to know wisdom , and to see the business that is done upon the earth : then i beheld all the work of god ; that a man cannot find out the work of god that is done under the sun : because though a man labour to seek it out , yet he shall not find it . yea further , though a wise man seek to know it , yet shall he not be able to find it , eccles. . , . and shall we then say , of the deep things of god , the thing is impossible , because we cannot find it out ? and if we consider how many puzzling questions god puts to iob , in the , , , , . chapters of iob , even in natural things , we may very well ( as iob did ) abhor our selves in dust and ashes , and be ashamed of our ignorant curiosity ; and confess ( as he doth ) i have uttered what i understood not ; things too wonful for me which i know not : when he found he had talked like a fool , while he thought to be wise , and would measure the power and wisdom of god by the narrow limits of our understanding : and might come to iob's resolution ( when he had well weighed the matter ) i know that thou canst do every thing , and that no thought can be withholden from thee , job . , , . the wind bloweth where it listeth , ( not where you please to appoint it , ) thou hearest the sound thereof , but canst not tell whence it cometh , or whither it goeth , ( saith christ to nicodemus : ) but shall we therefore conclude , the wind doth not blow , because we know not how or whence it bloweth ? or , that god cannot command the winds , because we cannot ? we should rather conclude , the wind doth certainly blow , ( because we hear the sound of it , ) though we know neither how , nor whence : and , though they do not obey us , yet the wind and the seas obey him . now ( as he there further argues ) if , when he tells us of earthly things , we do not apprehend it , how much more if he tell us of heavenly things ? of the deep things of god ? but ( to come a little nearer to the business ) consider we a little the union of our own soul and body . 't is hardly accountable , nor perhaps conceivable by us , ( who are mostly conversant with material things , ) how a spiritual immaterial being ( such as our souls are ) and capable of a separate existence of its own , should inform , actuate , and manage a material substance , such as is that of our body , and be so firmly united as to be one person with it . by what handle can a spirit intangible take hold of a tangible material body , and give motion to it ? especially if we should admit lucretius's notion ; tangere vel tangi , nisi corpus , nulla potest res : ( which he repeats almost as often as homer doth his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) who doth thence repute it impossible for an immaterial being to move a body . but we who believe the soul to be a a spirit , know it to be possible . much more is it possible for god ( though a being infinitely act. , , , . more pure ) who giveth to all , life and breath and all things ; and in whom we live and move and have our being ; and who is not far from every one of us . it would be hard for us to give an intelligible account , either how god moves all things , or how our soul moves the body ; yet we are sure it is so . that a body may move a body , seems not so strange to apprehend , ( for we see one engine move another ; ) but , by what mechanism , shall a spirit give motion to a body when at rest ? or , stop it when in motion ? or , direct its motions this way or that way ? it would be thought strange , that a thought of ours should move a stone : and it is as hard to conceive ( did we not see it daily ) how a thought should put our body in motion , and another thought stop it again . yet this we see done every day , though we know not how. and it is almost the same thing in other animals . and more yet , when an angel assumes a body . there are none of these things we know , how ; and yet we know , they are done . i shall press this a little farther . our soul ( we all believe ) doth ( after death ) continue to exist , in a separate condition from the body . and , i think , we have reason to believe also , that it will continue to act as an intellectual agent , ( not to remain in a stupid sensless 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) else i see not why paul should desire to depart , or to be dissolved , and to be with christ , which is far better ; rather than to abide in flesh. for while he abides in the flesh , he hath some enjoyment of christ , ( as well as an opportunity of doing some service ) which is more desirable , if when he is departed , he have none at all . and , how can he then say , that to dye is gain ? whether the soul thus separated shall be said to have a subsistence as well as an existence ; or , whether it may be properly said then , to be an intire person ; ( as the soul and body are , before death , and after the resurrection ) i will not dispute , because , that were to contend about words , and such words so signify , as we please to define them , and bear such a sence , as we please to put upon them . but it is ( as the angels are ) an intellectual , spiritual agent ; and we use to say , actiones sunt suppositorum ; and suppositum rationale , is either a person , or so near a person , that it would be so if men please to call it so . and the spiritual being , which doth now separately exist , shall at the resurrection , resume a body into the same personality with it self , and shall with it become one person , as before death it had been . now if a spiritual immaterial intellectual being , separately existent by it self , and separately acting as an intellectual agent , may , at the resurrection , assume or reassume a material corporeal being ( heterogeneous to it self ) into the same personality with it self , or so as to become one person with it , while yet it self remains spiritual as before : what should hinder ( for it is but one step further ) but that a divine person , may assume humanity , into the same personality with it self , without ceasing to be a divine person as before it was ? if it be said , that person and personality in the sacred trinity , are not just the same as what we so call in other cases : it is granted ; and by these words ( which are but metaphorical ) we mean no more , but somewhat analogous thereunto ; and which , ( because of such analogy ) we so call , as knowing no better words to use instead thereof : according as we use the words , father , son , generate , beget , and the like , in a metaphorical sence , when applied to god. for no words , borrowed from created beings , can signifie just the same when applied to god , as when they were applied to men , but somewhat analogous thereunto . and if the soul ( though we know not how ) may and do ( at the resurrection ) assume a body so as to become the same person with it self ( though neither the body be thereby made a soul , nor the soul a body ; but remain as before , that a body , and this a soul , though now united into one person : ) why may not a divine person assume humanity , so to be what is analogous to what we call a person ; the humanity remaining humanity , and the divinity remaining divinity , though both united in one christ ; though we do not particularly know how ? we should be at a great loss , if ( to answer an atheist , or one who doth not believe the scriptures ) we were put to it , to tell him , how god made the world ? of what matter ? with what tools or engines ? or , how a pure spirit could produce matter where none was ? he would tell us perhaps , ex nihilo nihil , in nihilum nil posse reverti ; where nothing is , nothing can be made : and what once is , ( though it may be changed ) can never become nothing : and will never believe the world was made , ( but rather was from all eternity ) except we can tell him , how it was made . now , if in this case , we may satisfie our selves ( though perhaps it will not satisfie him ) by saying , god made it , but we know not how : the same must satisfie us here ; that christ was incarnate , ( god and man ) we are certain , ( for so the scripture doth assure us , as well as , that god made the world ; ) but , how god made the world ; or , how the son of god assumed humanity , we cannot tell . nor indeed is it fit for us to enquire , farther than god is pleased to make known to us . all further than this , are but the subtile cob-webs of our brain : fine , but not strong . witty conjectures , how it may be ; rather than a clear resolution , how it is . another objection i have met with : to which the objecters must be contented with the same answer ; we know it is , but we know not how. it would be endless for us , and too great a curiosity , to think our selves able fully to explicate all the hidden things of god. the objection is this : since the three persons cannot be divided ; how is it possible , that one of them can assume humanity , and not the other ? and why the second person , and not the first or third ? as to the question , why ? i say , it is so , because so it pleased god ; and he giveth not account of his matters ; he is not accountable to us , why he so willeth . as to the question , how is it possible ? i see no difficulty in that at all . the persons are distinguished , though not divided . as in the divine attributes , god's justice and mercy are distinguishable ; though in god they cannot be divided . and accordingly , some things are said to be effects of his justice , others of his mercy . so the power and will of god ( both which are individual from himself : ) but when we say god is omnipotent , we do not say he is omnivolent . he wills indeed all things that are , ( else they could not be ) but he doth not will all things possible . and the like of other attributes . if therefore we do but allow as great a distinction between the persons , as between the attributes , ( and certainly it is not less , but somewhat more , ) there is no incongruity in ascribing the incarnation to one of the persons , and not to the rest . 't is asked further , how i can accommodate this to my former similitude , of a cube and its three dimensions ; representing a possibility of three persons , in one deity . i say , very easily . for it is very possible , for one face of a cube , suppose the base , ( by which i there represented the second person , as generated of the father , ) to admit a foil , or dark colour , while the rest of the cube is transparent ; without destroying the figure of the cube , or the distinction of its three dimensions , which colour is adventitious to the cube . for the cube was perfect without it , and is not destroyed by it . which may some way represent christ's humiliation . who being equal with god , was made like unto us , and took upon him the form of a servant , phil. . , . so that , upon the whole matter , there is no impossibility in the doctrine of the incarnation , any more than in that of the trinity . and , supposing them to be not impossible ; it is not denied but that they are , both of them , sufficiently revealed ; and therefore to be believed , if we believe the scripture . and of the other articles in the athanasian creed , there is as little reason to doubt . there is therefore no just exception , as to the declarative part of the athanasian creed . and , as to the damnatory part ; we have before shewed , that it is no more severe , than other passages in scripture to the same purpose ; and to be understood with the like mitigations as those are . and , consequently , that whole creed , as hitherto , may justly be received . 't is true , there be some expressions in it , which , if i were now to pen a creed , i should perhaps chuse to leave out : but , being in , they are to be understood according to such sence as we may reasonably suppose to be intended , and according to the language of those times when they did use to anathematize great errors , which they apprehended to be destructive of the christian faith , as things of themselves damnable , if not repented of . and , i suppose , no more is here intended ; nor of any other errors , than such as are destructive of fundamentals . oxford , octob. . . yours , iohn wallis . postscript . november . . when this third letter was printed , and ready to come abroad , i stopped it a little for this postscript ; occasioned by a small treatise which came to my hands , with this title , dr. wallis ' s letter , touching the doctrine of the blessed trinity , answered by his friend . it seems , i have more friends abroad than i am aware of . but , who this friend is , or whether he be a friend , i do not know . it is to let me understand , that a neighbour of his , reputed a socinian , is not convinced by it : but names some socinian authors , who endeavour to elude scriptures alledged for the trinity , by putting some other sence upon them . he might have named as many , if he pleased , who have ( to better purpose ) written against those authors , in vindication of the true sence . and if he should repeat what those have said on the one side ; and i , say over again , what those have said on the other side ; we should make a long work of it . but he knows very well , that was not the business of my letter , to discourse the whole controversie at large , ( either as to the evidence , or as to the antiquity , of the doctrine . ) for this i had set aside at first , ( as done by others , to whom i did refer : ) and confined my discourse to this single point , that there is no impossibility ( which is the socinians great objection ) but that what in one consideration is three , may in another consideration be one. and if i have sufficiently evinced this , ( as i think i have ; and i do not find that he denies it ; ) i have then done what i there undertook . and , in so doing , have removed the great objection , which the socinians would cast in our way : and , because of which , they think themselves obliged to shuffle off other arguments on this pretence . now ( whether he please to call this a metaphysick , or mathematick lecture , ) certain it is , that there are three distinct dimensions ( length , breadth , and thickness ) in one cube . and , if it be so in corporeals , there is no pretence of reason , why in spirituals 〈◊〉 should be thought impossible , that there be ●●ree somewhat 's which are but one god. and these somewhat 's , till he can furnish us with a better name , we are content to call persons , ( which is the scripture word , heb. . . ) which word we own to be but metaphorical , ( not signifying just the same here , as when applied to men , ) as also are the words , father , son , generate , begot , &c. when applied to god. and more than this need not be said , to justifie what there i undertook to defend . now 't is easie for him ( if he so please ) to burlesque this , or turn it to ridicule , ( as it is , any the most sacred things of god ; ) but not so safe , ludere cum sacris . the sacred trinity ( be it as it will ) should by us be used with more reverence , than to make sport of it . i might here end , without saying more . but because he is pleased to make some excursions , beside the business which i undertook to prove , ( and which he doth not deny ; ) i will follow him in some of them . he finds fault with the similitude i brought , ( though very proper to prove what it was brought for , ) as too high a speculation for the poor labourers in the country , and the tankard-bearers in london . and therefore ( having a mind to be pleasant ) he adviseth rather ( as a more familiar parallel ) to put it thus , i mary , take thee peter james and john for my wedded husband , &c. ( thinking this , i suppose , to be witty. ) and truly ( supposing peter , iames , and iohn , to be the same man , ) it is not much amiss . but i could tell him , with a little alteration , ( if their majesties will give me leave to make as bold with their names , as he doth with the names of christ's mother , and of his three disciples which were with him in the mount at his transfiguration , matth. . . ) it were not absurd to say , i mary , take thee henry william nassaw ; without making him to be three men , or three husbands ; and without putting her upon any difficulty ( as is suggested ) how to dispose of her conjugal affection . and , when the lords and commons declared him to be king of england , france , and ireland ; they did not intend , by alotting him three distinct kingdoms , to make him three men. and when , for our chancellor , we made choice of iames , duke , marquess and earl of ormond ; though he had three distinct dignities , he was not therefore three men , nor three chancellors . and when tully says * , sustineo unus tres personas ; meam , adversarii , judicis ; which is in english , ( that the tankard-bearer may understand it , ) i being one and the same man , do sustain three persons ; that of myself , that of my adversary , and that of the iudge : he did not become three men , by sustaining three persons . and ( in this answer to my letter ) the friend and his neighbour , may ( for ought i know ) be the same man , though he sustain two persons . and , i hope , some of these resemblances , may be so plain , and so familiar , as that he and his tankard-bearer may apprehend them : and thence perceive , it is not impossible that three may be one. for if ( among us ) one man may sustain three persons , ( without being three men , ) why should it be thought incredible , that three divine persons may be one god ? ( as well as those three other persons be one man ? ) nor need he the less believe it for having ( as this answerer suggests ) been taught it in his catechism , or ( as timothy did the scriptures ) know it from a child . but i would not have him then to tell me , the father is a duke , the son a marquess , the holy ghost an earl , ( according as he is pleased to prevaricate upon the length , breadth and thickness of a cube ; ) but thus rather , that , god the creator , god the redeemer , and god the sanctifier , are the same god. that god the creator is omnipotent and allsufficient ; that god the redeemer is so too ; and god the sanctifier likewise . that god the creator is to be loved with all our heart ; and so god the redemer , and god the sanctifier . and then there will be no absurdity in all this . as to what he says , that all people that have reason enough to understand numbers , know the difference between one , and more than one ; i might reply , that all people who can tell mony , know that three groats are but one shilling , and three nobles are one pound ; and what in one consideration is three , may in another consideration be but one. which , if it look like a slight answer , is yet sufficient to such an argument . he tells me somewhat of dr. sherlock , ( wherein i am not concerned , ) and somewhat of the brief history of the unitarians , ( of which his neighbour gives the friend a copy ; ) but he doth not tell me , as he might , ( and therefore i tell him ) that dr. sherlock hath confuted that history . but dr. sherlock says nothing contrary to what i defend . for if there be such distinction ( between the three persons ) as he assigns , then at least , there is a distinction ( which is what i affirm , without saying how great it is ; ) . nor doth he any where deny them to be one god. he tells me a story of somebody , who , in a publick disputation at oxford , maintaining a thesis against the socinians , was baffled by his opponent . whom , or when , he means , i do not know ; and so say nothing to it : but , that i may not be in his debt for a story , i shall tell him another , which will be at least as much to the purpose as his . it is , of their great friend , christophorus christophori sandius , a diligent promoter of the socinian cause . he printed a latin thesis or discourse against the divinity of the holy ghost , which he calls problema paradoxum de spiritu sancto , with a general challenge to this purpose , ut siquis in toto orbe eruditorum forte sit , qui doctrinâ magis polleat , quam quibuscum hactenus sit collocutus , ea legat quae à se publice sint edita argumenta , seque errare moneat , ac rectius sentire doceat . hereupon , wittichius accepts the challenge , and writes against sandius . to which sandius answers , ( taking in another as a partner with him in the disputation . ) and wittichius replies . and that with so good success , that sandius and his partner , acknowledged themselves to be convinced by it , and to change their opinion . this happening but a little before sandius his death ; his partner ( surviving ) published to the world an account hereof , ( and of sandius declaring , before his death , that he was so convinced , ) in a letter of thanks to wittichius for it . what sandius would have done further , if he had lived a little longer , we cannot tell . that of wittichius bears this title , causa spiritûs sancti , personae divinae , ejusdem cum patre & filio essentiae , ( contra c. c. s. problema paradoxum , ) asserta & defensa , à christophoro wittichio . lugduni batavorum apud arnoldum doude , . the letter of thanks bears this title , epistola ad d. christophorum gittichium professorem lugdunensem ; qua gratiae ei habentur pro eruditissimis ipsius in problema de spiritu sancto animadversionibus : scripta à socio authoris problematis paradoxi : per quas errores suos rejicere coactus est . coloniae , apud ioannem nicolai . he takes it unkindly , that i charge it upon some of the socinians that though they do not think fit directly to reject the scriptures , yet think themselves obliged to put such a forced sence upon them , as to make them signifie somewhat else . and tells me of some socinians , who have so great a respect for the scriptures , as to say that the scripture contains nothing that is repugnant to manifest reason ; and that what doth not agree with reason , hath no place in divinity , &c. but this is still in order to this inference ; that therefore what they think not agreeable to reason , must not be thought to be the sence of scripture : and therefore that they must put such a force upon the words , how great soever , as to make them comply with their sence . if he except against the words , how great a force soever , as too hard an expression of mine : they are socinus's own words , ( in his epistle to balcerovius , of ianuary . . ) certe contraria sententia adeo mihi & absurda & perniciosa ( pace augustini , &c. dixerim ) esse videtur , ut quantacunque vis potius pauli verbis sit adhibenda , quam ea admittenda . that is , the contrary opinion ( with augustin's leave , and others of his mind ) seems to me so absurd and pernicious , that we must rather put a force , how great soever , upon paul's words , than admit it . and , as to the suspicion i had of some of their sentiments , as to spiritual subsistences , ( that it may not appear to be groundless ) he doth ( in his epist. . ad volkelium ) absolutely deny , that the soul after death doth subsist ; and adds expresly , ostendi me sentiresnon ita vivere post hominis ipsius mortem , ut per se praemiorum poenarumve capax sit : that is , that the soul after death doth not subsist ; nor is in a capacity of being , by it self , rewarded or punished . and how he can then think it an intelligent being , i do not see . st. paul , it seems , was of another mind , when he had a desire to be dissolved ( or depart hence ) and to be with christ , as being far better for him , than to abide in the flesh , phil. . , . and willing rather to be absent from the body , and present with the lord , cor. . . now i do not understand the advantage of his being with christ , or being present with the lord ; if he were then to be in a sensless condition , not capable of pain or pleasure , punishment or reward . in epist. . ad dudithium , we have these words , unusquisque sacrae scripturae ex suo ipsius sensu interpres : eaque quae sibi sic arrident pro veris admittere de bet ac tenere , licet universus terrarum orbis in alia omnia iret . that is , every one is to interpret scripture accerding to his own sence : and what so seems pleasing to him , he is to imbrance and maintain , though all the world be against it . socinus , in his tract , de ecclesia , pag. . says thus , non attendendum quid homines doceant sentiantve , vel antehac docuerint aut senserint , quicunque illi tandem , aut quotcunque , sint aut fuerint . which is pretty plain . i am not ( says he ) to regard what other men do teach or think , or have before now taught or thought , whosoever , or how many soever , they be or have been . and if his whosoever are not here to be extended to the sacred writers ; he tells us of them elsewhere , ego quidem , etiamsi non semel , sed saepe , id in sacris monimentis scriptum extaret , non idcirco tamen ita rem prorsus se habere crederem . soc. de jesu christo servatore , par. . cap. . operum tom. . p. . as for me ( saith he ) though it were to be found written in the sacred moniments , not once , but many times , i would not yet for all that believe it so to be . and a little before , in the same chapter , ( having before told us , that he thought the thing impossible , ) he adds , cum ea quae fieri non posse aperte constat , divinis etiam oraculis ea facta fuisse in speciem diserte attestantibus , nequaquam admittantur ; & idcirco sacra verba , in alium sensum quam ipsa sonant , per inusitatos etiam tropos quandoque explicantur . that is , when it doth plainly appear , ( or when he thinks so , whatever all the world think beside ) that the thing cannot be ; then , though the divine oracles do seem expresly to attest it , it must not be admitted : and therefore the sacred words are , even by unusual tropes , to be interpreted to another sence than what they speak . which sayings are , i think , full as much as i had charged him with . and if these instances be not enough , i could give him more of like nature . but i shall conclude this with one of a later date : at a publick disputation at franeker , octob. . . where ( amongst others ) this thesis was maintained ; scripturae divinitatem non aliunde quam ex ratione adstrui posse ; eosque errare , qui asserere sustinent , si ratio aliud quid nobis dictaret quam scriptura , huic potius esse credendum . and when ulricus huberus ( because it was not publickly censured , as he thought it deserved to be ) did oppose it in word and writing ; the same was further asserted , in publick disputations , and in print , by two other professors in franeker , in vindication of that former thesis ; that , if reason do dictate to us any thing otherwise than the scripture doth ; it is an error to say , that , in such case , we are rather to believe the scripture . an account of the whole is to be seen at large in a treatise entituled , ulrici huberi , supremae frisiorum curiae ex-senatoris , de concursu rationis & scripturae liber . franakerae apud hen. amama & zachar. taedama , . and a breviate of it in the lipsick transactions for the month of august , . and , after this , i hope this answerer will not think me too severe in charging such notions on some of the socinians , while yet ( i said ) i was so charitable as to think divers of them were better minded . but what should make him so angry at what i said of guessing , i cannot imagine . that there is a distinction between the three , we are sure ; ( this i had said before , and the answerer now says , it is so . ) but not such as to make three gods ; ( this i had said also , and the answerer says so too . ) that the father is said to beget , the son to be begotten , and the holy ghost to proceed , i had said also , ( and i suppose he will not deny , ) because thus the scripture tells us . ( and whatever else the scripture tells us concerning it , i readily accept . ) but if it be further asked , ( beyond what the scripture teacheth , ) as , for instance , what this begetting is , or , how the father doth beget his only begotten son ; this , i say , we do not know , ( at least i do not ) because this , i think , the scripture doth not tell us ; ( and of this therefore i hope this gentleman will give me leave to be ignorant : ) certainly it is not so as when one man begets another ; but how it is , i cannot tell . and if i should set my thoughts awork , ( as some others have done , and each according to his own imagination ) to guess or conjecture , how perhaps it may be ; i would not be positive , that just so it is : because i can but guess or conjecture , i cannot be sure of it . ( for i think it is much the same as if a man born blind , and who had never seen , should employ his fancy to think , what kind of thing is light or colour : of which it would be hard for him to have a clear and certain idea . ) and if this gentleman please to look over it again , i suppose he will see , that he had no cause to be so angry , that i said , we can but guess herein , at what the scripture doth not teach us . that the socinians have set their wits awork to find out other subsidiary arguments and evasions against the trinity , beside that of its inconsistence with reason , i do not deny : but that is the foundation , and the rest are but props . and if they admit , that there is in it no inconsistence with reason ; they would easily answer all the other arguments themselves . i thought not to meddle with any of the texts on either side , because it is beside the scope which i proposed , when i confined my discourse to that single point , of it s not being impossible or inconsistent with reason : and did therefore set aside other considerations , as having been sufficiently argued by others , for more than an hundred years last past . but having already followed him in some of his excursions , i shall briefly consider the two signal places which he singles out as so mainly clear . in the former of them , iohn . . this is life eternal , that they might know thee the only true god , and iesus christ whom thou hast sent ; he puts a fallacy upon us : which perhaps he did not see himself , or at least hoped we would not see it . and therefore i desire him to consider , that it is not said thee only to be the true god ; but thee , the only true god. and so in the greek ; it is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . the restrictive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , only , is not annexed to thee , but to god. to know thee to be the only true god ; that is , to be that god , beside which god , there is no other true god. and we say the like also , that the father is that god , beside which there is no other true god : and say , the son is also ( not another god , but ) the same only true god. and if those words , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; should be thus expounded , to know thee to be the only true god ; and whom thou hast sent , iesus christ , ( to be the same only true god ; ) repeating 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he would not like that interpretation ; but both the words and the sence will very well bear it , ( without such force as they are fain to put upon many other places . ) or if , without such repetition , we take this to be the scope of the place ; to set forth the two great points of the christian religion , or way to eternal life ; that there is but one true god ( though in that godhead there be three persons , as elsewhere appears , ) in opposition to the many gods of the heathen : and the doctrine of redemption , by iesus christ , whom god hath sent , ( of which the heathen were not aware : ) the sence is very plain . and nothing in it so clear , as he would have us think , against the trinity ; but all very consistent with it . and the same answer serves to his other place , cor. . . but to us there is but one god , the father , of whom are all things , and we in him , ( or for him : ) and one lord iesus christ , by whom are all things , and we by him . for here also one god may be referred 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , both to the father ( if here taken as a distinct person ) and to the lord iesus christ : or , without that , it is manifest , that one god is here put in opposition ( not to the plurality of persons , as we call them , in one deity ; but ) to the many gods amongst the heathen : and our one saviour , against their many saviours . as is manifest , if we take the whole context together ; we know that an idol is nothing in the world : and that there is no other god but one . for though there be that are called gods , whether in heaven or in earth , ( as there be gods many , and lords many : ) but to us there is but one god , the father , of whom are all things , and we in him ; and one lord iesus christ , by whom are all things , and we by him , ver. , , . where it is evident , that the scope of the place is , not to shew either how the persons ( as we call them ) or how the attributes of that one god are distinguished amongst themselves : but to set our one god ( who is the father or maker of all things , ) in opposition to the many gods of the idolatrous world : and our one saviour or redeemer , against their many saviours . indeed , if we should set up our jesus christ to be another god , the text would be against us : but not when we own him for the same god. so that here is nothing clear in either place ( as he pretends ) against christ's being the same god with the father . but in that other place of iohn . ( which he labours to elude ) the evidence for it doth so stare him in the face , that if he were not ( as he speaks ) wilfully blind , ( or did wink very hard ) he must needs see it . in the beginning was the word ; and the word was with god ; and the word was god. the same was in the beginning with god. all things were made by him ; and without him was not any thing made that was made . in him was life , and the life was the light of men , ( ver. , , , . ) he was in the world ; and the world was made by him ; and the world knew him not . he came unto his own , and his own received him not . but to as many as received him , he gave power ( or right , or privilege , ) to become the sons of god , even to them that believe on his name , ( ver. , , . ) and the word was made flesh , and dwelt among us ; and we beheld his glory , the glory as of the only begotten of the father ; full of grace and truth , ( ver. . ) why he should not think this very clear , is very strange , if he were not strangely prepossessed . unless he think nothing clear , but such as no man can cavil against . but there can hardly be any thing said so clearly , but that some or other ( if they list to be contentious ) may cavil at it , or put a forced sence upon it . for thus the whole doctrine of christ , when himself spake it , ( and he spake as clearly , as he thought fit to speak , ) was cavilled at . and himself tells us the reason of it , matth. . , . and ioh. . , , , . and after him st. paul , acts . . and rom. . . not for want of clear light , but because they shut their eyes . in iohn . it is thus , but though he had done so many miracles before them , yet they believed not on him : that the saying of esaias the prophet might be fulfilled , which he spake ; lord , who hath believed our report ? and to whom hath the arm of the lord been revealed ? therefore they could not believe , because esaias said again , he hath blinded their eyes and hardened their heart , that they should not see with their eyes , nor understand with their heart , and be converted , and i should heal them . these things said esaias , when he saw his glory and spake of him . and thus in matth . hearing ye shall hear and shall not understand , and seeing ye shall see and shall not perceive . for this peoples heart is waxed gross , and their ears are dull of hearing , and their eyes they have closed ; lest at any time they should see with their eyes , and hear with their ears , and understand with their heart , and should be converted , and i should heal them . so that 't is no argument of a place or doctrine's not being clear , because prejudiced persons are able to pick cavils at it , or put a forced sence upon it . but let us see what these cavils are . this i confess ( saith he ) were to the purpose , if by the term word could be meant ( he should rather have said , be meant ) nothing else but a pre-existing person ; and , by the term god , nothing but god almighty the creator of heaven and earth ; and if taking those terms in those sences did not make st. john write nonsence . now in reply to this , i first take exception to that phrase , if it could be meant of nothing else . for if his meaning be this ▪ if no caviller can start up another sence , right or wrong : this is no fair play . for hardly can any thing be so plain , but that somebody may find a pretence to cavil at it . it is enough for us therefore , if it be thus meant , without saying , it is impossible to put a forced sence upon it . but this would have spoiled his design , in mustering up a great many forced sences ; not that he thinks them to be true , ( for surely they be not all true ; and i think none of them are ) nor telling us which he will stick to ; but only that he may cast a mist ; and then tell us ( which is all that he concludes upon it ) the place is abscure , he knows not what to make of it . but when the mist is blown off , and we look upon the words themselves , they seem plain enough , as to all the points he mentions . the word which was with god , and was god , and by whom the world was made , and which was made flesh and dwelt amongst us , and we saw his glory , and of whom iohn bare witness ; must needs be a person ; and can be no other than our lord iesus christ , who was born of the virgin mary . and this word , which was in the beginning , and by whom the world was made , must needs have been pre-existent before he was so born . and this word , which was with god ( the true god ) and was god , and by whom the world was made , and who is one with the father , ( joh. . . ) and * who is over all , god blessed for ever , ( rom. . . ) is no other god than god almighty , creator of heaven and earth . ) and this plain sence the words bear , without any force put upon them : without any incoherence , inconsistence , or contradiction ; s●●e that they do not agree with the socinian doctrine . and there is no other way to avoid it , but what socinus adviseth in another case , quantacunque vis verbis adhibenda ; putting a force upon the words , no matter how great , to make them , not to signifie , what they plainly do . or else to say , ( which is his last refuge ) that st. iohn writes nonsence . but let him then consider , whether this do savour of that respect which he would have us think they have for the holy scripture ; and whether we have not reason to susp●●t the contrary of some of them . and , whether we have not reason to complain of their putting a forced sence upon plain words , to make them comply with their doctrine . and lastly , whether it be not manifest , that the true bottom of their aversion from the trinity ( whatever other subsidiary reasons they may alledge ) is , because they think it nonsence , or not agreeable with their reason . ( for , set this aside , and all the rest is plain enough ; but , because of this , they scruple not to put the greatest force upon scripture . ) nor is there any other pretence of nonsence in the whole discourse , save that he thinks the doctrine of the trinity to be nonsence . so that the whole controversie with him , turns upon this single point , whether there be such impossibility or inconsistence , as is pretended . that of iohn . . there be three that bear record in heaven , the father , the word , and the holy ghost ; and these three are one : is wanting , he says , in some copies . and it is so ; ( and so are some whole epistles wanting in some copies . ) but we will not for that quit the place . for we have great reason to think it genuine . if this difference of copies happened at first by chance ( upon an oversight in the transcriber ) in some one copy , ( and thereupon in all that were transcribed from thence ; ) it is much more likely for a transcriber to leave out a line or two which is in his copy , than to put in a line or two which is not . and if it were upon design , it is much more likely that the arians should purposely leave it out , ( in some of their copies ) than the orthodox foist it in . nor was there need of such falsification ; since 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , concludes as strongly , as to a plurality of persons , ( and of the son in particular , which was the chief controversie with the arians ; ) as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth as to all the three . and , i think , it is cited by cyprian , in his book de unitate ecclesiae , before the arian controversie was on foot . and therefore , if it were done designedly ( and not by chance ) it seems rather to be razed out by the arians , than thrust in by the orthodox . and the language of this in the epistle , suits so well with that of the same author in his gospel , that it is a strong presumption , that they are both from the same pen. the word , in iohn . . agrees so well with the word in iohn . ( and is peculiar to st. iohn : ) and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in iohn . . with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in iohn . . ( these three are one , with i and the father are one ) that i do not at all doubt its being genuine . and that evasion of his , these three are one , that is , one in testimony , will have no pretence in the other place , where there is no discourse of testimony at all : but i and the father are one , ( unum sumus ) must be one thing , one in being , one in essence . for so adjectives in the neuter gender , put without a substantive , do usually signifie both in greek and latin : and there must be some manifest reason to the contrary , that should induce us to put another sence upon them . the other place , matth. . . baptizing them in ( or into ) the name of the father , and of the son , and of the holy ghost ; is not so slight an evidence as he would make it . for whether 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) be rendred in the name , and taken to denote the joint authority of father , son , and holy ghost , admitting the person baptized into the christian church : or , into the name , ( which this answerer seems to like better ) and taken to denote the dedication of the person baptized to the joint service or worship of father , son , and holy ghost ; ( baptism it self being also a part of divine worship : ) they are all conjoined ; either , as in joint authority ; or as joint objects of the same religious worship ; and , for ought appears , in the same degree . and socinus himself doth allow , the son to be worshipped with religious worship ; as adoration , and invocation ; as lawful at least , if not necessary . now when this answerer tells us of the first commandment , thou shalt have no other god but me , ( the god of israel ; ) he might as well have remembred that of christ , matth. . . thou shalt worship the lord thy god , and him only shalt thou serve . and therefore since socinus ( and other of his followers ) do allow christ to be worshipped , they must allow him to be god , even the god of israel . and i am mistaken if he be not expresly called , the lord god of israel . luke . . many of the children of israel shall he ( john the baptist ) turn to the lord their god ; for he shall go before him in the spirit and power of elias , &c. now he before whom iohn the baptist was to go in the spirit and power of elias , is agreed to be our lord jesus christ ; 't is therefore he that is here called the lord god of israel . and we who own him so to be , worship no other god in worshipping him . it is those , who do not own him so to be , and do yet worship him , that are to be charged with worshipping another god. now when here we find father , son , and holy ghost , all joined in the same worship , we have reason to take them all for the same god ; and , that these three are one. and do say , ( as willingly as he ) hear , o israel , the lord thy god is one god. father , son , and holy ghost , are but one god : as god the creator , god the redeemer , and god the sanctifier , are one god. and what in the old testament are said of god , indefinitely , without taking notice of this or that of the three persons ; are , in the new testament , attributed some to one , some to another , of the three persons . that which makes these expressions seem harsh to some of these men , is because they have used themselves to fansie that notion only of the word person , according to which three men are accounted to be three persons , and these three persons to be three men. but he may consider , that there is another notion of the word person , and in common use too , wherein the same man may be said to sustain divers persons , and those persons to be the same man , that is the same man as sustaining divers capacities . as was said but now of tully , tres personas unus sustineo . and then it will seem no more harsh to say , the three persons , father , son and holy ghost are one god ; than to say , god the creator , god the redeemer , and god the sanctifier are one god ; which , i suppose , even to this answerer would not seem harsh , or be thought nonsence . it is much the same thing , whether of the two forms we use . and , all the cavils he useth , may be equally applied to either . what answer therefore he would give to one who should thus object against the latter form , will serve us as well to what he objects against the former . if therefore the gentleman please to consider it calmly ; he will find , that , even amongst men , though another person do many times denote another man , ( and thereupon the words are sometimes used promiscuously , ) yet not always ; nor doth the word person necessarily imply it . a king and a husband ( though they imply very different notions , different capacities , different relations , or different personalities , ) yet may both concur in the same man. ( or , in that sence wherein person is put for man , in the same person . ) so a king and a father , a king and a brother , and the like . and this gentleman , though ( in the dialogue ) he sustain two persons ; that of an opponent , and that of an answerer ; or that of a friend , and that of an adversary ; ( that so , while one gives ill language , the other may give up the cause ; ) yet they do not act each their own part so covertly , but that sometime the vizard falls off , and discovers the man to be the same . for though my letter be answered by a friend , pag. . yet 't is the neighbour that is weary of writing , p. . now , if person , in a proper sence , when applied to men , do not imply , that different persons must needs be so many different men : much less should it be thought nonsence , when ( in a metaphorical sence ) it is applied to god , that different persons in the deity , should not imply so many gods : or , that three somewhat 's ( which we call persons ) may be one god. which is what i undertook to prove . and , having made this good , i need not trouble my self to name more texts ( though many more there be which give concurrent evidence to this truth ) or discourse the whole controversie at large , ( which was not the design of my letter . ) for himself hath reduced it to this single point ; when st. iohn says , the word was with god , and the word was god ; if by the word , be meant christ , and by god , the true god ; whether , in so saying , st. iohn do not speak nonsence ? and if i evince this not to be nonsence , ( as i think i have done ) he grants the place is to the purpose . which quite destroys the foundation of the socinian doctrine . without being obliged to prove , that these persons are just such persons , and so distinct , as what we sometime call persons amongst men , ( but with such distinction only as is agreeable to the divine nature , and not such as to make them three gods. ) like as when god the father is said to beget the son ; not so as one man begets another , ( nor is the son so a son as what we call son amongst men : ) but so as suits with the divine nature : which how it is , we do not perfectly comprehend . i have now done with him . but i have one thing to note upon what i have before said , of the athanasian creed . i there read it , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because i so find it in the copy i used ; which is that at the end of the greek testament in octavo , printed at london by iohn bill , ; with robert stephan's , ioseph scaliger's and isaac casaubon's annotations . but in whitaker's greek testament , reprinted by this copy , , i since find it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ( which edition , i suppose , is followed by some others . ) i take the former to be the better reading , ( as giving a clearer sence ; ) and that the correcter of the press , had put 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , intending thereby to mend the greek syntax , ( because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 follows , ) but doth ( i think ) impair the sence . but , as to the doctrine , it is much one whether we read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . and what i have said of that whole creed , is chiefly intended for those who do believe the doctrine of the trinity , and of christ's incarnation ; that there is no reason ( in my opinion ) why they should not allow of that creed . but such as do not believe those points , cannot ( i grant ) approve the creed . and it is these , i suppose , who would fain have others to dislike it also . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a -e joh. . . joh. . . . gen. . . psal. . . numb . . . isai. . . gen. . , . rom. . . luke . . . gen. . . cor. . , . rom. . . joh. . , . mat. . , . phil. . , , . job . . notes for div a -e * de orat. * what we render who is , ( in rom. . . ) is in the greek , not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( he that is , ) which in rev. . . ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. ) and elsewhere , is used as a peculiar name or title proper to god almighty ; and answers to i am , exod. . . i am hath sent me unto you ( of the same import with iah and iehovah . ) and what is said of god indefinitely , ( without respect to this or that person in the godhead ) at rev. . . ( for christ in particular is contradistinguished , ver. . ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( from him that is , and was , and is to come , ) is at ver. . applied in particular to christ , i am alpha and omega , the beginning and the end , saith the lord , which is , and was , and is to come , the almighty . which closeth the description of christ , that begins at ver. . and that , by the lord , is here meant christ , is evident from the whole context , ver. , , , , and the whole second and third chapters . and so the description of christ , rom. . . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in its full emphasis , is thus , that being over all , ( or , the supreme being ) god blessed for ever , ( or the ever blessed god ) amen . and there will be need of socinus's expedient , ( quantacunque vis pauli verbis adhibenda ) to make it signifie any other god , than god almighty , the creator of heaven and earth . a defense of the christian sabbath in answer to a treatise of mr. tho. bampfield pleading for saturday-sabbath / by john wallis. wallis, john, - . approx. kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from -bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : - (eebo-tcp phase ). a wing w estc r ocm this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons . universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase , no. a ) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set ) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, - ; : ) a defense of the christian sabbath in answer to a treatise of mr. tho. bampfield pleading for saturday-sabbath / by john wallis. wallis, john, - . p. printed by l. litchfield and are to be sold by chr. coningsby, oxford : . caption title: a discourse concerning the christian sabbath. running title: the christian sabbath. reproduction of original in the cambridge university library. created by converting tcp files to tei p using tcp tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between and available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the , texts created during phase of the project have been released into the public domain as of january . anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. % (or pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf- unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p , characters represented either as utf- unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng bampfield, thomas, ?- . -- enquiry whether the lord jesus christ made the world. sabbath -- early works to . sunday -- early works to . - tcp assigned for keying and markup - apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images - olivia bottum sampled and proofread - olivia bottum text and markup reviewed and edited - pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a defense of the christian sabbath . in answer to a treatise of mr. tho. bampfield pleading for saturday-sabbath . by iohn wallis , d. d. and professor of geometry in the university of oxford . oxford , printed by l. lichfield , and are to be sold by chr. coningsby , at the golden turks-head over against st. dunstan's church in fleet-street , london . . imprimatur , ionath . edwards , vice-can . oxon . sep. t. . a discourse concerning the christian sabbath . sir , iune . . i had a while since a book sent me by the carrier ( i know not well from whom ) of mr. thomas bampfield , which in the title-page , is said to be printed for the author — . it is concerning the sabbath . which he thinks should rather be observed on what we call saturday , than on what we call sunday . i should not , on this account , give any disturbance to the peace or practise of the church where i live , so that a sabbath be duly observed as to the substantials of it , though perhaps not upon what day i should chuse . for i do not know ▪ and i believe no man living can tell me , whether what we now call sunday , be a first , a second , a third , or a seventh day , in a continued circulation of weeks from the creation . and what it is impossible for me to know , i think will be no crime to be ignorant of . nor hath this author any other way than common tradition , ( on which he is not willing that we should lay weight , ) whereby to guess , which is the first , or which is the seventh day , in such a circulation of weeks , either from the creation , or even from christ's time. i am sufficiently satisfied that we ought to keep a sabbath , that is , a day of holy rest , after six days of ordinary labour , according to the fourth commandment : and this in a continued course or circulation : but i am not certain , nor can i be , which is a first , or a seventh day in such a circulation of weeks from the creation . and therefore shall content my self to observe that day which i find observed in the church where i live . in old england i observe the sabbath which here i find : and if i were in new-england , i would observe the sabbath which i find observed there . though i think it may be disputable whether they and we may be said to observe the same day , ( the first meridian passing between them and us . ) and yet i would not advise to have it changed in either . now i can hardly think , that god hath laid the great stress of so weighty a point ( as whereon the main of gods publick worship doth much depend ) on such a circumstance as is impossible for us to know , and of which we may be modestly ignorant . i should rather think that what christ says of the place , ioh. . , , the hour cometh when ye shall neither in this mountain nor in ierusalem worship the father , but the true worshipers shall worship the father in spirit and in truth , is in good measure true of the time also ; and , as it is not so material whether in this or that place , god be worshiped , so he be worshiped aright : so neither is it so material , whether on this , or that day ; as , that a sabbath or day of holy rest be duly kept . the publick worship of god , was then in great measure confined to the temple ; not indifferently , in any place within thy gates , but in the place which the lord thy god shall chuse , to put his name there , deut. . , , , . for which any other place may now be as well assigned ; that men pray every where lifting up holy hands , &c. tim. . . ( privately in private places , and publickly in places appointed for the publick ▪ ) and i do not think we are now more confined to the iewish sabbath , than to the iewish temple . this premised , i can agree with this author in many things by him discussed . i agree , that our lord iesus christ ( according to his divinity ) was god ( and is so ) the true god , the god that made heaven and earth , the god who delivered the law upon mount sinai . for though we do acknowledge , in the godhead , a trinity of persons ; father , son , and holy ghost , ( whereof christ according to his divinity is called the second person , the son of god , or god the son ; ) yet those three persons are but one god. nor do i know any other true god but one , the god that made heaven and earth , the lord iehovah , the god of abraham , isaac and iacob , the lord god of israel , the lord their god who brought them out of the land of egypt , out of the house of bondage , and besides whom we are to have no other god , the god who delivered the law to them on mount sinai ; and i do agree that our lord iesus christ , is ( as to his divinity ) this god , the true god , the onely true god , and that he was so before his incarnation . how far each of those actions are to be ascribed to this or that person of the trinity , we need not be over solicitous . what in the new testament is more peculiarly ascribed to this or that of the three persons , is in the old testament wont to be ascribed to god indefinitely , without such particular application ; the doctrine of the trinity being then not so distinctly discovered . but i cannot agree that christ as god and man ( in contradistinction to the father and holy ghost ) did all those things ; for he was not then man. i agree with him also , that god who made the world in six days , rested the seventh day , gen. . . exod. . . and that he blessed the sabbath day and hallowed it . and that accordingly he hath appointed after six days of ordinary labour , man should observe a seventh day of holy rest , and this in a continued succession . but i should rather say , that our lord iesus christ is ( according to his divinity ) that god who blessed the seventh day gen. . than that the god who blessed the sabbath day , is the lord iesus christ ; ( as he doth p. . and elsewhere very often , seeming to lay great stress upon it . ) for he was not then the lord christ ( god and man ) nor did he bless it as christ , but as god ; in union with the father and holy ghost , not as contradistinguished from them . i agree also , that the law of the sabbath is one of the decalogue or ten commandments delivered to israel on mount sinai . ex. . but i am willing to think it was a law before . not only because we find it observed , exod. . ( before the giving of the law on mount sinai , ex. . ) but especially because of that in gen. . . god blessed the seventh day and sanctified it , because in it he rested from all his work. and those who are most averse to the morality ( as it is wont to be called ) or the perpetuity of the sabbath , or day of holy rest , and are yet very zealous for the holiness of places , would be very fond of it if they could find so clear a testimony , and so ancient , for the holiness of place , as here is for that of time. i agree also that the law of the decalogue or ten commandments , though then given peculiarly to israel , is obligatory to us also . for though some clauses therein do peculiarly respect them ; as that who brought thee out of the land of egypt out of the house of bondage , and that thy days may be long in the land which the lord thy god giveth thee , ( which i think is there said with a particular respect to the land of canaan , which god gave to israel , not to us ; ) yet the body of that law and the preceptive part of it , i take to be obligatory to others also , and to us in particular ; the decalogue being declarative of what was ( i think ) a law before ( however neglected or forgotten , ) and is by christ and his apostles frequently cited as such , even to gentiles as well as jews . nor will i dispute it with him , whether the sabbath were observed from the creation to the floud . for i am willing to think that if it were not , it should have been ; though , in the short history that moses gives us of that time , there be no mention made of such observation . but i doubt it was not universally so observed , if at all . for when all flesh had corrupted their ways , i doubt the sabbath day and the worship of that day were by them not much regarded . nor do i find ( gen. . . ) any express command ( such as he demands for the first days sabbath ) that it should be observed thenceforth by men , every seventh day of the week for ever . how far the words he blessed and sanctified it may extend i will not dispute . it may be a strong intimation ( and i think it is , ) but it is not expresly said , that , all mankind must , for ever after , observe every seventh day , in every week , of days , reckoned continually from the first creation . nor do i think it necessary to have been so recorded by moses , ( any more , than the law for sacrifices , ) if it did otherwise appear to have been the will of god. and therefore i would not have him lay too great a stress , on what he saith , that there is no express commandment , recorded in the new testament , for observing the first day : it is enough if we there find sufficient intimation for us to judge that god was pleased to have it observed . i say the like as to the time from the floud to that of abraham , and from thence to the coming of israel out of egypt . for i do not find any mention of their observing a sabbath ( either in the writings of moses , or the book of iob ) earlier than that of exod. . after israels coming out of egypt , and after the time that god is said to have made a statute and ordinance for them , at marah , ex. . . what that statute and ordinance was , we cannot tell . the jewish writers think ( or some of them ) that it was that of the sabbath ; and perhaps it might , or this be some part of it . it was perhaps a revival of what had been before disused . nor is it likely that their task-masters in egypt would suffer them to be idle , and neglect their work , one whole day in seven . nor do i find any foot-steps in history that any other nation but the jews did ( for many ages after this time ) so much as measure out their time by weeks . i know that many learned and pious men have been searching to that purpose and willing to lay hold on any thing that might seem to look that way . and i should be well enough pleased to see it made out . but i have not seen any thing convictive to give me satisfaction therein . i have consulted clemens alexandrinus , and what he cites in the fifth book of his stromata , who hath i believe made the best search of any into heathen writers for that purpose . his design in that book is to shew that the heathens had stollen or borrowed much of their philosophy from what he calls philosophia barbara , or barbarorum , meaning thereby the iewish learning ; ( for , with the greeks , all but themselves were barbarians . ) and amongst many other things , he takes notice of the number seven sometimes mentioned in heathen writers , as with some veneration ; which he thinks to be occasioned from that number oft mentioned in the sacred writers , and particularly from that of their sabbath , and measuring their time by weeks . but he doth not at all intimate as if himself did think the heathens so to have divided their time , or to keep that sabbath , but only that they were acquainted with the jewish learning , and borrowed much of theirs from thence . that which therein seemed to me the most promising ( and by others also is oft alledged ) was that cited from hesiod , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( the seventh a sacred day . ) but when i consulted the place in hesiod , in his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( in the latter part of which he treats of days ) i find nothing there of weeks , or days of the week , but only days of the month. for 't is this he there proposeth to speak of , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( the thirty days of the month , ) on which he makes divers remarks ; as , which of them were to be accounted good days , and which bad days , and , for what purposes . and begins with these , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( begin we with the first , and the fourth , and the seventh , a sacred day , because that on this day apollo who hath the golden sword was born of latona . ) so that ( it seems ) the seventh day ( not the first ) was then sunday . ( for apollo with his gold sword , is but another name for the sun. ) but it was the seventh day of the month , not the seventh day of the week , ( for of weeks he there says nothing . ) and he then goes on to speak of the eighth and ninth days ; then of the eleventh and twelfth , next of the thirteenth , and so of other days of the month ; shewing which of them were accounted lucky days , and which unlucky , and for what affairs . but nothing of weeks at all . however , hesiod himself , though one of the oldest of the heathen writers , is but young as to the times we speak of ; who is reckoned to have lived about the time of king uzziah , seven hundred years after the time we are now considering , upon the coming of israel out of egypt . nor doth clemens alexandrinus think , when they name seven , it was from any old tradition ( from adam or noah ) but from what acquaintance they then had with the jewish writers of later time . nor do i find any thing that is more to the purpose , in all there cited by clemens alexandrinus than this of hesiod . but if any where he could have found , that the heathens divided their time by weeks ; no doubt but he would have mentioned this as borrowed from the iewish learning ; ( which was the thing he was there inquiring after . ) and , when he saith nothing of it , we may be sure he could not find it . i find indeed that , some of the heathens ( as iuvenal and lucian ) do laugh or jeer at the jewish sabbath ( recutitaque sabbata pallent ) and therefore did know of the jewish sabbath ; but not that they did observe it , or so much as divide their time by weeks . now if we should admit , that in some families ( where the true worship of god was preserved ) there be a strong presumption ( for 't is no more ) that they did observe a sabbath ; that is , a seventh day of holy rest after six days of ordinary labour ; yet 't is a question , whether that were just the seventh day in a continual succession of weeks from the creation . and if at any time there chance to be an intermission , and the day forgotten , it is impossible ( without a miracle or a new revelation ) that it can be restored again . and if from thenceforth they would again keep a sabbath ( as we find the pass-over was revived by hezekiah and iosiah which had been long intermitted kings . and chr. . ) they must begin at adventure , and thence continue it . now if we consider , that the true worship of god was oft reduced to some one family , as in the time of noah , and perhaps of abraham ; and even that family sometimes corrupt enough , ( as was that of nahor , from whence abraham for that reason was removed ; and that of laban where iacob sojourned ; and how oft also the like happened , we cannot tell ) it was very possible the sabbath might be neglected ; as himself observes p. , it had been before and under the captivity for a long time , and made a market-day , as well as any other day of the week ; like as the temple was become a market-place , mat. . , . ioh. . . . as was also the pass-over in great measure from the time of samuel till that of iosiah , chr. . . and the feast of tabernacles , from the days of ioshuah to nehemiah , neh. . . and circumcision , for forty years together in the wilderness , iosh. . . now if circumcision and the pass-over and the feast of tabernacles were thus neglected when they were at liberty ; how much more the sabbath , when they were bond-men in egypt ; of which we have not the least mention from god's keeping a sabbath , gen. . . till after israels coming out of egypt , exod. . nor is there the least mention ( as i shew'd but now ) in any history sacred or profane , so much as of dividing their time by weeks , all that time ; nor , except that of israel , for many ages after . and though the sun , moon and stars ( gen. . . ) are said to be for signs and for seasons , for days and for years , yet not a word is there of weeks . nor could they indeed , by their motions , distinguish weeks , as they do months and years . and therefore though i find years and months to have been observed all the world over long ago ; yet weeks no where ( that i know ) of ancient times , but by the nation of the iews onely , nor by them before their coming out of egypt . so that , though , i am willing to think , the sabbath ought to have been observed all that while , yet there is too much reason to doubt it was not ; or , if at all , not without frequent intermissions , which would , in this case , be fatal . now to argue as he doth , that abel , and enoch , and noah , and abraham , were good men , and are ( some of them ) said to walk with god , and to keep his commandments , and therefore may be presumed to have kept a sabbath , is but a weak argument as to matter of fact , and , to begg the question . for we are not to think them so good as to be guilty of no failings or omissions . the law of marriage is certainly as old , if not older than that of the sabbath , the tenour of which was ( he tells us p. . ) that they two should be one flesh ; not , they three , four or five : yet he tells us also , that polygamy , or having many wives , was frequently practised , from lamech to malachi , even by some eminent in the church at that time , and by them ( he supposeth ) held to be lawful . and it may as well be thought , the law for the sabbath might sometime within that two thousand five hundred years ) be neglected and forgotten ; as that of marriage ; in a time when there was no writing ( that we know of ) to preserve it . and , if once forgotten , it could never ( as to that seventh day ) be recovered . and i would ask that gentleman , in case the day should chance to have been sometime forgotten , ( as is very possible and not unlikely , ) and that after such time ( upon finding the book of the law , as in iosiah's time kings . . which had been lost ) it did appear that a sabbath should have been kept , but was not , ( as was there the case of the pass-over , chap. . . ) what doth this gentleman think ( in such case ) should be done ? must they never restore the sabbath because they do not know the day ? or must they begin upon a new account ? i should think this latter ; ( and that it would be warranted by the fourth commandment ; ) notwithstanding his objection , no other day ( but the seventh from the creation ) is commanded ; no promise to the observance of any other ; nor threatning for the omission . indeed in our days when so great a part of the world reckon by weeks , and we be stored with astronomical tables adjusted to the motions of the sun , moon and stars , and many celestial observations , ( as for instance , that such a year , such a day of such a month there was an eclipse on monday morning or the like ) 't were more easy to rectify such an intermission . but in those days , when there was nothing of all this , nor so much as the use of writing ( that we know of ) older than moses ; there was no way to rectify an interrupted tradition . all which is not said to disparage the observation of the sabbath day ( for which i have as great veneration as he that pleads for the saturday sabbath , ) but onely to shew , that we can be at no certainty , ( and scarce a conjecture , ) which is the first , second , or seventh day of the week in a continued circulation of weeks from the creation . and consequently i cannot think that the great stress of the fourth commandment is to be understood of just that seventh day in every such week from the creation ( which i doubt cannot be known ) but rather that there should be a weekly sabbath ; that is , after six days of work , the seventh should be a holy rest , and then , after another six days of work , the seventh should be again a holy rest ; and so continually ; which is as truly observed in the sunday-sabbath , as in that of saturday . as when god requires the tenth of our increase ; it is not meant of the tenth in order ( for it should rather be the first in order , for he requires the first-fruits ) but the tenth in proportion ; so here the seventh . and this author knows very well , that it is signally noted by expositors on the fourth commandment , and other writers about the sabbath , that this commandment begins with remember to keep holy the sabbath-day , or the day of rest , ( not the seventh day ; much less the seventh day of the week from the first creation ; ) and what is that day of rest , the next words tell us , six days shalt thou labour , but the seventh is the sabbath , &c. that is , after six days of labour , the seventh shall be a day of rest. and in the close of that commandment ( ex. . . ) our bibles have it wherefore the lord blessed the sabbath-day ( not as we commonly repeat it , the seventh day ) and hallowed it . the reason given to inforce it is , for in six days the lord made heaven and earth &c. and rested the seventh day , and accordingly should we , after six days of work have a seventh day of rest , and so onward . if he thinks that to make a difference , that we now reckon our weeks to begin with the day of rest , and after that , six working days ( which in a continued circulation comes all to one , ) i will allow that gentleman ( if that will please him better ) to begin the week on monday , and then sunday will be the seventh . the commandment says nothing of the seventh day of the week in a continued succession from the creation ; but the seventh day after six days of labour . and whereas he observes ( and would lay great weight upon it ) that it is ( hashebigni ) the seventh ( the article ha answering to our the ) not a seventh . 't is very true , and very proper so to be . for the meaning is not that , after six days of labour , there should be a seventh for rest no matter when ; but the seventh day , that is , the next day after those six . but it is not said the seventh in course from the creation . just as when it is said , a male-child is to be circumcised the eighth day , it is not meant of an eighth day in course from the creation ; but , the eighth day from the birth . and in like manner ex. . . in the seventh day there shall be a holy convocation ; it is not meant of the seventh day of the week from the creation ; but on the seventh day of the feast of unleavened bread , what ever day of the week that happen to be . and exod. . , . the sixth and seventh day there mentioned , seem plainly to be , not the sixth and seventh in course from the creation ( which i doubt was not then known ) but from the first raining of manna , ver . , . he 'll say perhaps , the jews observed such seventh day from the creation , and that was their sabbath . but that is more than he or i know , or any man living . they had i grant , a circulation of seven days , but from what epocha we cannot tell . and when moses tells them ( on the sixth day ) ex. . . tomorrow is the rest of the holy sabbath . it seems to be the fixing of a new epocha ( from the first raining of manna ) and then all his arguments , from the continual observation of the seventh day from the creation till that time , are at an end . whether this ( from the first raining of manna ) be the same with that from the creation ; no man can tell . and there is six to one odds that it is not . now , that there is a new course of sabbath ( from a new beginning ) whereof this seventh day from the first raining of manna is the first , and not a continuation of a former course hitherto observed without interruption ; seems farther evident from this consideration , because , if this were but a continuation of that uninterrupted course of sabbaths , then the next seventh day before it , would have been a sabbath also , and to have been in like manner observed ; that is , the next day before the first raining of manna . but , on that day we find ( exod. . , . ) the quails came up and covered the camp , without any prohibition to gather them . if therefore they might not ( now ) gather manna , because it was the sabbath ; but might ( before ) gather quails ; it should seem , that was not a sabbath . and if it be not allowed , upon occasion , to fix a new epocha ; then if the circulation of weeks from the beginning of the world ( which was then about years old ) did ever chance to have been interrupted , and the day forgotten , ( as in all likelyhood it might be in egypt , if not long before ) or if ever after it should chance so to be ( as in the days of iosiah when the book of the law was lost , and the pass-over forgotten ; ) men must never keep a sabbath thenceforth . for then all his own arguments return upon him ; no other day is commanded ( 't is will-worship , ) no promise to the observance , no threatning for the neglect . i should rather think , if that day were unknown ( as i believe it is ) any day were better than none at all . for gods commands do more respect the substance of the duty than the circumstance of time , especially if they cannot both be had . circumcision was to be administred on the eighth day , according to the institution , ( i do not mean the eighth day of the week , but the eighth day of the childs age ; and therefore on the same day of the week on which the child was born. ) but if by accident or default it were omitted , it might be done any day after , rather than not at all . abraham we know was years old , and ismael when they were circumcised , ( and what was the age of other males in abraham's family , we cannot tell ; ) and a proselyte , at any age , was to be circumcised ; ( though perhaps it were not remembred on what day of the week he was born ; ) and those who were born in the wilderness for forty years together , were all circumcised at once , iosh. . , , . ( though not all born on the same day of the week . ) the pass-over was appointed to be eaten standing , with their loyns girt , their shoes on their feet , and their staffs in their hand , as in hast to be gone ex. . yet our saviour seemeth to have eaten it sitting , or rather lying . and none of them were to stir out of doors till morning , ex. . . yet christ and his disciples went out the same night to the mount of olives , and thence to gethsemane , mat. . , . the shew-bread was to be eaten by the priests only : yet our saviour observes that david did eat of it ( on a special occasion ) without blaming him for so doing . the rechabites are commended ier. . for obeying the command of ionathan their father , not to drink wine , nor build houses , but to dwell in tents &c. yet did they , upon nebuchadnezzar's invasion , quit their tents and repair to ierusalem ; nor is it reputed a disobedience . the paschal lamb was to be kill'd the fourteenth day of the first month at evening : yet if we consider how little knowledge they had in those days , of the sun and moons motions , and if we consider what the jewish writers tell us of their very uncertain method of judging , which was the first month , and which the fourteenth day of that month we shall find they were at great uncertainties , as to the just day ; yet was not the service thereof to be neglected , upon pretense there was danger of missing the right day . for they had not almanacks in those days , as we have now , to tell us before hand when will be a new moon . but ( if we may believe the jewish writers ) their manner was , about the time when they expected a new-moon , to send men to watch for it on the top of some hill or high place ; and he who could first discover a new-moon , was to tell the priest , and he to blow the trumpet to give the people notice that there was a new-moon , ( much like our custom at oxford , at the time of the assizes , to set some on st. maries steeple to watch when the judges are coming , and then to ring the great bell to give notice to those concerned , that the judges are at hand ; ) but , in case of cloudy weather , if in three days time from their first expectation no man could see a new moon , they did then venture ( but not before ) to blow the trumpet without seeing it , which must needs cause a great uncertainty ; and the same moon sooner seen at one place than at another , and the pass-over kept accordingly . and t is manifest in the story of our saviours last pass-over , that he kept it on one day and the jews on another ( perhaps he about a fortnight before , might see a new-moon , a day sooner than they did . ) so great uncertainty there was at that time , as to the particular day , though the institution was punctual for the fourteenth day of the first month. and the like uncertainty there was as to all their feasts of new-moons . and even in our days , when the motions of the sun and moon are much better known than at that time they were , we are far from being exact in point of time . our rule for easter is much the same with theirs for the pass-over ; the rule in general is this , the sunday next after the fourteenth day of the first month , is to be easter day . but when we come to make particular application , we do strangely miss of our rule . and our paschal tables which should direct us , do put us farther out than if we had none at all . for ( by reason that we take the length of our common year a little too long , by about eleven minutes of an hour , and the length of our months too long also ; ) since the time that those tables were made , 't is well known that the beginning of our ecclesiastical first month , is ten or eleven days later than that of the heavens ; and our ecclesiastical new-moons and full-moons , is later by four or five days than those of the heavens . whereby we do very often mistake the month , and yet oftner the true week , for keeping of easter . and though pope gregory the eighth , did ( somewhat more than an hundred years ago ) somewhat rectify the calendar , yet both papists and protestants do observe , some the newer gregorian , and some the older iulian account , and ( in the united provinces of the netherlands ) one town observes one account , and the next the other account , and accordingly keep their easters ( if at all ) at three , four or five weeks distance , and so for christmas-day . 't is not agreed amongst chronologers either what year , or what month , much less what day of that month , our saviour was born , yet wee keep december th . in memory of his birth , as supposing him to have been then born . yea we are at so great uncertainty , that we reckon the year from his circumcision , to begin the first of ianuary ; but the same year as from his conception , not till the th of march next following ; as if his birth and circumcision had been a quarter of a year before his conception . and if we be now at so great an uncertainty , in so short a period as from the birth of christ , i do not think the jews could be punctual , as to a day , in observing their pass-over ; and much less , as to a day from the creation of the world. he 'l say perhaps , that easter and christmas being of humane institution , it is not much matter though we miss the day , nor much matter perhaps whether it be kept or no. be it so ; but the pass-over was of divine institution ; yet were they at a great uncertainty , and might chance to miss more than a day or two ; yet was not the duty to be therefore neglected . the mistake of a day , was of much less concernment than the neglect of the duty ; as was the tithing of mint and annise , than the weightier things of the law. these little circumstances are but shaddows , in comparison of the substance , as the comparison is col. . . which is not said to incourage any one to violate the laws of god , even in little things , ( for we find god sometimes very severe even in such ; as in the case of uzzah's touching the ark , and nadab and ahihu's offering strange fire ; for reasons best known to himself , of which we are not aware . ) but onely to shew that the substantials of a duty are to be regarded more than circumstantials ; and these upon occasion to give way to those . and in such cases ( if it were a fault ) the prayer of hezekiah ( chr. . . ) is to take place , the good lord pardon every one that prepareth his heart to seek god , though he be not cleansed according to the purification of the sanctuary . and his service was accepted , though ( as it is expresly noted ) they did eat the pass-over otherwise than as it was written : and , in the second month , in stead of the first . and doubtless in the present case , if we do not know ( as certainly we do not ) which is the first or seventh day in a continual circulation from the creation , it is much better to keep a weekly sabbath on any day of the week whatever , than to keep none at all , and much more agreable to the true meaning of the fourth commandment . all which is said , partly by way of caution , not to be forward , upon slight grounds , to disturb the peace and settled practise of the whole christian church at this day . partly to take off what he would have to be admitted but cannot be proved , that the seventh day in a continued circulation of weeks from the first creation , was observed as the weekly sabbath , from the creation to the floud ; from thence to abraham ; from thence to israels coming out of egypt ; and from thence till after the resurrection of christ. which i think is impossible for any man to know . and partly to satisfy what he objects from the fourth commandment . which saith indeed that there is to be a rest on the seventh day after six days of labour , but not a word of its being such seventh day in a continual circulation of weeks from the creation . and therefore we are safe hitherto , for ought i see . but i 'le come up a little nearer to him . he may perhaps tell us ( though i do not find he doth ) that the jews did certainly keep their weekly sabbath ( at the time of our saviours death ) on what they called the seventh day . if not on the seventh day of the week from the creation ( of which we can have no certainty ) at lest on the seventh day of the week , as the weeks were then reckoned ; ( which i readily grant him ) and that they had so done for a long time before , and perhaps from the time of giving the law on mount sinai . ( and it may be so , for ought i know , but we cannot be certain . ) and what was then called the first day of the week , was another day from what they called the seventh ( which i admit also . ) and that , what they called the seventh day , is now what we call saturday , and what they called the first day is what we now call sunday . but this , i say , is more than he or i know . he may think so ; and so do i ; but i am not sure of it . the reason why i think so , is , because i think that christ or his apostles ( according to christs direction ) did remove the observation of the sabbath , from the seventh to the first day of the week , and that we have ever since kept the sabbath as they did , ( for i do not know that it hath been since altered , ) and as we now keep it on sunday , so i believe they did ; and therefore think that our sunday is what they called the first day . and if the apostles did then remove it from their seventh day to their first day , i presume they had direction from christ so to do , who after his resurrection , shewed himself to them for fourty days , giving commandments to his apostles speaking to them of things pertaining to the kingdom of god , acts . , . and therefore , what they did afterwards in settling the christian church , they did ( we are to presume ) according to such directions and commandments of christ , and this in particular of so removing the observation of the sabbath day , if they did remove it , ( as i think was done ) by his authority who was lord of the sabbath day . matth. . . luk. . . but if they did not so remove it ; i do not know that it hath since been changed . for i think we keep the same sabbath which they did : and that the christian church hath ever since so done ; and doth pretend so to have done , by a constant tradition ever since . and we therefore think our sunday to be their first day of the week , because we think their sabbath so to have been . but if we mistake in that tradition , we are ( for ought i know ) accordingly mistaken in thinking sunday to be their first day ; ( for we have nothing but tradition for either . ) and then for ought he can shew ( by better than tradition ) to the contrary , our sunday may be their seventh day . and then he hath no pretense to quarel with it . if he say the jews do at this day keep saturday as their seventh day . i confess they do . but they do no more know which is the seventh day ; than we , which is the first day . and because they find that christians generally take sunday to be what was before called the first day , they do accordingly take saturday to be their seventh day . but their tradition is of no greater authority than ours . all depending upon this , that our sunday being that sabbath which we think christ or his appostles did appoint , we take it to be the first day , because christ or his apostles ( by christs directions ) did remove the observation of the sabbath to that day . he 'l say perhaps ; i do not my self think our sunday to be their seventh day . and then , why should not our sabbath be on saturday as theirs was ? 't is true , i do not think our sunday to be their seventh day . and i have told you the reason why i do not think it ; because i think christ or his apostles did change the day , and for that reason only . and for the same reason i think our sabbath should be as now it is , and as i think it hath been ever since . but if i be mistaken in it , i may be mistaken in the other also : but , either way , sunday is yet to be our sabbath . he says , it is no where expresly said in scripture , that the apostles did thus change it . true , and 't is no where said in scripture , that our sunday is not their seventh day . it may be the same for ought i know , ( and for ought he knows ) if it were not then changed . though , because i think the day was then changed , i do therefore think it is not the same . and if it were not changed , then all the difference is , that what they called the seventh day of their week , we call the first day of our week . which , if the author do not like , he may call monday the first day , and then sunday will be the seventh , as it was before . but i say further ; there be many things , even as to the worship of god , which we may reasonably think to have been done , though it be not expresly said so ; but only to be collected by consequence from what is said . 't is no where said expresly , that , after the first sabbath of god himself , ( gen. . . ) any other sabbath was ever kept before that in exod. . which was above two thousand and five hundred years after . yet this author would have us think it was observed all that while ; and that it was commanded so to be , which yet is no where said expresly . but a slight presumption , it seems , may serve his turn , but not ours . 't is known that god was worshiped by sacrifices very early ; at least as early , as that of cain and abel ; and that this worship was accepted of god , at least that of abel . and therefore i suppose this author would have us think it was commanded . ( not a meer will-worship , without any direction or institution from god. ) yet we are no where told , of any such command or institution . we may say the like of iacob's consecrating a pillar , by pouring oyl upon it , gen. . . though we do not find mention , before that time , of any direction for any such consecration ( of things or persons ) by anointing , or pouring on of oyl . we have also reason to think there was some command from god , that the fire for incense should be taken from the altar , ( or somewhat of like nature ; ) else nadab and abihu would not have been destroyed for offering strange fire . yet we are no where told expresly of any such command . we have no particular command ( that i know of ) for baptizing of infants , nor any particular mention in scripture of any such baptized . yet i do not know that this author would have us thence infer , that none such were baptized , or that they ought not so to be . nor have we any express mention of womens receiving the other sacrament ; nor any express command for their so doing ( any more than for females being circumcised ) yet i know not any who doth therefore think they ought not . we know that children were reputed members of the church of god before christ's coming ; and we have no reason to think that christ did put them out ( and make them in a worse condition than they were before ) but rather would have them continue so to be ; and seems to favour it , by that of suffer little children to come to me and forbid them not ; for of such is the kingdom of heaven mar. . . and did accordingly embrace them as such . and therefore , as ( before ) they were circumcised , ( which was then the sacrament of admission ; ) so they should ( now ) be baptized which is our sacrament of admission . ) and when we find whole families to be baptized , we cannot think but that there might be little children in some of them ; ( and more likely so than otherwise . ) and we are , in such cases , to practise according to what we may judge by what we find . we find also that women were baptized ( though not circumcised in the jewish church , ) yet we have no command for so doing . and because there seems to be the same reason for womens receiving the other sacrament as for men , ( and we find nothing to the contrary , ) therefore we do now practise it ( as the most likely to be god's will , according to the light we now have ) though we find in scripture neither express precept nor example for it . in like manner it is no argument that christ or his apostles did not make such a change , because in scripture it is not expresly said so . 't is enough if we there find so much as that we may thence reasonably judge they did so ; and more likely so than not . now i meet with so much there to that purpose , as makes 〈◊〉 judge they did . and so much as ( i believe ) would make this gentleman so to think , if he were not otherwise prepossessed with prejudice ; and with a great fondness to find out somewhat wherewith to find fault . i find that christ , on the very day of his resurrection ( which was the first day of their week ) did not only appear to the good women at the sepulchre ( who sought him there ) and declare to them the resurrection ( which was then to preach a new doctrine , of which they were not before aware ) and bid them tell it to his disciples : but did also the same day himself declare it to two of them going to emmaus ( luk. . ) preaching to them , from moses and the prophets ver . , , ▪ the doctrine of his death and resurrection ( which was to them a new doctrine , which till then they did not understand , ) or ( as the phrase there is ) did expound to them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself ver . . which i think , was preaching , and did open to them the scriptures ( ver . . ) concerning those points ; ( which was a sabbath-days exercise , though perhaps they did not at first so apprehend it ) and did , i take it , celebrate with them the sacrament of the lords supper ( and perhaps the first time after the first institution ) for so much seems to be implyed in those words , ( ver . . ) he took bread and blessed it , and brake , and gave to them , and ( ver . . ) he was known to them by breaking of bread , ( for that sacrament used to be designed by breaking of bread. ) and if our author could but shew so much as this , once done , in the first years from the creation , on the seventh day , it would be a better proof for the celebration of the seventh-day sabbath in that time , than all that he offers at to that purpose . and the effect of this preaching was on them so much , that their eyes were opened , and their heart did burn within them , while he talked with them by the way , and opened to them the scriptures , ver . , . and they returned presently ( the same hour ) to ierusalem , to acquaint the disciples ( who were there assembled ) with this good news . if he tell us that this journey from ierusalem to emmaus ( being about threescore furlongs , near eight of our miles ) and back again , was more than a sabbath-days iourney ; i confess it was ( unless upon an urgent occasion ) if they had known it to be a sabbath-day , when they undertook the iourney ; but this then they knew not ; nor was it therefore , on this occasion , a breach of the sabbath so to do . if he say , christ knew it ( though they did not ) if it were now a sabbath . 't is true ; he did so . but christ , i presume , in that estate ( after his resurrection ) could travel without pain , and therefore without breaking the sabbath . or if it were painful ; he tells us mat. . , that the priests in the temple profane the sabbath and are blameless ; that is , they take as much pains or labour in killing , dressing , and offering the sacrifices , as a butcher would do in killing and dressing his meat ; which would in the butcher be a culpable profanation of the sabbath ; but is not so in the priests , because theirs is religious service . nor doth this author think that in preaching , though it be a labour , the minister doth thereby break the sabbath . and such was christs imployment here . and , then , whether he preach standing , or preach walking , 't is all one . and if he say farther , that the disciples at ierusalem ( not then knowing this ) could not be thought then to have met upon a sabbatical account : i grant this also , that their then meeting was providential ( as was that of the two other meeting christ in their journey , ) yet they might before they parted ( as did those others ) know more of it than at their first coming together . and christ knew before what he meant to do , though they did not , and did accordingly so order it by his providence . and though they did not know that it was thenceforth to be kept as a sabbath , yet may they well be supposed to be imployed on religious work , upon what tidings the women had before brought them ( of christs being risen ) waiting for what directions they should farther receive from christ. to this purpose let us consider what was further done at this meeting . while these two were telling the rest what had happened to them ; as they thus spake ( ver . . ) iesus himself stood in the midst of them , and said peace be unto you : and did ( by shewing them his hands , and feet , and their handling of them , and seeing him eat before them ) convince them that he was indeed risen from the dead , and that it was not only a spirit that appeared to them ( ver . , , , , , . ) and did again , to them , preach the same doctrine which he had before preached to the two ; that it was what he had told them while he was yet with them ( though they did not understand it , ) that this was but what was written in the law of moses , and the prophets , and the psalms concerning him ; and opened their understanding that they might understand the scriptures ; that it was thus written , that it behoved christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day ; and that repentance and remission of sins was to be preached in his name among all nations ; whereof they were to be his witnesses , and apostles ( ver . , , , , . ) and did renew his promise of sending the holy-ghost , and power from on high ( v. . ) he did moreover at the same meeting , not only upbraid them for their unbelief , ( mark . . ) but did authorize them with a solemn commission for the work they were to be sent abqut , to go into all the world , and preach the gospel to every creature ; that he who believeth and is baptized shall be saved , but he who believeth not shall be damned , ( ver . , , ) and a power to work miracles ( ver . , , ) in confirmation of that doctrine . and to the same purpose , iohn ▪ . the same day at evening ( in which he before appeared to mary magdalen and the rest ) being the first day of the week ( the very day of his resurrection ) where the disciples were assembled ( at a private meeting ) for fear of the iews ( the door being shut ) iesus came and stood in the midst of them , and gave them his solemn benediction , saying unto them , peace be unto you ; and in confirmation of his resurrection , shewed them his hands and his side ; ( ver . . ) and then a second time gives them his solemn blessing together with his ordination or commission for preaching the gospel , and planting the christian church , iesus saith to them again , peace be unto you ; as my father hath sent me , even so send i you . and when he had said this , he breathed upon them and said unto them , receive the holy ghost : who 's soever sins ye remit , they are remitted to them ; and who 's soever sins ye retain , they are retained , ver . , , . all which being put together , seems to me very like the celebration ( if not the consecration ) of a christian sabbath , or day of holy rest and religious service . 't is all of it sabbatical work , and there is a great deal of it . 't is not indeed expresly said , that he did bid them thus to meet on such other first day of the week , ( as neither is it expresly said , gen. . . that god did then bid adam and eve to keep a weekly sabbath , or that he did bid them to offer sacrifice ; ) but it is very likely christ might so order it ( and more likely than that he did not . ) for , that they did so meet we are sure ; and therefore 't is very likely ( if not a strong presumption ) that they were bid so to do . for so we find it ioh. . . after eight days ( that is , as we commonly speak in english , on that day sennight ) his disciples were again within , and thomas with them ( who before was absent ) the door being shut ; then iesus came and stood in the midst and said peace be unto you , ( as he had done the week before , ) and satisfyed thomas , who before doubted . so that we have here two solemn meetings of the disciples , two weeks together ( the two first after his resurrection ) on the first day of the week ; and christ with them on both . ( and i am sure we have not more for the first sabbath , gen. . . ) on how many more such sabbaths he so met with them , i cannot tell . that he oft appeared to them ( during the forty days of his abode on earth after his resurrection ) we cannot doubt , and its like it might be on these days . the cavil which here he makes to this place , is so weak , that i am sorry to see it from one who would seem to be serious . as if eight days after , or after eight days , were not the same as what we would say a week after or that day sennight after ; for he must needs know , that 't is not only the common scripture language , but the general language of latine and greek writers , to reckon inclusively ; that is , to take in both the extreams ; and so it is even at this day ( i think ) in most languages except english. what we call a sennight , the french call huict jours ( eight days ) and what we say a fortnight , is with them quinze jours ( fifteen days ; ) and so in all manner of reckoning . a fourth , a fifth , an eighth , a fifteenth , and other intervals in musick are always so reckoned . what we call a third-day-ague , the latins call a quartan ; and what we call every other day , they call a tertian . so they call secundo calendas ( i. e. secundo die ante calendas ) what we would say one day ( not two days ) before the calends ; and they call tertio calendas , what is with us two days ( not three days ) before the calends . so nudius tertius is what we would say two days ago ; and nudius quartus is in our language three days ago ( not four. ) so mark . . where christ speaks of himself , that the son of man should be killed and after three days rise again , that is , on the third day after ( inclusively taken ) or after the third day is come ; whereas , according to the sense this author would put upon the words , it should rather have been said after one day ( for there was but one day between his death and resurrection ; ) and it is the same in sense , with what he says ioh. . . destroy this temple , ( speaking of his body ) and in three days i will raise it up , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or as mat. . . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that is , the third day after ( inclusively . ) and mat. . . they tell pilate , this deceiver said , after three days i will rise again , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( meaning thereby the third day after , inclusively , ) and therefore they pray , that the sepulchre may be made sure till the third day . whereas , if ( as our author would reckon upon his fingers ) by after three days ; were to be understood , when three whole days after that should be past , they need not set their watch before the fourth or fifth day . thus christ's ascension is said to be forty days after his resurrection , ( speaking of a scripture computation , in scripture language , ) which in our ordinary manner of speech is but nine and thirty . for ascension-thursday ( if easter-day be not reckoned for one ) is but days after easter . upon a like account that christ tells us mat. . . that as jonas was three days and three nights in the whales belly , so shall the son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth . not three whole days , and three whole nights ; but , till the third was begun . for by day and night is here understood the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or what we now call the artificial day , consisting of hours , day and night : and till such third day ( or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) was begun , christ rested in the grave ; otherwise , though he were in the grave ( part of ) three days , yet but two nights . so luke . . when eight days were accomplished ( for the circumcision of the child ) they called his name iesus ; that is , upon the eighth day , inclusively ; reckoning the day of birth for the first , and the day of circumcision for the last ( of the eight days ) which with six whole days between make eight . ( whereas , if eight whole days had been fully past , christ had been circumcised the tenth day . ) the sense being the same with that concerning iohn the baptist , luk. . . on the eighth day they came to circumcise the child . so here , after eight days , that is on the eighth day , or after the eighth day was come . and this , i think , is the constant language of scripture every where . and his objection needs no other answer , but , that st. john did not speak english. and i cannot but think ( however he please thus to object ) that himself doth believe this , after eight days , to be here meant of the first day of the next week , ( and he should have been so candid as to own it . ) and that post octo dies is the same in sense with octo post diebus , that is , the eighth day after , ( reckoning the present day for one , ) and that it is so to be understood in this place . we should not , in a serious enquiry , press what possibly might be , but what we truly think is the meaning . a lawyer at the bar may fairly propose for his client , what possibly may be the sense of such or such a clause . but a judge on the bench ( and a counsellor , to his client , ) is to consider what really is the sense of words in question . i dare appeal to himself , whether ( in his own thoughts ) he do not think after eight days , here to signifie the same , as after eight days were accomplished , luk. . . and , if so , then this is rather to wrangle , than to dispute fairly . before i dismiss this place , it is not amiss to take more particular notice about what time it was that mary magdalen and the other women came to the sepulchre on the day of christs resurrection . 't is said luke . , . when they beheld the sepulchre and how the body was laid , ( on the sixth day day at night whereon he was crucified ) they returned and prepared spices and ointments , and rested the sabbath day according to the commandment . and in the next words luk. . . now upon the first day of the week , very early in the morning , they came to the sepulchre bringing the spices which they had prepared . in mat. . . in the end of the sabbath when it began to dawn toward the first day of the week . in mark . . when the sabbath was past , very early in the morning the first day of the week , they came to the sepulchre at the rising of the sun , or by sun-rising . and ioh. . . the first day of the week , early , when it was yet dark , they came to the sepulchre . ( perhaps all the women did not come just at the same time , but were all there by sun-rising . ) but the body was raised before they came , as is agreed by all the evangelists . where i observe first that the sabbath , according to their account , did not end till toward the morning of the next day . the end of the sabbath , or when the sabbath was past , was early in the morning , before the sun-rising , while the day did begin to dawn , and while it was yet dark . very early indeed in the morning , but yet not till morning , ( not in the evening over night . ) and therefore ( without disputing how the day was reputed to begin in the time of moses ) 't is manifest that , at this time , as well the sabbath as other days was by them reckoned not from ( the beginning of ) the evening to ( the beginning of ) the evening , but rather ( according to the rom. account ) from midnight to midnight . for 't is manifest that it was toward evening of the sixth day before the crucifixion was over ; for it was some while after the ninth hour ( that is , after our three a clock ) that he cryed with a loud voice and gave up the ghost , mark . , . and it was yet later , when they brake the legs of the two thieves , ( that they might not remain on the cross upon the sabbath ) but only pierced his side , because he was already dead , joh. . , , , . and later yet when ioseph of arimathea begged his body and buried it . for 't is expresly said , when even was come there came a rich man of arimathea , named ioseph , and begged the body of iesus , and when he had taken the body ▪ he wrapped it in a clean linnen cloth and buried it in his own new tomb , mat. . , , , . mark . , , , , . luk . , , . but , though even were come before this time , yet the sabbath was not begun ; for so it followeth , luk. . . that day was the preparation and the sabbath drew on . and after this , ver . , . the women who beheld the sepulchre , and how the body was laid , returned and prepared spices and ointments ( the same night ) but rested the sabbath day according to the commandment ; and by this time it must needs be pretty late at night ; while yet the sabbath was not begun . that is , i suppose not till midnight of the sixth day . nor was the sabbath ended when evening began on the seventh day . for if so , the women might that night have brought and applyed their spices and ointments which they had prepared the night before . for they had as much time so to do , after the evening was begun that night ( if the sabbath were now ended ) as they had , to do what was done the night before ; after that evening was then begun . nothing hindered them but because the sabbath was not yet done , and they were to rest the sabbath day according to the commandment . but , so soon as well they could , when the sabbath was ended , they came early , the next morning , while it was yet dark . and might as well have come the night before , if the sabbath had ended when the evening began . i add farther , if the sabbath had ended at the evening of the seventh day , and the first day of the week had then begun ( as this author would have it , ) christ might have risen that night ( for it would then have been the third day , ) and not have stay'd in the grave ( for the third day ) till the next morning , which yet we know he did . 't is manifest therefore that the first day of the week did begin from the middle of the night , not from the first evening of the seventh day . and that christ was risen very early in the morning of that first day while it was yet dark . we are next to consider how long that first day lasted . after christ was risen early in the morning while it was yet dark , ( how early that was , we cannot tell , but it was in the morning , not over night ; ) he appeared first to mary magdalen , and the women who went to the sepulchre ; they , as they were directed , carried news of it to the disciples ; and when they were going , ( mat. . . ) the watch came into the city and shewed to the high-priests the things which were done ; who , calling a councel , gave the souldiers money to say , his disciples came and stole him away while they were asleep ; undertaking to secure them in case the governour should come to hear it . upon this news being brought by the women to the disciples , two of them , from the rest , went to the sepulchre to enquire into the business ; and brought an account of it to the rest , who were astonished at it . and all this happened before the two disciples began their journey to emmaus ; for they discoursed of it by the way , and told it to iesus who fell into their company , luk . , , , , , . now their journey from ierusalem to emmaus , was about threescore furlongs , ver . . which our author rightly computes to be about seven miles and an half , of our miles ; which they travelled on foot , for 't is said they walked , ( mark . . ) and iesus in their company , preaching to them ( out of moses and the prophets ) the doctrine of christ's death and resurrection . when they came near to emmaus it was towards evening , and the day far spent , ( luk. . . ) they did there abide for some time , and iesus with them , continuing to preach on the same subject , and was at length known to them by breaking of bread , ver . . . after which they returned to ierusalem and told these things to the disciples then gathered together , ver . . by which time ( having now walked another seven miles and an half ) we may reasonably suppose it to be pretty late at night ; for , when they first approached to emmaus it was then so late , as that it was not thought convenient ( unless upon some such great occasion ) to travel further , ver . . yet , after they were come back to ierusalem , christ then appeared himself to the disciples , blessing them , reproaching their unbelief , confirming their faith , giving them instructions , and commission for preaching the gospel , and planting the christian church . and it was yet but the same day at evening , being the first day of the week , ( joh. . . ) on which he rose : but , now late at night , when the doors were shut ; that is , ( if i mistake not ) so late as that it was time to shut up doors as men use to do towards bed-time . not as if christ came in through the key-hole ( any more than did the two disciples that came from emmaus ) or did penetrate the doors , ( as the papists would have us think in favour of their transubstantiation ; ) for they were not so shut but that they could , be opened again ( upon occasion ) to let him in ( as they had been to let in those two that came from emmaus ) ▪ as well as to let in peter ( late at night ) act. . . so that from very early in the morning while it was dark , till very late night and about mid-night , was the same day , the first day of the week . 't is manifest therefore that about our saviours time , according to the computation of the new testament , both the jews and the four evangelists did reckon their days from mid-night to mid-night . and if they did not so reckon ▪ christ could not be said ( mat. . . ) to be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth . for it was evening , when ▪ ioseph begged the body of iesus , and later yet before he had buried it , and yet this must be reckoned part of the sixth day , olse he had not been three days in the grave , or heart of the earth . and i think they were so reckoned in the times of the old testament also . which though it be not so much to the present purpose , yet ( if you will pardon this digression ) i will tell you why i think so . it is i know an opinion taken up by some ( and i find it is grown pretty current even amongst learned men ) that the jews in the time of the old testament did reckon their days from evening to evening ( whether they mean from sun-set to sun-set , or from six a clock to six a clock , i cannot tell , nor perhaps are they all agreed as to that point . ) but i take it to be a mistake ; which being at first taken up without sufficient ground hath since passed ( without further examination ) from hand to hand . we find exod. . . the pass-over was to be killed in the first month , on the fourteenth day in the evening ; which i think is agreed by all to be the evening at the end of the fourteenth day , ( not that at the end of the thirteenth , ) for the next morning was the fifteenth day ; which evening therefore belonged to the fourteenth day . but it is noted in the margin of our bibles , that it is , in the hebrew , between the two evening ▪ s. you 'l ask perhaps , what are those two evenings : i 'le tell you what i think they are . the word day , you know , is taken in a double sense . sometimes for ( what we call ) the natural day ( as it is contradistinguished to night ) from sun-rising to sun-setting : sometimes for ( what we call ) the artificial day ( or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) so as to take in both day and night . our saviour tells us there are twelve hours in the day ; meaning the natural day . but in the artificial day ( of which we are now speaking ) there be four and twenty hours . some please to call that the natural day , which i call the artificial ( for all do not use the words in the same sense ) but that matters not , so long as we understand one another . now by the word evening is understood the end of the day . which , as to the natural day , is at sun-set ; but as to the artificial day , it is ( i think ) at mid-night . and consequently , between the two evenings , is as much as to say , after sun-set , and before mid-night . and this is what , in our language , we commonly call the evening , which is in the hebrew between the two evenings , ( that is , between the end of the natural day , and the end of the artificial day : ) and within this time was the passover to be killed , rosted and eaten ; nothing of it was to remain till the morning ; that is , not after mid-night ; for as soon as mid-night is past morning begins . and within this time all leaven was to be put away ; that is before the mid-night of the fourteenth day . which is so fair an account of it , as that we need not scruple to embrace it . and it was the fifteenth day , that was the first day of the feast of unlevened bread ; ( all leven being put away before mid-night , ) and this fifteenth day was to be kept as a sabbath , and a holy feast to the lord , ver . . ( on what ever day of the week it chanced to fall . ) and so was the one and twentieth day , which was the last of those seven days : seven days shall ye eat unleavened bread ; even the first day ye shall put away ( or shall have put away ) leaven out of your house . and in the first day there shall be an holy convocation , and in the seventh day there shall be an holy convocation ; no manner of work shall be done in them , save that which every man shall eat ; ( that is they are to be kept as a sabbath or day of holy rest ; ) ver . , . from the fourteenth day at evening till the one and twentieth day at evening , ver . . that is , from the fourteenth day at midnight , till the one and twentieth at mid-night . and in like manner , lev. . . from even to even , or night to night , that is , from mid-night to mid-night ; or from the end of one evening to the end of the next evening . so in levit. . . and numb . . , . in the fourteenth day of the first month is the pass-over of the lord ; and in the fifteenth day of this month is the feast ; seven days shall unleavened bread be eaten , &c. where it is manifest that the fourteenth day which is the lords pass-over , is another day from the fifteenth which is the first day of the feast . for i will pass through the land of egypt ( saith god ) this night ; ( that is the night of the fourteenth day ) and will smite all the first born in the land of egypt , ex. . . and what time of the night it was , we are told ver . . and it came to pass at midnight the lord smote all the first born of the land of egypt . and to the same purpose moses tells pharaoh , chap. . , , , , thus saith the lord , about mid-night will i go out into the midst of egypt , and the first born of the land of egypt shall dy , from the first born of pharaoh , &c. that ye may know that the lord hath put a difference between the egyptians and israel . so that the fourteenth day , which was the lords pass-over continued till the mid-night of that day ; and then began the fifteenth day which was the first day of the feast . than which i think nothing can be more clear . and num. . . the fifteenth day of the first month is the morrow after the pass-over . in like manner , deut. . . thou shalt sacrifice the pass-over at even , at the going down of the sun , ( that is , after the going down of the sun , or when the sun is gone down ) at the season that thou camest forth out of egypt , which was about mid-night , ex. . . ex. . . what he offers from gen. . . is easily answered . the evening and the morning were the first day , ( and so of the other days ; ) whence he would have it thought , that the day is to begin at the begining of the evening . or ( as the margin tells us it is in the hebrew ) the evening was , and the morning was , the first day . or , there was evening , and there was morning , day one , ( for in such order the words stand in the hebrew . ) or , and was evening , and was morning , day one . that is , there was in the first day , ( and so in the rest ) evening and morning ; or darkness and light ; and the dark is put first , because ( beginning the day from midnight ) the dark is before the light. and by day one , is meant the first day . and it was moreover very agreable so to reckon . for , supposing paradise the principal seat of action ; the sun may reasonably be supposed to be created ( in the middle of the fourth day , gen. . . ) in the meridian of that place , ( as in its greatest splendor ) or , if not in the meridian of that place , it must needs be in the meridian of some place : and wherever that be , the day ( of hours ) being there half past , it must have begun at mid-night foregoing . and i doubt not but a child born on saturday night at ten a clock , was to be circumcised the next saturday ( as being the eighth day , ) not on the sunday after . i have insisted the longer on this , because i find him afterward moving another question about what time the sabbath is to begin and end , and lays great stress upon it , as we shall see anon . of which i think we need not be further solicitous than to begin and end this day , according as other days are accounted to begin and end in the places where we live . i do not think the fourth commandment to descend to these punctilio's . but , if he think it necessary to be more curious in it ; i take it to be very plain from what i have said , that at the time of christs death and resurrection , it was accounted to begin very early in the morning , while it was dark , and continue till very late at night , according as we now account our days , from midnight to mid-night . but i go on . we have now found our saviours example , as to the two first sundays from his resurrection ( if at least their first day of the week be our sunday ) imploying the day in religious exercises and sabbatical affairs with his disciples . how many more sundays he so spent with them we cannot tell . which examples of his two first , with their imitation of him in others after , ( of which we are to speak by and by , ) and the churches practise ever since , looks so like the celebration and institution of a christian sabbath , or day of holy rest and religious exercise , as that we may warrantably do the like . i am sure it is more than he can shew for the saturday sabbath in gen. . . save that men are apt to think a small thing an institution and ius divinum for what they fansy ; but , as to what they do not , nothing will serve but full express words . we have next clear evidence , of a like practise ( consonant to this example ) in act. . . on the first day of the week ▪ when the disciples came together to break bread , paul preached unto them ready to depart on the morrow , and continued his speech until mid-night . which is so plain that he is much put to his shifts to avoid it . that here is a religious assembly of the disciples , he doth not deny ; paul was preaching very late , even till mid-night , and they met to break bread , which i think is generally agreed by interpreters , to signify the celebration of the lords supper ; and i know not well what clearer character we need demand of a religious meeting for worship , sutable to the work of a sabbath or holy rest. and it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which i think he will not deny ( though he seem to cavil at it ) to signify , on the first day of the week . but he excepts , that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here translated preached , is elsewhere render'd reasoned or discoursed . be it so , and if that word will please him better , let it be so here ; he reasoned , discoursed , treated , or did hold forth ; that i think will not alter the case ; and he continued , or held on ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) this discourse , this speech , this sermon , ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sermonem ) till mid-night ; ( he held on this holding forth till mid-night ) which i take to be the same with what we now call preaching , ( or very like it ; ) 't was a long continued discourse to a congregation met together on a religious account for the service of god. but let it be called ( if he please ) a religious discourse of the holy apostle to a congregation of christians met together for such a purpose . he would then have it thought a favour or condescention to admit this breaking of bread , to be meant of the lords supper ; and not barely a common eating . but since he doth not deny it , we will accept the favour and take it so to be ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the disciples being congregated or assembled to break bread ▪ 't is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the disciples ; ( not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some of them : ) and they were ( perhaps not every one but the generality of them , as at other meetings ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 congregated or assembled ; and it seems to be a good full congregation , by eutychus's being mounted to the third loft ( whatever he meant by that third loft , though but the third scaffold , ) so high that by a fall from thence he was in great danger of being killed . now it is not likely that such a congregation of christians were thus assembled for common eating . he says , paul was to go away on the morrow . true ; but it is not said they came together to take leave of paul ; but , came together to break bread. paul's going away on the morrow , might be the reason ( and i believe was ) why they continued there so long : but the end for which they came together , was to break bread : and the occasion of their so coming , because it was the first day of the week : on which , it should seem , they were wont so to do for that end . and if he candidly ▪ consider it , methinks ▪ it should seem so to him . paul came to them at troas in five days , where he abode seven days : and on the first day of the week when the disciples came together to break bread , paul preachea to them . doth not the fair prospect of the place import thus much , that they were then met to break bread , as being the first day of the week ? what other occasion was there of mentioning what day of the week it was ? it had been otherwise a fairer transition to have said , he staid there seven days , and on the seventh day ( or the last of those seven ) the disciples came together to take leave of paul and sup with him over night , who was to depart on the morrow . now if it had been said on the seventh day ( though meaning but the last of those seven ) it would no doubt have been urged as a great argument of paul's keeping a seventh day sabbath , and the disciples with him ; not as a iewish but as a christiam assembly ; for breaking of bread ( which was a christian not a iewish service ; ) for then , breaking of bread , would certainly have been the lords supper : ( but because it was on the first day of the week ) it must now be but common eating , to take leave of paul ▪ and to sup with him ; as ( he tells us p. . ) friends commonly do ( when a minister or any other special acquaintance intends to take a iourney in the morning ) to sup with him over night . but if he thinks this to be all which is there meant by the disciples coming together on the first day of the week to break bread ; he must excuse me if i cannot be of his opinion . but because he is content to admit ( upon some terms ) their meeting might be upon a religious account , for the lords supper ( as no doubt it was ) i shall press him no further therein : but accept of his condescension . when he tells us , that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is greek for one , and therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may as well be rendered one day of the week , as the first day of the week : surely he is not in earnest . such trifling doth more hurt than help his cause . no doubt , but , when ever they met ▪ it was one day of the week , we need not be told it ; nor need the word week be added , he might as well have said one day ; nor need he have said so much ▪ but this author cannot think ( nor doth he ) that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth any where signify other than the first day of the week . in the whole story of christs resurrection , and what followed on that day in all the four evangelists , we have no other word for it but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , nor have we any other word for it ( that i know of ) there or any where else . i do not know that it is any where called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . such shifting doth not look well . 't is somewhat like the story of a man who bought a horse for five pounds to be paid the next day . and accordingly on the next day he sent five pounds of candles . perhaps ( in the bargain ) it was not said expresly ( in words at length ) five pounds of lawful money of england . but , by common intendment , it must be so understood . ( and an honest english iury ▪ upon a tryal , would so find it . ) the latin word pridie , is a derivative ( or compound rather ) from prae , prior ; and postridie from post , posterior ; and accordingly ( in latin ) pridie calendarum , and postridie calendarum must signify a day before , and a day after the calends . but can any man think it is meant of any day ? no , but the next day before , and the next day after . so if we say , christ was crucified one day before the sabbath , and rose again one day after the sabbath . this one day is the next day . and so any man who hath not a mind to cavil , will understand it . and so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , one day after the sabbath , must needs be understood of the next day after the sabbath : nor is it ever used in any other sense . if it were to be understood of any indefinitely , it should be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some day after the sabbath , not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one day after . but the most pleasant shift of all , is , when he would have us think that this evening ( which is called the first day of the week ) was the evening after the seventh day , that is saturday night ; and the next morning ( when paul was to go away ) was sunday morning ( and he to travel that sunday : ) and that the evening of saturday was the beginning of sunday , and was therefore called the first day of the week . because it is said gen. . the evening and the morning was the first day , ( and so of the rest , ) and therefore the evening was the beginning of every day . see what ▪ shift a man will make , rather than quit an opinion he hath once taken up . we are taught that on the fourteenth day of the first month at even the pass-over was to be killed . doth he think that this fourteenth day at even was the end of the thirteenth day , the fourteenth day then beginning ? i think every body else takes it to be the evening at the end of the fourteenth day , and the fifteenth day ( on the morrow ) was the first day of the feast of unleavened bread. for though it were the fourteenth day at evening , yet it was the fourteenth day , not the fifteenth . and luke . . the evening after our saviours crucifixion , on the sixth day , when it was late at night ( as was shewed before , and must be , according to the story of what had been done before that time ) was yet but the preparation , not the sabbath , the seventh day being not yet begun . for so we have it , it was the preparation , and the sabbath drew on . and the women were then preparing their spices and oyntments , yet rested the sabbath day according to the commandment ; so that the sabbath day was not yet begun ; nor was it ended when the evening of the next day began , but on the morning of the day following ▪ as was shewed above . and ( as we shewed at large before ) the first day of the week ( on which christ rose ) began very early in the morning while it was dark , and continued ( the same day ) till very late at night . and this is the constant language of the new testament every where . so that when the congregation of christians , acts . . did on the first day of the week assemble to break bread , and paul preached to them , continuing his sermon till mid-night ; this must needs be on what we call sunday ; and the morning following was munday morning ; not sunday morning as this author would have it . 't is manifest therefore , that there was a religious assembly , of the christian congregation at troas , on the first day of the week , for celebration of the lords supper , and preaching ; and paul with them . which i take to be the celebration of a christian sabbath . however , this ( he says ) is but one instance . true , this is but one . ( but we have heard of more before , and shall hear of more by and by . ) but this one is more than he can shew for more than two thousand five hundred years ( from god's resting on the seventh day gen. . . till after israel was come out of egypt ex. . ) during which time he would have us think the seventh-day sabbath was constantly observed . and if he could shew any one such instance ( of enoch , noah , abraham , or other , ) where such a religious assembly , for the worship of god , was held on the seventh day in course from the creation ; he would think his point well proved , though no more were said of it than is of this . whereas now as to the time from thence to the floud , he brings no other proof , but that abel , and enoch , and noah were good men ( as no doubt they were ) and therefore it is to be presumed they kept a sabbath ; and that upon the seventh day . which is to beg the question , not to prove it . from thence till israels going into egypt , all that he brings to prove this matter of fact is but that of gen. . . where ( speaking of abram and lot , with the multitude of their cattel ) it is said , the land was not able to bear them that they might dwell together ; for their substance was great so that they could not dwell together ; and there was a strife between the herd-men of abrams cattle , and the herd-men of lots cattle , &c. they could not dwell together , that is ( saith he ) they could not rest together , that is , they could not keep a sabbath together ; therefore ( he concludes ) they did use to keep a sabbath ; and that sabbath was the seventh day in course from the creation . and is not this a goodly proof ? i should think ( if he would put a stress on the word rest ) it should rather signify , they could not live quietly together without their herd-mens quarrelling about their pasture ; for so it follows in the next words , there was a strife between their herds-men . from thence till after their coming out of egypt , he brings no other proof but that of ex. . , . where , when moses and aaron had been pressing pharaoh to let israel go three days iourney into the wilderness , to keep a feast and sacrifice to the lord their god ; pharaoh replies , wherefore do ye lett ( or hinder ) the people from their work ; you make them rest from their burdens , or you take them off from their work ; that is , says he , you make them keep a sabbath . for the word or verb there translated you make them rest is , ( he tells us ) a derivative from another verb which signifies to rest , from which verb the word sabbath is also derived : they did therefore rest ( saith he ) that is keep a sabbath , and that sabbath was every week , and it was on the seventh day in course from the creation . alas ! how little do either or both of these places prove , of what he would have to be granted him thence ! he tells us sometimes there were other sabbaths , besides that of the seventh day ; i am sure there were other restings . if moses and aaron had desired pharaoh to excuse them from their work one day in seven , that on such day they might serve the lord their god ; it would have looked like an argument . but when it is , to go three days into the wilderness to keep a feast to the lord ; what is this to a weekly sabbath ? this seventh-day sabbath , so runs in the mind of this author , that if any where he can lay hold of the word rest , it must presently prove a seventh-day-sabbath . else who would have thought , that because abram and lot could not dwell quietly together ; therefore they must needs keep a sabbath , and that upon the seventh day , and in course from the creation ? and the like of the israelites in egypt , because moses and aaron are said to hinder them from their work ; therefore they did constantly keep a weekly sabbath , and that upon the seventh day , in course from the creation . he might have to better purpose , alleged pharaoh's seven fat kine and seven lean ones , and the seven full ears of corn , and seven empty ; for here we have the number seven signalized ; only these were seven years , not seven days ; and the like of nebuchadnezzar's being seven years turned out to the beasts of the field , dan. . , , . or that of the clean beasts and fowls coming into the ark by sevens , gen. . , . but , what is more to his purpose ( and which he should not have missed ) is that of gen. . . and gen. . , . where we have the interval of seven days particularly mentioned ; for yet seven days , and i will cause it to rain upon the earth , &c. ( chap. . . ) where god gives to noah just a weeks warning of the time when the floud should begin , during which interval ( if those days were sabbath days ) he might remove himself and what was necessary into the ark before the next sabbath . and , toward the end of the floud , noah sends out the dove , chap. . . and he staid seven days , and again sent forth the dove , ver . . and he staid yet other seven days , and sent forth the dove , &c. ver . . where we have the dove sent out three times , just at seven days distance . and how do we know but that these three days were three sabbath days ? which though it be not a conclusive argument , is better than any that he brings . for here we have three intervals of seven days , in these two chapters . but if a weekly sabbath were then kept , 't is very strange that we should have no intimation of any such thing in the books of moses ( before israel's coming out of egypt . ) and much more , that there is nothing of it in the book of iob. and , that none of his friends ( amongst the many charges they bring against him ) should never object his neglect of the sabbath , or want of due observance thereof . which being so plausible an objection , it seems more likely , that a sabbath was not then wont to be observed : for which he hath so very little to shew . and by what we have iob . . it should seem that iob's seven sons kept feasting ( each in his own day ) for seven days together ; without any mention of a sabbath intervening . nor was it a religious feast but a feast of mirth and jollity , such as made iob suspicious lest they might sin and curse god in their heart , v. . and therefore he offer'd propitiatory sacrifices for them continually , or ( as the margin tells us it is in the hebrew ) all the days , that is every of these seven days . as little a matter will serve his turn to prove ( p. . ) that christs ascension was , and his coming to iudgment is to be , on a saturday , or seventh-day-sabbath : because it is said acts . . that mount olivet ( whence he ascended ) is , from ierusalem , a sabbath-days iourney . but he tells us that by no account that he can make ▪ can he assign the ascension on the first day , ( no more can i. ) but what then ? well! but why upon a saturday rather than a sunday ? because he observes , that after christ's ascension from mount olivet , it is said , then they returned to ierusalem , from mount olivet , which is from ierusalem a sabbath-days iourney . well! what of this ? he cannot see why it was expresly said , that it was but a sabbath-days iourney from ierusalem , but because it was the sabbath-day . perhaps i may shew him another reason as likely as it . if the word then do not there signify the same day ( but only at large , after his ascension ▪ ) this is nothing to the purpose . but admitting that by then be meant the same day ; the connexion runs fairly thus , after his ascension they returned from thence to ierusalem the same day , for it was ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) but a little way off , about a sabbath days iourney . which , i think , is a fair account of the place ▪ especially since we know otherwise , that it was not upon 〈…〉 account ( as he speaks ) will serve as well for the one as for the other . but , indeed , for neither . but how doth this concern his coming to iudgment ? yes , because it is there said ( ver . . ) he shall come in like manner ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) as ye have seen him go into heaven . and ( because this author fansies ) he did ascend on a sabbath day , therefore ( he fansies also ) he shall on a sabbath day come again . i see a weak argument , with a strong fansy will go far . but to prove his ascension to be on the sabbath ( besides this , of a sabbath-days journey ) he adds further , that christ and his disciples were then assembled , and that christ preached . well! and why may we not as well conclude that the day of his resurrection was also a sabbath ? for christ and his disciples were then assembled , ( first at emmaus , and then at ierusalem , ) and christ did then also ( at both places ) preach to them , and the substance of his preaching was much the same , ( as will appear by comparing luk . with acts . ) and did then also celebrate the lords supper . and eight days after , christ was again assembled with the disciples , and preached to them , on the same day of the week . if christs presence and preaching will prove the ascension day to be a sabbath , why should it not as well prove the resurrection day to be a sabbath ? the onely difference is , that ( he thinks ) serves his turn , but this makes against him . and why should it not also be thought a sabbath , acts . for paul and the disciples were then assembled ; and they were assembled to break bread ; and paul there preached to them . and all these assemblies were on the first day of the week . and they seem to me a much stronger proof of the first day , ( the day of his resurrection ) being a sabbath , than that the ascension day was so . and the preaching which our author here mentions as on the day of ascension , seems to me rather to have been on that of the resurrection . for st. luke in the beginning of this chapter of acts . seems to give a short repetition of what himself had delivered more at large luk. . and gives an account not only of what happened on the day of ascension , ( though he close with it ) but of what happened during the forty days from his resurrection to that time . and this preaching , i take to be that mentioned luke . on the day of his resurrection . but ( after all ) this is but a whimsey , ( what he tells us of christs ascension on a seventh-day-sabbath . ) for 't is very plain that his ascension was neither on a seventh day , nor on a first , but on a fifth day of the week . for 't is plainly said , acts . . that he shewed himself alive after his passion , being seen of them forty days , ( that is , he was seen of them at times , not constantly , for the space of fourty days ) whereof that of his resurrection was the first , and that of his ascension was the last . and if that were sunday , this must be thursday . he may tell it upon his fingers ( as he speaks p. . ) if he please . but though our saviours ascension was not on the seventh day of the week ( in observance of the seventh-day sabbath , or in confirmation thereof : ) yet the mission of the holy ghost ( according as on the first day of the week , the day of his resurrection , he had promised . luk . . ) was on the first day of the week fulfilled also , as appears acts . when the day of pentecost was fully come , that is , the fiftieth day ( for so pentecost signifieth in greek ) they were all with one accord in one place ( that is , they were unanimously assembled ) and suddenly there came a sound from heaven , as of a rushing mighty wind , and filled the house , where they were sitting ; and there appeared to them cloven tongues like as of fire , and it sat upon each of them ( that is , at least , upon each of the apostles , ) and they were all filled with the holy ghost , and began to speak with other tongues as the spirit gave them utterance . which i take to be a further instance , ( if our author will not allow it to be called a sabbath ) at lest of a religious assembly for the worship of god ; ( and if it had been on the seventh day , how great a proof would this have been with him for a seventh-day sabbath . ) this i take to be a christian sabbath , and within the prospect of the fourth commandment . and though it be not expresly called a sabbath ( to avoid confusion or ambiguity , because the word sabbath in common speech was then appropriated to the jewish sabbath , ) yet it is the same thing . and if he doubt whether the feast of pentecost were on the first day of the week , as was that of the resurrection ; he may be satisfied from levit. . . where that feast is appointed . after mention made of the pass-over , ( ver . . &c. ) moses proceeds to that of the wave-offering , v. , . when ye be come into the land which i give unto you , and shall reap the harvest thereof ; then shall ye bring a sheaf of the first-fruits of your harvest unto the priest , and he shall wave the sheaf before the lord to be accepted for you ; on the morrow after the sabbath the priest shall wave it . whether by the sabbath here mentioned be meant the weekly sabbath , or the first day of the feast of unleavened-bread , is not material ; because , in that year whereof we are speaking , this first day of the feast was on the weekly sabbath , ( as is manifest from the story of christs crucifixion , which was on the sixth day of the week , and the next day ( being the seventh day ) was the feast of the pass-over ) and the morrow after this sabbath , was the day of christ's resurrection , as well as of the wave-offering . and then he proceeds , ver . , , to the feast of pentecost , or the feast of weeks . ye shall count unto you from the morrow after the sabbath , from the day that ye brought the sheaf of the wave-offering , seven sabbaths , shall be compleat , even unto the morrow after the seventh sabbath , shall ye number fifty days ▪ ( inclusively taken , as the manner is in scripture reckoning , and must needs be so here . ) it was called the feast of pentecost , or the feast of weeks ( as deut. . , . ) which feast of pentecost was the morrow after the sabbath ; on a first day of the week . and on this first day of the week , ( the morrow after the seventh day sabbath ) here was a solemn assembly for religious worship , and a very large one , both of jews and gentiles out of every nation under heaven , parthians , medes , elamites , &c. and this solemnized by a miraculous effusion of the holy ghost , in the gift of tongues ▪ for we all hear ( say those of that great assembly ) every one in our own tongue where in we were born the wonderful works of god , ver . , , , , , , . with a long sermon of peter's on that occasion ▪ which i take to be another celebration of the first day sabbath ; and a very eminent one . we are to observe also , that in some of the places alleged to this purpose , though but single instances , there is an intimation of a frequent usage . as in that act. . ● . on the first day of the week , the disciples being assembled to break bread , paul preached , &c. is a fair intimation , that on the first day they did use so to assemble . if it were said amongst us , about six a clock ; when they were come together ( in the college-hall ) to supper , such a thing happened : any ( unprejudiced ) person would take it for a fair intimation , that they used to suppe about six a clock . and if this author could any where find , in the book of iob , that on the seventh day of the week ( from the creation ) when iob and his friends were assembled for the joint service of god ▪ bildad spake thus , &c. he would take this for a strong proof , that the seventh-day sabbath was then wont to be observed . much stronger than what he allegeth to that purpose ; abram and lot had each of them so many cattel , that they could not dwell or rest ) together , without quarrellings amongst their servants . and that of what pharaoh said to moses and aaron , why do you hinder their work , you make the people rest from their burthens ? a like place is that of cor. . , . nov concerning the collection for the saints , as i have given order to the churches of galatia , even so do ye ( and what that was , we are told in the next words , ) upon the first day of the week , let every one of you lay by him in store as god hath prospered him ; that there be no gatherings when i come . ( if it had been so said ( to 〈◊〉 , to 〈◊〉 , or to iob , upon the seventh day of the week do this or thus ) what a strong proof would this have been for the observation of a seventh day sabbath ! ) i think it is plain from hence , that the first day of the week , was weekly observed , and was wont to be so observed , both by the church of corinth , and by the churches of galatia . for so paul doth not here advise it , but suppose it , or take it for granted . what that order was to the churches of galatia our author says he cannot tell . 〈◊〉 thought it had been plain enough : he bids the corinthians do , as he had bid the galatians , that is , on the first day of the week , &c. what further order , he had given the galatians , it is not as to this point necessary for us to know . but saith he , if they must on that day lay by as god hath blessed them , then they must on that day cast up their accounts , tell their mony , reckon their stock , compute their expenses , &c. which are not sabbath-day works . a wise objection ▪ as though all this could not as well be done before ( so far as is necessary ) and , on sunday , put so much into the poor mans box ( or give to the deacons or collectors ) as ( upon such account ) they should have found fit ; like as is now done in our churches when there is occasion for such collections . why doth he not make the same exception to that of deut. . . concerning the feast of pentecost ? where they are to bring a tribute of a free-will-offering , which ( says he ) thou shalt give unto the lord thy god , &c. according as the lord thy god hath blessed thee ; doth he think that on the day of pentecost ( which was to be strictly observed as a sabbath , a holy convocation and no servile work to be done , lev. , . ) they must cast up their accounts , tell their money , &c. because they were to offer according as the lord hath blessed them ? i think not ▪ but here comes in again his former trifling objection of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , whether it signify , the first day of the week ? yet i am very confident , himself doth really believe it doth here so signify , and ( as to his own thoughts ) doth not doubt of it . but perhaps thinks it a piece of wit , or skill in greek , thus to object against his own judgment . yet since he will have it so , ( and we must come again to childs play , ) i will say some what to it . whether 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be good greek or no , as to the common analogy of that tongue ; or , what is the reason of that syntax ; i need not trouble my self to enquire , ( because it is nothing to the purpose ; for we are not inquiring whether it be good greek , but what it here signifies . ) there are i presume in all languages ( by negligence or corruption ) some harsh expressions , as to the analogy of the language , which yet are allowable by common usage , and well enough understood . he would think it perhaps a little harsh to say in greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( that is in latine , tres & decimum , quatuor & decimum , ) for what we say in english thirteenth , fourteenth ; yet so they speak . and somewhat harsh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rev. . . rev. . . and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , rev. . . ( instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) yet so it is . and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , yet so we find it rev. . . and many such may be shewed . in latine , idcirco , quocirca , posthac , quapropter , controvertor , paterfamilias , omne genus homines , aethiops albus dentes , pridie catendas , and many more , are scarce to be accounted for as regular , save that they are so used ; but , because they are so used ; they are accounted elegant enough . in english ; methinks ( for i think , ) three pound ten shillings , ( for three pounds , &c. ) three foot nine inches , many a one , a few pottage , and the like , are scarce regular ; yet are so used . when a merchant marks his parcels ( and so calls them ) number one , number two , &c. he means first and second . so , in the year of our lord one thousand six hundred and ninety one , one thousand six hundred ninety two , is commonly said ; when yet we mean ninety first , ninety second ; so one a clock , two a clock , for the first and second hour after twelve . and other the like cases , where the cardinal number is put for the ordinal . as it is also in gen. . the evening , and morning were ( jom echad ) day one ; which the septuagint renders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth there signify 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . yet no wise man will cavil as to the sense of such expressions , ( what ever they may do as to the grammatical construction , ) when we know what is meant by them . so here ; 't is true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth properly signify one in common construction : but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth never signify other than the first of the week , ( either in the new testament or any where else , ) not any day of the week , any more than one a clock doth signify any other hour than the first after twelve . when a thing is said to be done at one a clock ; he that shall object , this may be any hour , for every hour is one ; would be laugh'd at . and when a merchant bids his prentice bring him number one , if he bring him what else he pleases ( because every number , is number one , or one number ) he deserves to be knockt . now when every one knows ( who understands any thing of this nature , ) that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the proper name of that day which is next after the iewish sabbath , as much as one a clock is the proper name of that hour which is next after twelve : it must either be great ignorance , or somewhat worse so to object . i appeal to himself , whether ever he met with that name ( in any author ) in any other sense . he seems to take it very unkindly , pag. . of those who should think that , by son of man should be meant an ordinary man , in mar. . , . the sabbath was made for man , and not man for the sabbath ; therefore the son of man is lord also of the sabbath . where i think it is plain , that in the former verse ( the sabbath was made for man , &c. ) it is manifestly spoken of ordinary men. and though in the latter verse , ( the son of man is lord also of the sabbath , ) by son of man i suppose is meant christ ; yet is that title given also to ordinary men , elsewhere , very often . as iob , . . how much less man who is a worm , and the son of man which is a worm ? and isai. . . who art thou that shouldst be afraid of a man that shall dy , and of the son of man which shall be made as grass . so ps. . . what is man , that thou art mindful of him , and the son of man that thou visitest him ? and to the same purpose , ps. . . and ( to name no more ) in the book of ezekiel , the prophet ezekiel is , in that one book , called son of man , oftener than christ is so called in the whole bible . and if we would argue as he doth , we might plausiby object , it might be so meant here ; though i think it is not . but he cannot shew that ever the iewish sabbath was called the lords day ( however he thinks it might have been ; ) nor ( though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be greek for one ) that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is ever used for other than the first day of the week , or the next after the jewish sabbath . nor doth he think it . such trifling ( to give it no harder name ) may do well enough in drollery or burlesque , but not in a plain honest enquiry . but if he would be curious as to the phrase ; 't is plain enough that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not properly the genitive case governed of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for then it should have been 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is of the neuter gender . ( and 't is a mistake therefore when p. . he renders it by one of the sabbaths , as if it had been 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ) but 't is governed rather of some praeposition or particle understood , ( as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the like , ) and then , as in latin pridie calendas ( that is , p●io● dies ante calendas ) is the next day before the calends . so is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) the next day after the sabbath : the full construction is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being understood in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 understood in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ) that is one day after the sabbath ; which being the proper name of a day , cannot be meant of any other but the next day after . 't is certain therefore that ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) the first day of the week , or the first day after the iewish sabbath , was from the resurrection of christ and after , eminently signalized , as a day of special observation ; 't was honoured with christs resurrection on that day ; with his first appearance to mary magdalen and the other women ; then , to the two disciples going to emmaus , and his religious assembling with them there ; after that , to the disciples at ierusalem and assembling with them the same day ; and the whole time of those assemblings employed in religious exercises , ( preaching , celebrating the sacrament , instructing and blessing his disciples , and giving them commission for preaching the gospel and planting the christian church . ) and again with the same disciples on that day sen-night , assembled with them , and in like manner employed . it was specially signalized also by the miraculous effusion of the holy ghost on that day , in a great assembly of iews and gentiles on the day of pentecost ; and the day employed in preaching and other religious exercises . it was observed in like manner at troas , in preaching the word , celebrating the sacrament , and other religious communion , as things there usual on that day . it was observed at corinth , not once onely , but as a thing of course ; and so presumed by the apostle when he gives particular instructions concerning a collection for the saints to be made weekly on that day . and in like manner in the churches of galatia , with a like direction to them . ( and we have no reason to suspect but that in other churches also , there was a like custome of observing that day ) and it is the onely day of the week ( unless the seventh-day , in order to the iewish sabbath ) that is so much as mentioned by name after the resurrection of christ. ( at least i do not at present remember the second , third , fourth , fifth , or sixth day of the week by name so mentioned . ) now what we have reason to believe was so generally observed after the resurrection , by christ himself ( more than once , ) by his apostles , and by the christian churches in their days ; we have reason to believe was according to christs direction . for we know very well , that christ did after his resurrection give commandments to the apostles , about things pertaining to the kingdome of god , and ●●●●ling the christian church . what those commandments were in particular , we cannot tell ; but are to presume that what they did therein , was pursuant of those commands ; and this in particular about observing the first day of the week , which we call the christian sabbath ; and which ( in contradistinction to the iewish sabbath ) is called the lords day ; rev. . . and hath accordingly been so called , and so observed ever since . which being so practised by the apostles , and so continued ever since , i take to be a good warrant for us to continue it , as a thing agreeable to the will of god. as to what he so often objects , that there is no express command thereof recorded : that is , not such a command as our author demands . we are not to prescribe to god in what terms he shall make known his will , ( any more than the pharisees , mat. . . were to prescribe to christ what kind of signs he was to shew to testify his authority ; ) 't is sufficient if god do in his own way intimate what is his will , though it be it not with the formality of be it enacted . and those who are willing to be taught of god , will be content so to understand his meaning . an approved practise in the worship of god , frequently repeated , attested by miracles , encouraged by christs own example , and that of the apostles and the christian churches then , and continued in the christian church ever since : is to me great evidence of the will of god ; and that there was a command for it , though it be not recorded . ( like as i believe that there was , very early , a command from god , to worship him by sacrifice , though that command be not recorded . but ( to that of its being so observed ever since ) he objects , we have nothing but tradition , either that the christian sabbath hath been so observed , or that it is called the lords-day . and tradition is what he takes great pleasure to exclaim against ; if that be admitted ( saith he ) where shall we stop ? very well ! i am not over fond of laying too great a weight upon traditions ; at least not on all things that are pretended so to be . but i pray , how can he tell , otherwise than by tradition , whether our saturday or our sunday , be the seventh day in course from the creation ? or , ( if that be too hard a question ) whether of the two is the seventh day of the iewish week ? i know nothing but tradition for it . i cannot remember so long : nor have i so long kept so strict account of days as to be sure of it . i trust to the common computation of the world , that our sabbath is a continuation of that sabbath which the apostles kept . and if so , i am safe . if not , i cannot help it . and because i think the apostles sabbath was on the first day of the jewish week , therefore i think ours to be so . but if theirs was not , neither is ours . he would not have that of st. iohn , revel . . . i was in the spirit on the lords-day to be understood of our sabbath . and why not ? he tells us , . some think it to be christmass-day ; . some think it to be easter-day ; and . some think it to be the day of iudgment . and long discourses we have upon all these . well! but doth he think it to be meant of any of these ? no. then , to what purpose are these alleged , in disparagement of the christian sabbath ? but he seems to have so great displeasure against the christian sabbath , that whatever he can think of to be objected ( though he do not think it to be true ) he will be sure to object , ( that he may disparage the day , or perplex the argument ) as if he were more concerned to beat down the christian sabbath , than to set up the iewish . not considering , that , by all this , he is doing their work who would have none at all . for they know well that the iewish sabbath hath been long since laid aside ( without any great fear of returning ; ) and if they can but throw off the christian sabbath also , 't is what they would have . and 't is of a like import what he argues ( p. ) for coming to the publick but once a day , ( not twice as our manner is ; ) for those who care not to come at all , if he dispense with them as to the one , they will dispense with themselves as to the other meeting . i should rather think , that , the whole day being due to the service of god ( publick and private ) it is to be parcelled out , as to the number and times of publick meeting ; as might ( according to christian prudence ) be judged most conducing ( in this or that place ) to those ends , and to common edification ; and that , to make such little circumstances ( otherwise than as they conduce to those general ends ) a matter of religious observation , or divine institution , is a like extravagance as that of the pharisees in laying like weight on their traditions , and that of the papists on their numerous superstitious ceremonies . and is as properly superstition , as these . i do not know this author , ( who thus argues against observing the christian sabbath , and against publick meeting on that day more than once ; ) and therefore am not willing to judge hardly . but the natural result of what he argues , is as i told you . he doth not think that iohn , was ( on the lords day rev. . . ) keeping the anniversary of christs incarnation ; nor of his resurrection . ( no more do i. ) but why not ? because ( saith he ) he may say as in the case of moses's dead body , no man knows of his sepulchre to this day . now as to the incarnation , i am apt to think , that no man doth at this day know certainly , either on what day of the year , or what day of the week christ was born ( nor is it any matter whether we do or no. ) but i should rather say , no man knows at this day , than ( as he ) no man knoweth to this day , ( as if no man hitherto had known it : ) for certainly there have been those who knew it heretofore ( while he was alive ) though it be now forgotten , and at this day no man knows it . but will he say so as to the resurrection ? i think it is plain , that christ was crucified on the fourteenth day , lay in the grave the fifteenth , and rose again the sixteenth day , of the first month . and that he rose on the first day of the week , no man doubts . he should rather have put it thus , as no man knows to this day , where is the body of moses , ( that it might not be worshiped , ) so no man knows at this day , which is the seventh in course from the creation ; that we might not contend about it . however , i am contented to admit , ( if that will please him ) that the lords day there mentioned was neither meant of christmass-day , nor easter-day , nor whit-sunday , nor the day of iudgment ; but think it to be meant of the first day of the week , which is the christian sabbath . not , of any of those other days mentioned ; nor of the iewish sabbath , as he would have it . 't is , i think , a new notion of his own ( at least i know none other of his mind ) that it should be meant of the iewish sabbath . he grants there is nothing from the circumstances of the place to determine it to this day . nor doth he pretend to shew that the jewish sabbath was ever so called . but he thinks it might have been so called . for he says god blessed and sanctified the seventh day ( that is , the seventh day after six days of labour ) therefore it might have been called the lords day : and so may as well the christian sabbath as the iews sabbath . that the son of man is lord also of the sabbath day ; and so he is of every day in the week ; and of the christian sabbath ( when that is the sabbath ) as well as of the iewish . that the seventh day is the sabbath of the lord our god ; that is , the seventh day after six days of labour , but whether the seventh day in course from the creation , is no where said . that isai. . . the sabbath is called my holy day : true , on what ever day the sabbath be : first or seventh of the week ; or whatever day god appoints to be kept holy ; as for instance , the first and seventh day of the feast of unleavened bread , ex. . . the first day shall be a holy convocation ; and the seventh day shall be a holy convocation ; and each of them was the lords holy day , on what ever day of the week they happened . and the like for other days . so levit. . , , , , , , , , , , , , , . and num. . , , . num. . , , , . all the days here mentioned are the lords holy days , yet i do not take any of them to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and all he can pretend to from these or whatever he produceth , is no more but that the iewish sabbath ( while it was the sabbath ) might have been so called , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the lords day ; he doth not pretend to shew that ever it was so called . now i would desire this gentleman ( if he can but a little while lay aside his prejudice ) to consider , first that the lords day was the proper name of a day ; whereby it might be known as distinguished from other days ; ( else to what purpose is it said i was in the spirit on the lords day ; ) whereas the proper name of the iewish sabbath ( and of that onely as he would have us think p. . ) was the sabbath day ; and there is no appearance of reason , why , if he meant that day , he should not rather have said i was in the spirit on the sabbath day , or the seventh day . this therefore must needs be meant of some other day , known by another name . . i would have him next consider , that the lord in the old testament is the usual name of god indefinitely ; without particularizing this or that of the three persons ; and the sabbath of the lord thy god , doth not appropriate it to the second person more than to the first and third . and though i do not deny , that our christ was the god who gave the ten commandments ( for all the three persons are the same god , ) yet i do not think it to be christ onely , as contradistinguished to the other two . and when it is said , i am the lord thy god , thou shall have no other god but me ; the meaning is not , i the second person , am so the lord thy god , that thou shalt own no other person for thy god beside me the second person . but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the lord , in the new testament , is for the most part applied peculiarly to our lord christ ( god and man. ) and is understood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of him . ( as he is called elsewhere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the son of man. ) and accordingly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must be a day peculiarly appropriate ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) to our lord christ ; which the jewish sabbath was not , nor that of the fourth commandment ; which is the sabbath of the lord thy god , that is of god indefinitely ; for 't is in that notion that god speaks in the ten commandments , not as one person contradistinct to the other two . it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the lords day in a like sense as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the lords supper , cor. . . and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the cup of the lord , the table of the lord , cor. . , . cor. . . in all which , by the lord is meant the lord christ , god and man. and because , there being a double sabbath then in use , ( the iewish sabbath , and the christian sabbath , ) and the word sabbath indefinitely having been a long time applied to the iewish sabbath , and would be apt to be understood of it ; therefore ( by way of distinction ) that of the christians ( though a sabbath also , within the sense of the fourth commandment ) was called the lords day , as being the day or sabbath appropriate to our lord iesus christ. and therefore when he tells us , so often , the world was made by our lord iesus christ , and the law given on mount sinai by our lord iesus christ , ( upon which notions he seems to lay great stress , though it be nothing to the purpose , ) i think it is a mistake . for our lord iesus christ is god and man , but he was not god and man when the world was made , or the law given , but onely god. 't is true christ as god , ( according to his divine nature ) is the same god who made the world , and gave the law , ( for we have no other god but one ) but not as god and man. for man he was not at that time , but in the fulness of time became man. the sabbath of the lord our god ( in the fourth commandment , with equal respect to all the three persons ) doth not signify the same as , the sabbath of our lord iesus christ ( god and man. ) the lord our god there , not the same with our lord iesus christ , in the new testament . but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( the lords supper ) is the supper of our lord iesus christ ( god and man ) the founder of our christian religion : and accordingly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( the lords day ) is the day of our lord iesus christ , a day appointed by him . . i would have him consider further , that the lords day , ( dominica , or dies dominicus , ) hath been all along , in all ages of the christian church , used as the proper name of what we otherwise call the christian sabbath ; and not for the proper name of any other day ; and therefore , till somewhat do appear to the contrary , i shall take it to be the same with what is called the lords day in scripture . there is , in the new testament , a place called rome ; and there is at this day a place in italy called rome , and which hath been so called all along ever since ; neither do i know of any other eminent place of called . therefore ( till somewhat do appear to the contrary ) i shall presume our rome to be the same place with that which in the new testament is called rome . we find in scripture there is an island of the mediterranean sea called melita or malta ( where st. paul suffered ship-wrack ) not far from another island called crete : now we know also there is in the mediterranean sea an island called malta at this day , and another not far from thence called crete or candy , and we do not know of any other islands so called , then , or at any time since ; and therefore we may safely presume ( till somewhat do appear to the contrary ) that those islands now so called , are the same islands with those which were then so called . and in like manner , that day which hath been ever since called the lords-day as by its proper name , we may and ought to presume to be the same day which was by st. iohn so called ( as by its proper name ) in rev. . . when he wrote the book of the revelation ; till it can be shewed that he did by that name mean some other day . and we have the more reason so to presume , because we find it so called by others , very soon after st. iohn's time ; and by those whom we have great reason to believe to have been well acquainted with st. iohn's meaning and his manner of speech . the first i shall name is st. ignatius , who was not onely contemporary with st. iohn , but was a disciple or scholar of st. iohn . now st. iohn ( according to the best account we can have from chronology ) wrote his revelation in patmos ( whither he was banished by domitian , ) in or about the year of our lord ; ( after which he wrote his gospel , upon his return from patmos to ephesus : ) and died in the year or under trajanus . and ignatius died a martyr under the same emperour trajan , in the year of our lord . so that there is no great distance in time . ( and if we should miss a year or two it is not material . ) how long before his death ignatius wrote his epistle to the magnesians , we are not sure ( nor is it material ; ) now in that his epistle to the magnesians , even according to the genuine edition published by bishop usher out of an ancient manuscript ( not that which is justly suspected to be interpolated , ) he doth earnestly exhort them not to iudaize , but to live as christians ; ( si enim usque nunc secundum iudaismum vivimus ; confitemur gratiam non recepisse . ) and as to the sabbath in particular , non amplius sabbatizantes , sed secundum dominicam viventes , in qua & vita nostra orta est ▪ ) not any longer observing the iewish sabbath , but the lords day on which christ our life 〈…〉 is manifest therefore , that within or years after 〈…〉 writing , the lords day did not signify the jewish sabbath , but the first day of the week , on which our saviour rose again ; and that it was then observed in contradistinction to the jewish sabbath . i forbear to mention his epistle ad trallianos ( where again we have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 applied to the first day of the week on which christ rose again ) because it is in that edition which is suspected to be interpolated . i might to this add the testimony of polycarp , who was also a disciple of st. iohn , and collected and published these epistles of ignatius , and may be presumed to understand what st. iohn meant by the lords day . but i shall add in the next place that of iustin martyr ; whom though i cannot call a disciple of st. iohn , ( because he was not converted to the christian religion till about the year of our lord , about thirty years after st. iohn's death , ) yet he lived so soon after , that he could not be ignorant of the christians practise , and what they understood st. iohn to mean by the lords day . and how that day was observed in iustin's time , he tells us in ( what is called ) his second apology , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and a little after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . on that day commonly called sunday , there is held a congregation or a general meeting together , of all inhabitants whether of city or country , and there are publickly read the memorials or monuments of the apostles , or the writings of the prophets , &c. and again , the day called sunday we do all in common make 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the meeting-day ; for that the first-day is it on which god from darkness and matter made the world , and our saviour iesus christ did on the same day rise from the dead . in which places though it be not called dominica , but dies solis , yet how it was then solemnly observed , in memory of our lord christs resurrection , is evident . 't is manifest therefore that the lords day ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , dominica , or dies dominicus , ) was the known name of a day so called when st. iohn wrote his revelation ; that it was a day of religious worship contradistinguished to that of the iewish sabbath , so observed and so called by ( st. iohn's disciple ) ignatius within or years at most after st. iohn's writing that book ; ( which he would not have done if he had not thought it to be so meant by his master st. iohn . ) 〈…〉 manner it was observed ( in their solemn religious assemblies ) iustin martyr tells us within ● years after that ; and that it was otherwise called ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) sunday . and that dominica or dies dominicus ; hath been so used not onely by the ancient christian writers , ignatius , clemens , irenaeus , origen , tertullian , &c. but by the councils and church history all along ; hath been so often shewed by divers , and is to be seen by any who please to consult them , as is not to be doubted by any ; unless we would ( under the notion of tradition ) deny all history ; which in a plain matter of fact were very unreasonable . nor can he shew that the name of the lords day ever was ( however it might have been as he thinks ) attributed to the iewish sabbath . and therefore to tell us that this name is stollen from the iewish sabbath to be applied to ours ▪ is such a fansy as may be laughed at , but doth not deserve a serious answer . sure we are that the christian sabbath hath been long in possession of that name ; but , that ever the iewish sabbath was so , there is no evidence : therefore the theft must be on his side , who steals it from us to give it to the jewish sabbath . but he tells us , that our saviour himself observed the jewish sabbath . ( and i suppose he did so ▪ and , that he was circumcised also , and did observe the ceremonial law ▪ ) but it was before his death and resurrection . i do not find that he observed it afterward . but he says , after christs death when he had said it is finished , he kept the sabbath in the grave . be it so ( if that were keeping a sabbath . ) and the good women rested on that day according to the commandment . and why not ? since christ was not yet risen ; nor was the day yet changed , or pretended so to be . this therefore is but whimsey and nothing to the purpose . we all agree ; that , till the resurrection of christ , the jews observed the jewish sabbath , on what they called the seventh-day of their week . but whether or no it were a seventh from the creation , we cannot tell . 't is more to the purpose what he tells us , that paul and other christians did after christs resurrection seem to observe the jewish sabbath ; going to the temple and to the synagogues on the sabbath-day ; meaning thereby the iewish sabbath . and it is true ; they did so go . but i answer ; . so they did on other days as well as on the sabbath , and in other places , as well as in the synagogue and the temple , act . . dayly in the temple , and in every house , or from house to house ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈…〉 they ceased not to preach iesus christ. and act. . . they continued dayly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with one accord in the temple , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and breaking bread at home , or from house to house . as to such duties of worship as were common to them with the jews , they took the opportunity of joining therein with them ; whether on their sabbath , or on any other day ; but as to what was peculiarly christian , this they performed in separate meetings from them ; breaking their bread at home , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or from house to house ; the sacrament of the lords supper ( being peculiarly a christian service ) they did celebrate in their houses , or separate places of meeting . and so we find it at troas ; and , on the first day of the week ; act. . . on the first day of the week , when the disciples were met to break bread , paul preached , &c. their meeting for this christian service , was in a separate place , and on another day , from that of the iewish service . and paul at athens . act. . . he disputed in the synagogue with the jews , and with the devout persons , and in the market , dayly , ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ) he took the opportunity of publick meetings , whether in the synagogues or elsewhere , whether on the sabbath or any other day , to preach christ to them , whether jews or greeks . which doth not prove that they did then take the seventh day to be the christian sabbath ▪ any more than our going to hear or preach a week-day lecture , suppose on thursday , would prove , that we take thursday to be our sabbath ▪ or paul's preaching on mars-hill , or in the market-place , would prove that he took these places to be the temple or synagogue . he knew these to be times and places of concourse , and therefore took the opportunity of preaching then and there ; and would so have done at any other time and place as there was occasion : in season or out of season , as he adviseth timothy , tim. . . he doth not deny , p. . but that paul did keep the feast ( of the pass-over ) after the resurrection of christ ; because of what we have act. . . he bids them farewel ( at ephesus ) saying , i must by all means keep this feast that cometh , at jerusalem ; but i will return again unto you , if god will. which feast he thinks to be that of the pass-over , though it be not named . but whether that or whatever feast of the jews it be , it is all one as to our business . how great a proof would this have been for the seventh-day-sabbath , if it had been said i must by all means keep the sabbath ! 't is said indeed , he did on the sabbath-day go into the synagogue ( but so he did on other days , ) but not that he kept the sabbath-day ; much less that he must by all means keep it . or that he must by all means take a journey from ephesus to ierusalem rather than not keep it , though he were to return thither again . yet this author doth not , for all this think , the law for the iewish pass-over to be then in force . but onely that paul took occasion to be there at that publick great concourse of people , to preach christ to the multitude . for , that the apostles were under no obligation to keep that feast of the pass-over , after the death of christ , is to him ( he says ) past doubt . and why may not we say the same of his going into the synagogue on the sabbath day ( rather than miss such an oportunity of a publick concourse ) which was a less journey than from ephesus to ierusalem ? though under no obligation to keep the iewish sabbath , more than to keep the iews pass-over . . but i answer further . the jews who were not christians , did yet continue to observe the jewish sabbath as a matter of duty . and there was no reason why they should not . for , while they did not acknowledge our christ to be the messiah , nor the mosaick law to be at an end , but circumcision and the jewish oeconomy yet in force , there was no reason why they should not think themselves obliged to the jewish sabbath . and many of the christian jews , who were not yet satisfied of the abolition of the mosaick law , did comply with them therein . for knowing this to have been a law once , and not yet being fully satisfied that it was expired , they were content still to observe it . ( and if our gentleman be of that mind , i would not hinder him , if a jew , from so doing ; but neither would i incourage him . ) and i find the apostles willing to connive at it , and even to countenance it . not as a thing necessary , but at least allowable . and though they did not think fit to bring a new yoke upon the gentiles , who had not before been obliged to the jewish law , ( and therefore would not allow the gentiles to be circumcised ; as appears by s. paul's epistle to the galatians , and the decrees of the synod at ierusalem , act. . ) yet he allowed the iews to practise it ( to whom it had once been a law ) and accordingly circumcised timothy act. . because , though his father were a greek , yet his mother was a jew : ( but he did not circumcise titus , gal. . . for whom there was not the same reason . ) and he did himself comply with the iewish ceremonies ; as act. . . having shorn his head in canchrea ; for he had a vow . and those of purification act. . not that he thought those laws now obliging ; but , because many of the believing iews were yet zealous of the law , and thought themselves obliged by it , he would not give offense to them . for he was satisfied as to himself , that circumcision availeth nothing , nor uncircumcision , cor. . . gal. . . but was content ( till by time and further instruction they should be better satisfied ) that each one should be gratified , as to their own practise , according to their own sentiments , as to things yet disputable . and accordingly , as to eating or not eating things forbidden by moses's law , his advise was , to the romans , ( many of whom were jews ) rom. . . let not him that eateth not , judge him that eateth , ( as breaking a law which he thinks to be yet in force , ) nor let him that eateth , despise him that eateth not , ( as a fool that doth not understand his own liberty ) for the kingdom of god is not meat and drink , &c. and in like manner those at ierusalem act. . though they did not think fit to bring a new yoke of circumcision upon the gentiles ( to whom before it had not been a law ) yet do advise them to forbear things strangled and bloud , because this had once been a law to all the sons of noah , gen. . . not but that this was even now antiquated , but ( to avoid offense ) because it had once been a law. for i take even those things to fall under these generals , the kingdom of god is not meat and drink , but righteousness and peace and joy in the holy ghost , rom. . . and every creature of god is good , tim. . . i know , and am perswaded that there is nothing unclean of it self : but all things indeed are pure , rom. . , . tit. . . meat commendeth us not to god ; for neither if we eat , are we the better ( as making use of our lawful liberty ) neither if we eat not ( in compliance with those who be unsatisfied ) are we the worse , cor. . . so that the practise of the apostles or of the church at that time , in compliance with the jews , as to what had before been a law , but now was not ; is no argument that the thing was then obligatory , as before it had been , but onely an argument of their condescension in things of a middle nature , rather than to give offense to those who were therein unsatisfied ; according to that principle of his all things are lawful for me but all things are not expedient , cor. . . to give no offense either to iew or gentile , or to the church of god , ver . , . to the iews i became as a iew ; to the weak i became as weak ; i am made all things to all men ; . cor. . . in so much that even in those things which he knew to be lawful , yet , rather than give offense to a weak brother , he would forbear , if meat make my brother to offend , ( or , be an offense to a brother ) i will eat no flesh while the world standeth , left i ma●● my brother to offend . and the like i suppose as to the iewish sabbath ▪ he that regardeth a day regardeth it to the lord ; and he that regardeth not the day , to the lord he doth not regard it . he that eateth , eateth to the lord , for he giveth god thanks ; and he that eateth not , to the lord he eateth not , and giveth god thanks , rom , . . where 't is manifest that he doth parallel the observing or not observing a day than questionable ; with the abstaining from meats disputable ; that is , from such as before were unlawful , but now ceased so to be , though all were not yet therein satisfied . and though it be not expresly said , what was the day thus in question ; yet it is most likely to be that of the iewish sabbath ; for , that the first day of the week or christian sabbath was now observed , seems very plain : and whether the iewish sabbath should be observed also , was the question . and those who were for continuing circumcision and the mosaick ceremonies , were doubtless for that also . and the apostles rule was for a mutual condescension ( as to the jews ) for each to follow their own sentiments therein , without censuring one another . but as to the gentiles , he seems to be of another mind ; and therefore to the galatians , who were most of their gentile-christians , he would not so much as allow the practise of circumcision ( which to the jews he did ; ) and tells them that if they be circumcised christ profiteth them nothing ; and he that is circumcised is debtor to the whole law , gal. . , . for it was a renouncing christ who had made them free ; putting themselves under the jewish yoke , to which ( even before ) they were not subject . and therefore to these he speaks more warmly , gal. . , . i marvel that you are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of christ , unto another gospel : which is not another , ( or , there being no other gospel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , where as there is not any other gospel ; ) onely there be some that trouble you , and would pervert the gospel of christ. and such are those who would bring on them a new yoke , ( by making that a duty which god had not made so . ) where he presseth them to keep close to the gospel of christ , as by him delivered ( without any connexion of moses's law , ) there being indeed no other gospel but that ; and they who teach them otherwise , do pervert the gospel ; the true gospel of christ , including no obligation to the jewish law ; either as to circumcision or the difference of meats , or other particulars of that law ; as he argues , in the second , third and fourth chapters ; shewing that even those who were before under it , are now freed from it , and they much more who were never under it . and thereupon chap. . , , . he rebukes them severely , that after they had known god ( or rather were known of god ) they should turn again to the weak and beggarly rudiments or elements . ye observe ( saith he ) days and months and times and years , i am afraid of you lest i have bestowed upon you labour in vain . 't is not indeed here said in particular , what those days were , that are here meant ; yet it is most likely ( and scarce to be doubted ) to be meant of the iewish sabbath . for though other observation of times be here reckoned up ( there being the same reason of all ) yet there was no occasion for the others , in galatia . for the jews themselves did not think themselves obliged ( nor do the jews at this day ) to the observation of their other feasts or fasts out of their own land . but to that of circumcision , and of the iewish sabbath , and the distinction of meats , they thought themselves obliged even out of their own land . and of such we must understand this to the galatians . these being the things there in question ; not those other , which were confined to the land of canaan . but he objects here , that though days be mentioned , yet not sabbath days ; and fansies it might be meant of some other days ; not of sabbaths . to gratify him therefore in this also , i will proceed to that of colos. . . where sabbaths are expresly named . to the colossians , who were also christian gentiles , he pursues the same notions ; least any one should beguile them with inticing words , col. . . ( thereby to bring them under the mosaick law : ) he bids them beware lest any spoil them through philosophy and vain deceit . whereby , i suppose , he means the mosaick doctrines or philosophy of the jews , ( which clemens alexandrinus doth all along call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in contradistinction to that of the greeks , ) after the traditions of men , after the rudiments ( or elements ) of the world , and not after christ , ver , . and that particularly of circumcision ver . . ( in the room of which , baptism is come ; ver . . ) christ , by his death having blotted out the hand-writing of ordinances ( meaning the jewish law ) and took it out af the way , nailing it to his cross , ver . . and ( amongst other things ) let no man therefore judge you in meat or in drink ( as if some were now clean others unclean , as under the mosaick law , ) or in respect of an holy day , ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a festival ) or of the new moon , or of the sabbath days ▪ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ver . . where by sabbath must be meant the iewish sabbath ; the day which in common speech was understood by the word sabbath . for this , he hath two or three evasions . he doth commonly press hard in other places , that by sabbath is to be understood the jews seventh-day-sabbath , and no other day . ( the holy spirit doth call the seventh-day , the sabbath , ( and no other day of the week ) both in the old and in the new testament throughout , p. . and , i think , he is not much out therein ; that it doth , usually , so signify where it doth not come with some intimation to direct us to some other sense . and why it should not be thought so to signify here , i see no reason . for though i take our christian sabbath to fall as properly under the word sabbath in the fourth commandment , as that of the iews ▪ yet the word , in common use , having by this time become the proper name of that day which the jews so called , it was necessary ( to avoid confusion ) to give the christian sabbath another name ; as that of the lords day , or the first day of the week . and consequently that the sabbaths here mentioned , are to be understood ( according to the then use of the word ) of those sabbaths . not as if all days of holy rest where hereby forbidden ; but onely the nicety of confining it particularly to that day which was then ( in common speech ) so called . but he would not have it here understood of the seventh-day sabbath ( as every where else ) but some other ceremonial sabbaths ; but what those are , he doth not tell us . that there were some other feasts observed by the jews , which , in the old testament , are sometimes called sabbaths ( but very seldome , ) i do not deny : nor that those come under the general words in this place . but those do not seem to be here principally intended , because it is manifest to be understood of the sabbath there in dispute . now there was no occasion of a dispute concerning the observance of those other sabbaths , amongst the gentiles , out of the holy-land . these observations being not thought obligatory , even to the jews , but in their own land onely . and it is expresly provided , deut. . that these were not to be kept in any place promiscuously ; not within any of the gates which the lord thy god giveth thee ; but in the place which the lord thy god shall chuse to place his name there . so of the pass-over , ver . , . so of the feast of pentecost , ver . . so of the feast of tabernacles , ver . . and of altogether , ver . . and therefore , not out of their own land. i do not deny but that they might , in private houses , eat the paschal lamb , ( as christ did , with his disciples , ) but not sacrifice the pass-over . for it was to be sacrificed in the temple onely ; and the feast of the pass-over to be there solemnly kept . not in private houses ; and much less out of their own land. nor do i remember , that any where in all the new testament , the word sabbath is used for any such sabbaths : nor can reasonably be supposed to be here meant of those feasts , because it is put in contradistinction to them . let no man judge you in respect of a feast , of the new-moon , or of the sabbaths . which yet i do not understand as if no sabbath might now be kept , but that the obligation to that sabbath was now at an end . another evasion is this , he would have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( sabbata ) in the plural number , to signify weeks , not sabbath-days . the sabbath-day being called , in the singular number , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( sabbatum . ) for he will rather play at small game than stand out . if we should allow him this , it would not advance his purpose at all . for if the business of weeks be at an end , ( that we are no longer to distribute our time into weeks , ) than that of the sabbath much more , which he would have to be the seventh day of the week . but suppose we do allow that one sabbath is to be called sabbatum what are we to call two or more sabbaths ? must not they be sabbata ? and if this be his meaning , then are we not to observe such sabbaths any longer . but what must we then say to mat. . . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which we render in the end of the sabbath , meaning thereby the seventh day sabbath then past , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as it began to draw towards the first day of the week : must we read it , at the end the sabbaths ( because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is in the plural number , ) when the sabbaths ( meaning the seventh-day sabbaths ) were now at an end , and the first-day sabbath coming on in their place ? if that reading please him ; it will serve us as well . but he is mistaken in his criticism . 't is true that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the plural number seems to be sometime put for a week ( but not weeks , that i know of , as he would have it . ) and so it is commonly taken to be where we find 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , for the first day of the week ( but may as well be rendered , the first day after the sabbath . ) and so is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the singular , as luke . . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , i fast twice in the week , i suppose he would not have us render it i fast twice on the sabbath day ( though it be in the singular number , ) as if he did fast twice upon one day . but thus rather , i keep two fasts to one sabbath ; which is the same in sense with , i fast twice in the week ▪ in like manner as the olympiad , may be taken sometime for that particular year on which were the olympick games ( which were wont to return every fifth year inclusively , that is , as we use to speak the fourth year after the last olympick ; ) sometime for the interval of four years from the end of one olympick to the end of the next following . so here , sabbatum may be sometime taken strictly for the sabbath-day , and sometime for the whole septiduum or week from sabbath to sabbath . and so is sabbata ( in the plural number ) taken also for a sabbath-day ; thus i take it to be here , ( mat. . . ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when the sabbath-day was ended ; in the same sense with that of mark . . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( speaking of the very same time ) when the sabbath was past . and in like manner , matth. . . at that time iesus went on the sabbath day through the corn , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( sabbatis ) in the plural number . and so it is in mark . . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . yet it is meant but of one day , as appears by the parallel place ( where the same is again related luk. . . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . and so mat. . , , . mar. . . luk. . . luk. . , . and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the septuagint is commonly put for the sabbath-day . i will not say . allways ( because i have not examined it ) but in all the places which i consulted . and even in the body of the ten commandments exod. . . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ( remember the day of the sabbaths ; in the plural number ▪ ) and again ver . . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ( but the seventh day sabbaths to the lord thy god ; ) so ex. . . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ( the sabbaths a holy rest unto the lord , to morrow . ) and levit. . . six days shall work be done , but the seventh is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the sabbaths of rest ; ye shall do no work therein , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is the sabbaths of the lord. which are the signal places wherein the sabbath is commanded . and the like very often ( if not always ) in the septuagint , whose language the new testament doth usually follow . so that his criticism comes to nothing , but only to shew how careless he is of what he says if at least he may seem to say somewhat . ( such is that when he tells us p. . that god who hath reserved a tenth of our substance , hath reserved but a seventh of time. as though he thought a tenth part to be more than a seventh part . and many such negligences , which i spare to mention . ) but whether we render it sabbath-day or sabbath-days the sense is still the same . and the apostles design in all these places seems to be this , that though to the iews , to whom it had once been a law , he doth allow a liberty ( till they should be better satisfied ) for each to follow his own judgment ( without censuring others ) as well in this of the iewish sabbath , as in the business of circumcision , and the abstinence from meats , and their other rites ; yet he would by no means suffer these to be brought upon the gentiles as a new yoke to which before they had not been subject . i say as a new yoke to which they had not been subject . for though i do admit that by natural light , or the law of nature , man ought to allow a competent time for the solemn service of god ; and , by a positive law , that it should be at least one day in seven , that is , after six days of labour , the seventh to be a day of rest ; and so much to be intended in the fourth commandment . yet , i do not think it to be so determined to this day in order , as to be unchangable to after ages . we can be no ways sure , that the seventh day in order from the first raining of manna , ex. . was the seventh in order from the creation . and as they did observe it then in order from thence ; so when christ , or his apostles by direction from him , did put it into a new order , this new order doth as well sute the words of the fourth commandment as that former . i do the rather say that this to the gentiles is a new yoke , because i find this to be given as a sign , a covenant , or distinctive mark given to the jews , as gods peculiar people , in contradistinction to other nations ; just as circumcision was . so exod. . . my sabbaths ye shall keep , for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations , and ver . . the children of israel shall keep the sabbath , to observe the sabbath throughout their generations for a perpetual covenant , and ver . . it is a sign between me and the children of israel for ever . so ezek. . . i gave them my sabbaths to be a sign between me and them ; and ver . . they shall be a sign between me and you , that ye may know that i am the lord your god. just as it is said of circumcision , gen. . . i will establish my covenant between me and thee ( saith god to abraham ) and thy seed after thee , for an everlasting covenant , to be a god unto thee and thy seed after thee : and ver . , . this is my covenant which ye shall keep between me and you , and thy seed after thee , every male-child among you shall be circumcised , and it shall be a token of the covenant between me and you : and ver . . my covenant shall be in your flesh an everlasting covenant , ( not as if circumcision were to be for ever obligatory ; but rebus sic stantibus , so long as things continued in that estate . ) and so it is called rom. . . he received the sign of circumcision , a seal of the righteousness of faith. and such was the bloud of the paschal lamb on the door-posts of the house , ex. . . to be a distinctive mark between the israelites and the egyptians ; as ver . . the bloud shall be to you for a token upon the houses where you are , and when i see the bloud i will pass over you . and so ex. . , , . that ye may know how that the lord doth put a distinction between the egyptians and israel . and our author himself , pag. . doth press the same , and puts great weight upon it , that this seventh-day-sabbath is often called a sign for ever between him and them , and a perpetual covenant , to distinguish his people from others ; that is , the people of the jews from other nations . and so to be a sign for ever , as circumcision is an everlasting covenant . now whatsoever was a distinctive mark of the people of israel , from other nations , as was that of circumcision , the pass-over , and the seventh-day-sabbath , was at an end and to cease when the partition-wall was broken down between jew and gentile , when christ had made both one , and abolished in his flesh the enmity , ( even the law of commandments contained in ordinances , ) to make of twain one new man ; to reconcile both in one body by the cross , having slain the enmity thereby , eph. . , , . or as it is col. . . having blotted out the hand-writing of ordinances which was against us , and was contrary to us , ( as separating us gentiles from the jews , and so excluding us out of gods visible church , ) and nailing it to his cross. from whence he there infers , ver . . let no man therefore judge you in meat or drink , or in respect of a holy-day ( a festival ) or of sabbaths , ( the proper name , at that time , of the seventh-day sabbath : ) which things are a shadow of things to come , but the body is of christ ; these being but shadows or empty things , whereas it is the body , ( the substance ) that christ regards . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , those are but shadow , but 't is the body that christ looks at . that is ( in our language ) those are only circumstantials , but 't is substance or the substantials of religion that christ and christianity respects . and , as it is meerly circumstantial ( and doth not at all influence religion ) whether in the temple or other place god be worshiped ( ioh. . . ) so , whether on this or another day , a sabbath be kept . if therefore those sabbaths ( as is shewed ) were distinctive marks or signs of gods peculiar covenant or contract with the church of israel as their peculiar god , in contradistinction to other nations ; then 't is manifest that those other nations did not at all keep a sabbath , or not on that day ; ( else how could this be a distinctive mark ? ) and therefore to bring this now upon the gentiles , was to bring upon them a new yoke . i add further , that this iewish sabbath ( as is shewed before ) seems to be , not a continuation of a former sabbath from the creation , ( which i doubt was either not observed at all , or had long before this time been forgot , ) but rather a new institution or restitution after their coming out of egypt ( from a new epocha ) at marah ; where god is said to have made a statute and an ordinance , exod. . . to which commandment and statute if they would hearken diligently and give ear , he would not bring upon them the diseases which he had brought upon egypt , for ( saith he ) i am the lord that healeth thee , ver . . whereupon follows ( in the next chapter ) a sabbath to be observed on the seventh-day from the first raining of manna , ( not from the first creation . ) and with reference to their rest or refreshing after their labour or bondage in egypt ; ( as was that of the pass-over , to their being passed-over , when the first-born of the egyptians were slain . ) for so he saith , exod. . . my sabbath shall ye keep , for it is a sign between me and you , that ye may know that i am the lord that doth sanctifiy you ( or separate you to my self as a peculiar people , a holy people ; ) and ver . , . the children of israel shall keep my sabbaths ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) for a perpetual covenant ; it is a sign between me and the children of israel for ever ; for in six days the lord made heaven and earth , and on the seventh day he rested and was refreshed . not that god was wearied with his work , and needed refreshment ; but he doth parallel his rest after his work of creation , with their refreshment after their labour in egypt . and that god had a particular respect to their rest and refreshment from their labour and bondage in egypt ; is farther evident , not onely from the general preface to all the commandments , ( i am the lord thy god which brought thee out of the land of egypt , out of the house of bondage ; ) but from the close of this fourth commandment , as it is repeated in deut. . , , , . ( somewhat different from what is in exod. . ) where , ( instead of for in six days the lord made heaven and earth , &c. exod. . . ) we have ( deut. . . ) and remember that thou wast a servant in the land of egypt , and that the lord thy god brought thee out thence , through a mighty hand , and a stretched out arm ; therefore the lord thy god commanded thee to keep the sabbath-day . which shews that this sabbath , had a particular respect to that deliverance . now as god by moses did , upon a new occasion ( of their rest from their labour in egypt ) give a new epocha or beginning to a circulation of sabbaths , to be reckoned from thence , in imitation of his own resting from the work of creation ; not by the fourth commandment ( for that speaks indifferently as to any circulation , ) but by this ordinance at marah , or at elim ( for 't is this determines the circulation to the seventh day after the raining of manna ; ) so might christ as well ( by himself or his apostles ) six another epocha from his resurrection ; ( as we have reason to think he did ; ) and this equally within the prospect of the fourth commandment . this rest from the egyptian bondage , being as much a shadow , of what christ regards as the substance ; as was the escaping of the egyptian destruction , of which the pass-over was the memorial . and accordingly this circulation equally to cease with that of the pass-over , at the coming of christ ; notwithstanding the continuance of the fourth commandment , in a new circulation from another epocha . it is not indeed expresly said that christ bid his apostles so to do : but as moses is presumed to do what he did by gods direction ; so the apostles by christs direction ; to whom he gave commandments for that purpose , act. . , . as to what he says so often ; that not one iott or tittle of the law ( meaning that of the decalogue ) is destroyed , but doth still continue in force : this , as to the substance of the duty , i grant . but if his meaning be , that there is not a word or letter therein which doth not as literally belong to us now , as it did then to israel : i cannot assent to it . for it cannot be said of all us who are under that law , that god hath brought us out of the land of egypt , out of the house of bondage ; or that we are to expect long life , in the land ( of canaan ) which he gave them. if he say that our deliverance from spiritual bondage is equivalent to theirs from egypt , and our land the same to us as canaan was to them : i grant it . but so is our lords day equivalent to their seventh-day-sabbath , and christ the true manna ( more than ) equivalent to that of theirs , from the raining of which they reckoned their iewish sabbaths . as to what he says of mat. . . pray that your flight be not in the winter , nor on the sabbath-day ; which he thinks to be understood of the iewish sabbath , years after christs resurrection . perhaps it may . for the obstinate jews , ( who would not in their day understand the things that belonged to their peace , but rejected christ , ) did no doubt continue to observe their jewish sabbath , and thought themselves obliged so to do : and it would then be as great an affliction to them , as if their sabbath were yet in force : but no more a sin to fly on that day , than to fly in the winter . it would be so to the christians , if put to flight on the christian sabbath ( for the case would be the like of both ) and they might as well pray against it : that is , against their flight on the christian sabbath ; as the iews on the iewish sabbath . this therefore makes nothing at all to his purpose . he might as well argue from hence , that it were a sin to labour in winter ; as , on the iewish sabbath . he hath many other little excursions , as little to the purpose , with which i shall not trouble my self or you ; having fully answered what seems to me to have any appearance of argument . but he takes great pleasure to expose the name of sunday . yet i do not find any more fond of using it , than he . not , that he would be thought to like the word , but because he thinks it a reproach . if he do not like that name , he may call it as we do , the lords day , the christian sabbath , or ( if he think these too good names for it ) he may call it the first day of the week . but why not as angry with the monday ? or other of the week days ? if on monday the heathens ( as he would have us think ) did worship the moon , as the sun on sunday , why is he not as angry with that ? it is as much idolatry to worship the moon on monday , as the sun on sunday . true. but that doth not concern the christians sabbath ( which is what he hath a mind to reproach ) and therefore he speaks little of the other , and but seldome : but sunday is to be snubbed upon every occasion . he would not have a sabbath upon sunday , because he says , on that day they worshiped the sun. but why upon saturday if on that day ( as he would have us think ) they worshiped saturn ? now 't is true that some of the heathen did worship the sun , and the moon , and the host of heaven . but that they did worship the sun more upon sunday , than they did upon monday or tuesday , is more than i know , or he can prove . he tells us , verstegan says , that the heathen saxons did so . but verstegan is too young an author to settle this upon his own authority ; unless he can bring vouchers for it more ancient than himself . it was , i suppose , a fansy of verstegan then ( as it is of our author now ; ) but i do not remember that he cites any author ancienter than himself . and though some others may say the like ; yet i look upon it but as a plausible conjecture , without any good foundation in history . and even the heathen suxons are too late for his purpose . he tells us , p. . the heathen nations long before christs birth did offer sacrifice to the sun , and worship it as a god upon sunday . his proof is from iob . , , . if i beheld the sun when it shined , or the moon walking in brightness , and my heart hath been secretly enticed , or my mouth hath kissed my hand , this were an iniquity to be punished by the iudges ▪ for i should have denied the lord above . but what is all this to sunday ? it may perhaps be a disclaimer of worshiping the sun ; but says nothing of sunday . doth our author think the name of sunday to be as old as iob's times ? if iob had said , if i have worshiped the sun upon sunday , or the moon upon monday , and not the lord upon saturday ; it had been to his purpose : but here is nothing of that . not a word of what day it was on which they worshiped the sun. but i would not have him lay too great a load upon sunday . for hesiod tells us ( as was said before ) that in his time ( one of the oldest of the heathen writers , though younger than iob ) the seventh day was sun-day , not the first . and he hath nothing to shew ( more than the bare name of sunday ) to make us believe that those of the heathen , who worshiped the sun , did confine that worship to this day of the week ; or , did more worship it on this day than on others . i do not certainly know how ancient those names are of saturday , sunday , monday , &c. nor upon what occasion they were first taken up , ( nor is it much to our purpose . ) the most ancient heathen writer whom i know to have mentioned them is dio cassius , who lived about the year of our lord . who speaking of the destruction of ierusalem and the temple , tells us that the iews had such a reverence for saturn's day , as that they would not labour on that day for their defense ; which the romans understanding , did on that day assault them , and prevailed . ( against their temple and sabbath both at once . ) not as if the iews did then call it saturn's day , ( nor am i sure that any other did then so call it , ) for they called it their sabbath-day ; but it was that day of the week which , in dio's time , was called saturday . but dio speaks of it as a new thing so to call the days of the week , and which the ancient greeks ( he tells us ) knew not . ( 't was therefore not very ancient . ) and therefore he supposeth the romans to have taken it up from the egyptians . not the old egyptians of moses's time , but rather from those about the time of ptolomy ; not of king ptolomy , but of claudius ptolomaeus the astronomer ( or perhaps somewhat earlier ) when astronomy there flourished , and from whom the romans had it . in a christian writer , i find it earlier than dio ; in iustin martyr's apology , written about the year of christ . who mentions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the day of the sun , as the christian sabbath . and tertullian in his apology , mentions saturday and sunday . and it may perhaps be found in writers earlier than these , though i do not at present meet with it . nor do i think it worth the while to make any great search about it . i grant , that when christianity was spread among the gentiles ▪ and , with it , the christian sabbath ; they did ( in order to the observing that sabbath ) distinguish their time into weeks , and thereupon gave names to each day . i grant also that the iews did , before , so distinguish their time : but i do not find that any other nation did so . if any think , that all nations did so distinguish , and every nation , all the world over , call the days by those names by which they are now called : this i take to be but a presumption , without proof . but when ever those names were first taken up , i do not think they were taken from the number of their gods ( for then they must have had a great many more days in their week than seven , if each of their gods must have a peculiar day : ) but from the number of the planets , which were then reckoned to be seven , and in this order saturn , iupiter , mars , sol , venus , mercury , luna . though we now know the planets to be more than seven . ( for the satellites of iupiter and saturn are as much planets as our moon ; but were not then known . ) nor were the seven planets always reckoned in the same order ; but some had been thought to be above the sun , which , before these names were given , were accounted to be below it . and therefore these names must be at least so late . and certainly not so old as iob's time . i take them not to be older than what are called the planetary hours , but to take their rise from thence , and the order of the names to be thence determined . for having divided the day into hours ; beginning with saturn , the highest of the planets , they assigned to him the first hour of one day , which thence they called saturn's day ; the second hour to iupiter , the third to mars , and so in order till they came to the eighth hour which falls to saturn's turn again , and so again to the fifteenth , and the two and twentieth ; and then the three and twentieth to iupiter , the four and twentieth to mars , and the next hour , being the first of the next day , to sol. which day doth thence take the name of sol or sunday ( next in order after saturn . ) and , in like manner proceeding , the eighth , fifteenth , and two and twentieth hour of that day will fall again to sol , the three and twentieth to venus , the four and twentieth to mercury ; and then the first hour of the next day to luna , thence called monday ( next after sunday . ) and , in like manner , the first hour of the following day to mars ; of the next to mercury ; the next to iupiter , the next to venus ; and then again to saturn ; and so onward as before . and this i take to be the true account of those names , and in that order : saturday , sunday , monday , after which ( in the latine denomination ) follow the days of mars , mercury , iupiter , and venus . but some of our ancestors the saxons , thought fit ( as is supposed ) to put-in the names of twisco , woden , thor , frea , ( some of their princes ) instead of mars , mercury , iupiter , and venus , ( as iulius and augustus , amongst the romans , gave their names to the months formerly called quintilis and sextilis . ) from which saxon princes we have the names of tuesday , wednesday , thursday and fryday : the other days retaining the names of their respective planets as they did before . this account ( from the order of the planetary hours ) dio gives us of the names of the week-days , and of their order . why so called , and why in this order . he tells us of another account from the principles of harmonicks . because dia-tessaron ( which we call a fourth ) is reputed a concord in musick ; therefore they might , beginning with saturn ( skipping two , iupiter and mars , ) take the fourth sol : then ( skipping the two next venus and mercury ) take luna : and then ( skipping saturn and iupiter ) take mars : then ( skipping sol and venus ) take mercury : then ( skipping luna and saturn ) take iupiter : then ( skipping mars and sol ) take venus : then ( skipping mercury and luna ) take saturn ; and so onward as before . but this account seems more forced , and the former more natural . which therefore i take to be the true ground of this order . but either way , depending upon the order of the planets as they were then accounted when these names were given to the week-days , it is at least so far evident that they cannot be older than since the planets were accounted to be placed in this order . and therefore not so old as when venus or mercury or both of them were thought to be above the sun. ( for this would quite disturb the order . ) and therefore , certainly , not so old as iob's time . whether on each of these days they did worship those respective planets , as so many gods , i cannot say ; nor do i think it . nor do i think that each of those planets have any more government of their respective hours , or days , than of others . for i take the whole foundation as well of these , as of the other parts of iudicial astrology , to be purely precarious ; and assigned onely at pleasure , by those whose business it was to amuse credulous people , and thereby to make a gain of them . but , whatever were the occasion of the first imposing ; these are now the known names of those days . ( and we need no more scruple the use of these names ; than to talk of pope pius , clemens , boniface , and innocent ; though possibly the persons so called , had none of those good qualities . ) in like manner as we have a spring near oxford which we call aristotle's well ; not that we think aristotle was ever there , or was lord of the place , and much less that he was wont to be there worshiped ; but we so call it as being now the proper name of the place ( imposed at pleasure ) by which it is known . and so for the days of the week ; whatever were the occasion of the first imposing , they now signify no more than the proper distinctive names by which the days are known . and why we may not continue so to call them , i know not . we are told act. . , . of paul's being at areopagus or mars-hill , because that was the known name of the place , without scrupling the reason why it was so called ( whether , because mars had been there worshiped , or for what other reason . ) and act. . . 〈◊〉 a ship designed by castor and pollux , or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , without scrupling the reason of that name , or what relation these stars had to iupiter , so as to be called his lads . and when paul cor. . allows them without scruple to eat of things offered in sacrifice to idols , even though they knew , or had reason to presume them so to be , ( unless when they might be suspected to do it with respect to the idol ) as the apostle argues at large cor. . and again chap. . no doubt we may as lawfully make use of proper names ( whereby persons , times , or places be commonly known ) without scrupling the occasion of their first imposition . and i would desire those gentlemen ( who are so over scrupulous where there is no just occasion , and make it their business to throw scruples and cast stumbling-blocks before others , ) to consider seriously , whose work they be doing all that while ; and whether it be not as truly and properly superstition to represent and quarel with things as unlawful and sinful , which in their own nature are not so ; as it is to introduce things under a pretence of holiness which have in them no such thing . and whether this be not to dote about questions and strife of words ▪ whether these be not of those foolish and unlearned questions which we are advised to avoid ; knowing that they gender strifes ; and to avoid foolish questions , and genealogies and contentions about the law , for they are unprofitable and vain ; and instead thereof to mind those things that are good and profitable to men ; to follow righteousness , faith , charity , peace , &c. as we are directed , tim. . , . tim. . , . tit. . , . they do not consider how much the studying and prosecuting these foolish questions , and needless scrupulosities , doth eat out the power of godliness and true piety , and the substantials of religion , while we busy our selves about these shadows ; about little circumstances which do not at all influence the substance of spiritual worship . there be so many necessary duties , and indubitable truths , in the serious practise of piety and godliness , that we need not trouble the heads of men ( and make it our business so to do ) with doubtful disputations . it seems to be the design of the new testament to take us off from the circumstantials and scrupulosities of religion ( which commonly produce strifes and contentions to no purpose ) and put us upon worshiping god in spirit and in truth . si deus est animus , nobis ut carmina dicunt , hic tibi praecipue sit pura mente colendus ▪ was well enough said of the poet ; and is a good paraphrase on that , god is a spirit and will be worshiped in spirit and in truth . i have been told long since of a grave divine , who when asked , why he did not preach against long hair ( which was at that time more offensive than now it is , ) gave this answer ; if he could but preach jesus christ into their hearts ; he should not much concern himself for their hair. this author tells us , p. . that our liberty gal. . . doth eminently consist in a freedome not onely from the ceremonial law of old , but also in a liberty not to be intangled with a new yoke of mens devices . i take needless scrupulosities to be such ; the making of more sins than god hath made ; the making or pretending of those things to be sins which are no sins , and putting a religious necessity upon things which are matters of meer prudence and discretion . like those tim. . . forbidding to marry , or ( as i would rather render it ) bidding not to marry ; and , to abstain from meats , &c. forbidding things as unlawful which are not so ; is alike superstitious as to impose things as holy which are not holy : and equally contrary to the liberty there intended . whether the days be called saturday , sunday , monday , or alpha , beta , gamma , is all one to me , ( i take them as i find them : ) i think we ought not to foment quarels upon such trifles ; and we sin if we do so . whether to meet once , or twice , or thrice , on a sabbath-day , ( if so as is most for edification and the real service of god , ) is meerly prudential in this or that place , without laying a new religious yoke where god leaves it to prudence . and if , in prudentials , things be not managed sometimes with so much prudence as we think they might , we must be content to bear with such imprudences as we cannot help ; and better so , than to pull-on greater inconveniences . whether to begin the sabbath at six or ten or twelve a clock on saturday-night , is a thing ( i think ) not worth contending about ▪ ( so that it be religiously observed as to the substantials of it , ) and for which we ought not to disturb the church where we live , but to follow righteousness , charity , peace ; and avoid foolish questions which gender strife . and i should not think it much more , whether on this or that day , so the sabbath be well kept : and i would by no means , on that account , give a disturbance to a church where it is peaceably settled : 't is less material when , than how , a sabbath be kept . and , in many cases , it must be unavoidably left to prudence , whether this or that day be called the first or seventh day of the week . we are in such cases to study the things that make for peace , and wherewith one may edify another . rom. . . the fruits of the spirit are love , joy , peace , &c. but variance , emulation , wrath , strife , are fruits of the flesh : gal. . , . to study and spin out disputes into too fine a threed ( like that of a spider out of her own bowels ) is but to pervert the simplicity of the gospel of christ ; to make that abstruse and difficult , which the scripture would have plain and easy : in speculatives as well as practicals . we should mind the substantials of spiritual worship ; and not dote upon circumstantials further than as they do really advance the substance . refuse profane and old-wives fables , and exercise thy self rather unto godliness ; for bodily exercise profiteth little , tim. . , . such are those col. . , . touch not , tast not , handle not , ( and others of like nature ) all which perish in the using , ( there is no real advantage doth ac●rew from the use of them ; 't is but labour lost ; ) or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they are but mischievous in their use . we complain of the papists ( and deservedly ) for loading their worship with a multitude of ceremonies and mimical gestures ; the number of which would be a burthen , even though singly they were tolerable . being so many diversions of the mind from attending the spirituality of the service . but they have some reason for it . for when much of their devotion is either to be spoken so low as not to be heard , or in such a language as not to be understood , they have need of somewhat to gratify the eye , when the ear is not edified . and it is almost the same mischief , when mens minds are amused with nice speculations and needless scrupulosities , whereby they are diverted from the substantials of serious religion . yet i would not so be understood , as if no care were to be had of corporeal worship , or the necessary circumstances attending it . ( for god expects the worship of the body as well as the soul , and religious actions must have their circumstances , as time , place , gesture , and the like , as well as other actions . ) but these circumstantials should be considered as circumstances ( not as the substance of the worship ; ) and as prudentials ; so to be managed ( as in all other actions ) as may , with decency and convenience , best advance the spiritual worship ; and may be varied according as the diversity of times and places may require . not to lay the weight of divine institution upon such little things . as if , because paul kneeled down and prayed ( act. . . ) therefore it were unlawful to use any other gesture in praying ; or as if , because christ bids , when thou prayest , enter into thy closet and shut the door ( mat. . . ) therefore we may not pray in the chamber ▪ parlour , dining-room , or chappel : or , because christ did celebrate the lords supper , at night , in an upper-room , to men onely , and but twelve , and to those sitting or lying ; therefore we may not do it at noon or morning , in a low-room , to women as well as men , in greater numbers , or in some other gesture . for though such circumstances may be lawful , and sometimes advisable when convenient ; yet to put a religious necessity upon them , as of divine institution , looks like a piece of superstition . and if we consider seriously how great a mischief many times some needless scruples do create to the church of god ; how great a matter a little fire kindles ; and how great hindrance to real piety ; it might justly make us wary how we add fewel to such a flame , and rather bear with some things we think amiss , ( but may perhaps not be so ) than by attempting to remove a suppos'd evil create a greater mischief . as to the present point in question ; i have said so much upon the whole , as i think might satisfy the gentleman if he well consider it . yet i know , when men have once espoused a notion of which they are fond ; and have so long pored upon it as to rivet it in their mind ; catching at every little thing that may seem to favour it , and slighting whatever makes against it ; ( as we find our author doth very often ; ) and that hardly any thing can be said so plain , as that there be nothing to be cavilled at , by one who is minded so to do ; and that when god hath declared his will as plainly as he thinks fit to do , if men will not be contented with reasonable evidence , he is not obliged to gratify their humours : when ( i say ) we consider this ; it looks somewhat like what solomon tells us prov. . . of a brother offended , harder to be won than a strong city ; and i must leave the success to god ▪ who so teacheth as none like him . he remits us to two writers on this subject , in defense of the christian sabbath , mr. shepheard and mr. hughs ( whom i have not read , nor have them at hand , ) and two others whom he names not ( nor know i well whom he means , for more than two have since written ; ) who , he thinks , do tacitly retract somewhat that those before had granted . and divers 〈◊〉 have written on this subject ▪ though i have scarce consulted any of them . and particularly i have not seen what is written by dr. young or mr. warren , whom i find cited in a late book of g. t. which came out since this was written and part of it printed . it is very possible , that some of those may have said much of what i now say , or that i may now say somewhat of what they have said before . but , in this , there is no hurt . if in some particulars i vary from some of them ; it is not because i slight them , or out of a desire to contradict them , but freely to speak my own thoughts as they do theirs . nor is it to be expected that all writers on the same subject should agree in every particular , ( nor is he to make advantage of it ; for p. . he owns it is so also with those who are for the seventh day : ) but as to the main ( i presume ) we do well enough agree . i have been a great deal longer than i did intend when i first began to write . i shall give you a brief summe of what i have said to this purpose , as to both questions . ( for the question is double , though it seem to be but one . ) first concerning the iewish sabbath , whether that be antiquated and at an end . secondly , concerning the christian sabbath , whether there be sufficient ground for this to succeed in the place thereof . as to the first ; i agree with him in many things which he prosecutes at large , though not peculiar to his question ; as , that our lord iesus christ is god ; that he is the lord iehovah , the god who made the world , who rested the seventh day , who brought israel out of egypt , and gave the law on mount sinai : for there is no other god. but , this i say , he did as god ( in union with the father and holy ghost ; ) not as christ ( god and man ) our mediator and redeemer . for he was not then man ; nor was there occasion of a mediator and redeemer before the fall . i agree also that the decalogue ( or ten commandments ) is obligatory to us gentiles ; ( as being for the substance of it , a law before it was so delivered on mount sinai . ) and that the fourth commandment concerning the sabbath is one of them ; which requires after six days of labour , the seventh day to be a sabbath or day of holy rest. and our christian sabbath is such . but it doth not say , the seventh in course from the creation , nor doth it appear that the iewish sabbath was such , but rather the seventh day from the first raining of manna . i do agree also that god himself did rest on the seventh day from the creation , gen. . that is , he did cease to create . but i do not there find , that man did so rest , or that there was any express command for him so to do on that day ; much less for ever after , on every seventh day in course from the creation . how much may be thought to be implyed in those words , he blessed and sanctified it , i will not dispute ; however , it is but by implication not by any express command ; such as our author demands for the christian sabbath . nor do i find that ever it was observed by man till after the israelites coming out of egypt , or expresly commanded so to be . nor do i find that any other nation ( beside the jews ) did anciently so much as divide their time by weeks . since the times of christianity they have : but that they did so , long before that time , i do not find . i do agree also that after israels coming out of egypt they did observe a sabbath , exod. . but it was from a new command , ( at marah or elim ) which appeared new to them , not a continuation of a constant practise ; and it was from a new beginning ( the seventh day from the first raining of manna , ) and as a distinctive sign or token , of gods being their god in a special manner , as contradistir guished to other nations ; ( as himself owns p. . and . ) and as a memorial of their refreshing after their bondage and labour in egypt , and feeding them with bread from heaven . i do presume also that , they did , from this first raining of manna continue a circulation of weeks for a long time , and perhaps till the time of our saviour . yet we are not sure but that it might be intermitted in the seventy years of the babylonish captivity , and the day forgotten ; and then restored a-new by nehemiah ( from a new beginning ) neh. . as he restored the feast of tabernacles ( chap. . ) which had been intermitted from the days of ioshua the son of nun to that day . but i rather think , the memory was preserved ( by tradition ) during those seventy years . i agree also that the church of the jews was the most visible church of god , but i am loth to say ( with him , p. . ) it was the whole visible church ; for i presume there might be many good men of other nations , who worshiped the true god ( of whom we have no history , ) though not joined to the jewish church , nor were ( that i know of ) obliged so to be . such was melchizedek ( whoever he were ) not of the seed of abraham , much less of israel . and such was iob , and his friends from divers countries ( of whom , were it not for the story of iob , we should have had no knowledge , ) nor are we to think these were the onely persons of those countries who worshiped the true god. and how many such were in other nations , we cannot tell . who might , if they had opportunity , join as proselites with the iewish church , when established . but i do not think they were necessarily obliged so to do , or to keep the same sabbath with them . for i take it to be true , even before christs coming , that god is no respecter of persons ; but in every nation , he that feareth him and worketh righteousness , is accepted with him . act. . , . whether iew or greek , rom. . , . pet. . . which are but quotations from deut. . . nor do i find that any nation , except the iews , did observe the iewish sabbath . but i rather take it to be a distinctive sign of them from other nations , ex. . , . as circumcision and the pass-over were ; which , when the wall of partition was taken away , ceased also . yet , as to what was moral in them ( the circumcision of the heart being pointed at by that of the flesh ; and the old leaven of malice and wickedness to be put away instead of that of bread ; and a rest from sin of more respect with god than that from labour ; ) we have instead thereof , baptism , in the room of circumcision ; the lords supper , in the room of the pass-over ; and the lords day or christian sabbath , instead of the iewish . and , as that took date from the raining of manna after their deliverance from egypt ; so ours from the resurrection of christ , the true manna . i agree also that the apostle , and other christians , even after christs resurrection , did go to the temple and the jewish synagogues on their sabbath days ( and did there assist at prayers , and reading the law , and other services common to jews and christians ) on a like account as when we now meet to hear a sermon , or keep a fast or thanksgiving on a week-day . but so they did as to circumcision , and other iewish rites . as when paul circumcised timothy , and joined in the jewish rites of purification , act. . on account of those believing iews who were yet zealous of the law : to testify to them that he had been misrepresented by those who said he did teach the iews which are among the gentiles to forsake moses , and that they ought not to circumcise their children , nor to walk after the customs . whereas indeed he taught that gentiles ought so to forbear , ( as being a new yoke to which before they were not subject , ) but as to the iews which were amongst the gentiles he did allow them ( if not yet satisfied of their christian liberty ) so to practise . for he puts a great difference between the gentiles , and the iews among the gentiles ; of which i doubt our author doth not take notice ; else he would not tell us ( p. . ) of paul's writing one thing , and practising another . he preached and wrote against circumcision as to the gentiles ; but allowed it to the iews ; and himself practised it , as to timothy ( a jew ) but not as to titus who was no iew. and the like we may say as to the iewish sabbath on their seventh day . as to what services were peculiarly christian ( as breaking of bread ) they did it not at the temple or synagogues , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at home , or from house to house , act. . . and on another day , the first day of the week , act. . . now this is all that he hath to urge , for the iewish sabbath in particular : which he cannot shew to be commanded to all the world ( but rather to them in particular in contradistinction to the rest of the world , ) nor that it was a seventh day from the creation , but from the first raining of manna . for the fourth commandment saith nothing of this sabbath in particular , but onely of the seventh day after six days of labour . as to that imperious demand , p. , , . where is there any such power recorded in scripture to be given to any man or men whatsoever , after christ had said it is finished , to alter the seventh-day sabbath instituted by our lord iesus christ ? i doubt he hath forgotten that the same god who gave the law of the ten commandments , gave also the ceremonial law ; and if it were the lord iesus christ who gave the one , it was he that gave the other also . and will he then ask where is there any power recorded in scripture to be given to any man or number of men to abolish circumcision and the rest of the mosaick rites instituted by the lord iesus christ ? i know no such power recorded in scripture to be given , as to circumcision and the rest , more than as to the iewish sabbath . and we find them both put together col. . , . or will he say , where is any power recorded in scripture to be given to any man or men , ( after christ had said it is finished , ) to appoint elders and deacons and other officers in the christian church , and give orders concerning it , which christ ( before he so said , ) had not given ? yet we know circumcision was abolished , and such officers and orders given . so that all this is but flourish . as to that of christ having said it is finished ; whatever be meant by that , we know that the whole order and constitution of the christian church was settled after that time : and whatever else be signified by it , it is not meant that there was nothing to be done further concerning it ; for , if so , to what purpose did christ give commandments to his apostles , of things pertaining to the kingdome of god after his resurrection , if nothing were to be further done ? and if we consider the apostles deportment ; we do not find them any where insist authoritatively upon a power given them from christ , to abrogate circumcision or the like , and thereupon to proceed pro imperio . but they argue it from the nature of the thing , that what was typical of christ , was at an end now christ is come ; that what was distinctive of the jews from other nations , was now to cease when the partition wall was broken down ; that what were but shadows as to the substantials of religion , were now to pass away , as beggarly rudiments , christ regarding the body or substance not the shadows ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , these are but shadows in comparison of what christ came to settle , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but 't is the body ( the substance ) that christ respects , col. . . they do not command , but argue . they do no where pretend that god or christ had given them authority to abrogate a law which god had made : but argue ( from the nature of the thing ) that the law was ceased ; and was not intended to oblige longer : that the law was now antiquated or expired when the end for which it was made was attained : that the types were at an end , when the thing typified was exhibited : that the distinctive marks were now no more of use , when jews and gentiles were united : that the elements or rudiments ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) which god ( for reasons best known to himself ) thought fit for the training-up of his church while as in a state of minority ( wherein a child though heir of all doth little differ from a servant ) should now cease when it comes to full age , gal. . and to the same purpose heb. . he argues that the old covenant was at an end when a better covenant was come in the room ; citing that of ier. . behold the days come , saith the lord , when i will make a new covenant with the house of israel and with the house of iudah : not according to the covenant which i made with their fathers when i led them out of the land of egypt , for this is the covenant that i will make , that i will put my laws into their mind , and write them in their hearts . meaning , instead of an outward ceremonial service , he would establish a service more spiritual . from whence he concludes the antiquation of the former : in that he saith a new covenant , he hath made the first old : now that which decayeth and waxeth old , is ready to vanish away ▪ they do not claim a power , to abolish a law of gods making ; but prove by argument , that these laws are antiquated or expired ; as not being intended , by the law-maker , to bind longer than till such a time . as rom. . the woman is bound by the law to her husband as long as he lives ; but if the husband be dead , she is free from the law : not that the law is abolished ; but the case is altered . and it is from these considerations that he argues against circumcision col. . . and the iewish sabbath , ver . . for as to the substantials of the service , provided a sabbath be duly kept , it is much one whether on the seventh or the first day . now these ( substantials ) are ( he tells us p. . ) a lively spiritual converse with the father , son and holy-ghost , in private duties and publick ordinances ( where they can be had , ) and in a holy rest all that day , saving emergent cases of necessity and mercy . which may be equally done on either day . but as to those who were not satisfied with these arguments ; ( if they were such as were before under those commands ) he doth not urge his authority ; he leaves them to practise according to their own judgment ( but without censuring others ) till they shall be better satisfied , as in rom. . but as to the gentiles , who had never been under these laws , the case was otherwise . which makes him argue otherwise with the ( gentile ) galatians , ephesians , and colossians , than with the christian iews at rome . and as to his question , p. . when , where , and by whom , it was taken away , i say then , there , and by the same , who took away circumcision and the other mosaick rites . that is , fundamentally by christ at his death who nailed them to his cross , after which they ceased to be obligatory ; but executively and practically by his apostles , and the christian church , according as they did ( leisurably and in time ) come to understand their liberty . all which we are to presume they did according to such directions as christ gave them . for ( as this author observes p. . ) paul , in those primitive times , when the ceremonial law was fresh in memory , and the gospel newly preached , had much a do t●●e move the first converted iews from circumcision and other ceremonials , ( and so from their iewish sabbath ; ) therefore these things were to wear off by degrees , and not to be torn from them all at once . and this i think is enough ( to a person not prejudiced ) as to the removal of the ( then ) iewish sabbath ; appointed by moses after their coming out of egypt , on the seventh day from the first raining of manna , and not given to all the world , but to be a distinctive sign of them from other nations . now as to the other point in question , the observation of the lords day : i would ground that originally on the fourth commandment ; which doth appoint a seventh day of holy rest , after six days of ordinary labour . which doth directly concern the substantials of worship ( that a sabbath be kept and god thus served ) , but whether on this or that day of the seven , is meerly circumstantial , and ( as paul calls it ) a shadow , in comparison of the body or substance , which is , he tells us , what christ respects . but then as to that , why the first day rather than another ? i answer , first , here was a much more memorable accident , of christs resurrection ; than was that of raining manna , from whence the jewish sabbath takes its date , as the seventh day from it ( not from the creation ) or that of the quails the night before , ( the first day that god fed them by miracle from heaven , ) and therefore stands as fair for beginning such a circulation of weeks and sabbaths . we are told ier. . , . and ier. , , . behold the days come ( saith the lord ) that it shall no more be said , the lord liveth that brought up the children of israel out of the land of egypt ; but , the lordliveth that brought up the children of israel out of the north country . not , that the former deliverance was to be forgotten ; but a greater than it did make it ( comparatively ) to disappear ( as when the light of the sun doth obscure that of the moon and stars ; ) and so here , the resurrection of christ to be commemorated paramount to that of former mercies . next , in pursuance of this occasion , we find our saviour did on that day of his resurrection , appear to mary magdalen and the other women , declaring to them the doctrine of the resurrection ▪ then , to the two disciples going to emmaus , preaching to them ( at large ) the same doctrine , and celebrating with them the lords supper ; and afterward ( the same day ) to those assembled at ierusalem ( with other sabbatical works ) and solemnly blessing that convention . and if our author by blessing the seventh day gen. . would have us understand an institution or command to observe it ; we have as much here ; christ joined in this assembly , and blessed it . for so much is intimated in that his solemn benediction ( a first and second time , ioh. . , . ) peace be unto you ; and he breathed on them saying , receive ye the holy ghost . he did so a second time on the same day the next week ; he assembled with them ( in religious services ) and blessed them . he did ( according to his promise made on that first day of his resurrection ) send on them that miraculous effusion of the holy ghost on the day of pentecost , which being the fiftieth day from his resurrection , was therefore the first day of the week as was that of the resurrection . on which day of pentecost we find them also otherwise exercised in religious employments , and attested further by a miraculous conversion of three thousand souls . we find st. paul at troas act. . preaching to the disciples assembled ( as it seems their manner was ) on the first day of the week to break bread ; that is , to celebrate the lords supper . that such assemblies were wont to be at corinth , on the first day of the week , the apostle presumes , or takes for granted ; and gives direction for a collection to be then made , cor. . and he had so done before , as he there signifies , to the churches of galatia ; presuming or taking for granted , that they also did so use to meet on the first day of the week . and we have no reason to doubt but that such meetings were wont to be in other churches . we cannot doubt but that other of the apostles did disperse themselves in other parts of the world , though we have not a like account of their travels , as we have of paul's recorded by st. luke : but we are to presume ( though it be not recorded ) that their doctrine and practise was consonant to his ; and that accordingly they had such weekly meetings on the lords day as these churches had of whom we have the history . hence that day had the name given of the lords day , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as we find it called rev. . . ( as that of the sacrament is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the lords supper , cor. . . ) which name it retaineth to this day , and for such purpose . and all this , i think , is sufficient for us to continue our observation of the same day . i am sure 't is much more than he can shew for his seventh-day sabbath for more than two thousand five hundred years from the first creation . it is not necessary that we have express words of command recorded . we have no record in scripture of such express words of command for the seventh-day sabbath , till after israels coming out of egypt ; nor for the worshiping of god by sacrifice ; nor for other things which yet were duties before any record of such express words of command . it is enough if we can otherwise collect it to be gods will , according to the best light we have . if this gentleman think himself obliged to keep the jewish sabbath also : this doth not hurt us . this , i think , was the case of the christian iews at first . i do not much question but that they did , as other christians , observe the lords day . the doubt was , whether they were not to observe also the jewish sabbath as before they did . and these believers who were yet zealous of the law , and thought themselves obliged , together with christianity , to observe the law of moses , did no doubt think themselves equally obliged to the iewish sabbath . those who thought themselves obliged to be baptized , and to be circumcised also , thought themselves in like manner obliged to observe the lords day and also the iewish sabbath . and ( till they should be better satified ) the apostles permit ( the iews ) so to do . if this do not satisfy him ; i have yet two expedients for him . . let him begin his week on monday ▪ and then sunday will be the seventh day . whether the seventh in course from the creation , i cannot tell ; nor can any man living inform me . but it will at least be the seventh day of his week . . if he be not satisfied with this : my next expedient is thus . let him take a voyage round the world , as sir francis drake did . going out of the atlantick ocean west-ward by the streights of magellan to the east-indies ; and then , from the east , returning by the cape of good hope ( the usual way ) homeward . and take with him as many as please of those who are of his mind . and let them keep their saturday-sabbath all the way . when they come home to england , they will find their saturday to fall upon our sunday ; and they may thenceforth continue to observe their saturday-sabbath on the same day with us . which is the second expedient . if you ask , how this can be ? i will make it very plain , that so it will be , and so it must be . for , supposing the earth to be round , and the sun moving from east to west ; you must allow that it comes sooner to the eastern parts than to the western . it will sooner be noon in holland than in england , and sooner here than in ireland . if you ask , how much sooner ? we say , that fifteen degrees of longitude west-ward , makes it an hour later . as if he embark about dover , yarmouth , or other port on the east-side of england , and sail as far west-ward as the west of ireland ( or a little farther ) it will be an hour later , and not be noon there till it be one a clock at the place where he embarked . and so in proportion , an hour for every fifteen degrees . and accordingly , when he hath gone round the whole circle of three hundred and sixty degrees , ( that is four and twenty times fifteen , ) it will be later by four and twenty hours ▪ that is , it will be but saturday-noon with him , when it is sundaynoon with those who staid here . that is , his saturday will be our sunday . and thenceforth his saturday-sabbath will be the same day with our sunday-sabbath ever after . and this , i think , should fully satisfy him . for he tells us , p. . the variety of the time of the sun-rising or setting in different climates doth no way disturb ; for that a day longer , or shorter is still a day , and but a day ▪ most certain it is he who shall have thus sailed round the world will have had one day fewer than those who staid here . so it was with sir francis drake and his company : and so it hath been with all who have taken such a voyage , ( as many have done , for it is not a rare case : ) and so will be to any who shall so do . what he would resolve upon this case , or what he thinks sir francis drake was to do when this happened ; i cannot tell . if he would go on to reckon the days according as they had happened to him in his voyage ; then this expedient must fully satisfy him . for then he keeps his saturday-sabbath on our sunday . if he thinks the account should be rectified when or before he comes home , and call the days thenceforth as he finds those to do that staid here , what shall be come of that day he hath lost ? and which day of the week shall he reckon that to be ? and when must he rectify that account ? when he comes home , or somewhere by the way ? for it would be just the same , if , before he come at england , he should have landed in france or spain , or on the coast of africk , or even at the east-indies ; and all the way from thence , he would still be a day behind them . and so he would be with every ship that in his way he should meet with . if he and such other ship meet at the isle of st. helens to take fresh water , his saturday will be their sunday ; and on which of the two days are they to keep their sabbath ? or must they keep it one on the one day , and the other on the other ? if he say that the account is to be rectified by the way ( before he comes home ) then where ? or when ? and by what rule ? for when ever he doth so rectify it , he must then begin to call sunday what just before he was to call saturday . if he say , this must be left to discretion , when , and where : then must it be matter of discretion ( and not determin'd by the fourth commandment ) on which of the two days in question the sabbath shall be kept . but then here will again come in our amazing demand ( as p. , , . ) what man or men , without an high usurpation of the divine authority , contrary to the first commandment shall , with pretended good intentions , assume an authority of their own heads , to appoint ( for this or that place ; suppose the streights of magellan ) what day shall be the lords holy sabbath ? who , but our lord iesus christ , that is lord of the sabbath , hath power to institute a sabbath day ? if the church or any part thereof be once admitted to have such power , what bolts or locks will be strong enough for such a door , to keep it from letting in upon the churches of christ what soever pleaseth those in power ? i shall not much trouble my self to answer all this warmth . but ( when that is over ) if at or near the streights of magellan ( a place , i think , not inhabited , or not by christian , ) a colony be planted by some from hence , and some from the east-indies ; those who come thither from hence will ( according to their account ) call that saturday , which those who come thither from the other side will ( according to their account ) call sunday : must they have no sabbath at all ? ( that 's against the fourth commandment : ) or must they by consent agree upon the day ? ( this i should think , if he would give me leave : ) or must they keep it some upon one day some on the other ? this i would by no means advise , if it may be avoided : because it would be a manifest confusion and disorder ; and they would not both ( if either ) be the seventh-day in course from the creation : and which of them is so , is not possible for any man to know . and it would be more for common edification that they do agree upon a common day . and not much matter , whether of the two. this gentleman , if he can consider of it calmly , i am apt to think will be of the same mind ; and think it better to have such a sabbath than none at all ; and that the little circumstance , whether on this or that day , should be disregarded in comparison of the substantials of the duty . there be many things which the word of god or the divine law doth determine in thesi , which when in hypothesi they come in practise , will require the intervention of prudentials or humane laws . the eighth commandment says , i must not steal , or take unduly from my neighbour what is his : but , what is mine , and what is my neighbours , will depend much upon humane laws ; and , what shall be reputed a trespass on my neighbours land ; or , a forfeiture of his right . the seventh commandment says , thou shalt not commit adultery : but it will depend much upon humane law , what shall be reputed a good marriage . the sixth commandment says thou shalt not kill : but it will much depend upon humane law what shall be reputed self-defense , or a just war , or a forfeiture of life . the fifth commandment requires us to honour and obey our parents ; but , in many cases , 't is humane law that is to determine , who is to be reputed the father . if a widow be left whith child by a former husband , and marry another before that child be born ( which sometime happens ; ) 't will be a point in law , not in divinity , to whether of the two fathers this son shall be heir . and if my father require me to part with what estate is my own , 't will be a point in law , how far i am required to obey such a command . ( and the like as to other superiours , as well as natural parents . ) and those laws which seem absolute ( as thou shalt not kill , thou shalt not steal , &c. ) have yet their tacite limitations implied . for no man doubts but there are cases wherein to kill may be lawful ; as in self-defense , in a just war , and for capital crimes ; and in such cases , to take from our neighbour what was his. and , notwithstanding the command of honour thy father and mother , or that of children obey your parents in all things ; there may things happen , wherein we are not obliged to do what they bid us . and in all such cases there is room for prudence to interpose . not , to abrogate or repeal a law of god ; but to judge what is the true intent of that law. so not withstanding that command of the sabbath , in it thou shall do no manner of work ; yet our saviour tells us , the priests in the temple profane the sabbath and are blameless ; and against the pharisees superstitious rigour he argues , not onely from his own authority ( the son of man is lord of the sabbath-day ) but from the reason of the law , the sabbath was made for man , and not man for the sabbath ; and consequently is so to be understood as may be for the good of man ( spiritual and bodily ) not for his hurt . and our author allows the emergent cases of necessity and mercy ; and no man doubts but that if a house be on fire , we may labour to quench it . in all which cases prudence may be used , but must not ( upon that pretense ) be abused . not as if it were left to our prudence , whether or no the law of god shall be obeyed ; but , what is , in such cases , the true intendment of the law of god. and there needs no other locks or bolts ( as our author speaks ) to confine prudence in such cases , than in all other prudential acts. so when the fourth commandment requires us to keep holy the sabath-day ; it may yet , in many cases , depend much upon prudence or humane laws , which day shall be reputed the sabbath . and if this author tell us , it must be the seventh in course from the creation ; we are never a whit the nearer . for though he take great pleasure , on all occasions , to exclaim against tradition ; yet he must admit a great deal of tradition to intervene before he can prove this or that day to be a seventh in course from the creation . i am apt to think also , that when he hath well consider'd the case of sr. francis drake ( and many more since that time , who sailing round the world , as he did , have lost a day , ) he will come to one of these two resolutions : either that when he comes back to england he must continue to call that saturday which on his account was so ; ( and then his saturday-sabbath will be the same with our sunday : ) or else that his account must be somewhere rectified in his voyage by skipping a day ; and then and there beginning to call sunday what , just before , he was to call saturday . now because there is nothing in nature to determine where this must be ; nor is there any thing of divine institution ( that i know of ) to determine where it shall be ; it seems to me to be prudential , or most rational , ( if nothing intervene to counterbalance it , ) to be at what we call the first meridian , from whence we reckon the degrees of longitude , east-ward , , , , &c. and so onward till we come round to , at the same meridian again ; and thence begin to reckon onward , , , &c. as before , for another round . this first meridian , in ptolemy's time , was accounted to be about the western part of the african shore ; as being the most western part of the world then known . of later times , geographers have been pleased to remove it more west , about the islands called azores , or the flemish islands . but all agree to place it between our continent and that of america . and if from that meridian , from whence we reckon the beginning of longitude , we reckon also the beginning of days ; then the last of saturday must there end , and the first of sunday must there begin . and therefore at that meridian the sailers round the world should rectify their account , calling it saturday on the one side of it , and sunday on the other ; that being the latest of saturday , and the soonest of sunday . he will tell me perhaps , that , by this account , if we keep our sabbath on sunday , those in new-england must be said to keep theirs on monday , as being on the other side of that meridian . and 't is true , it would so follow . and therefore i did interpose , if nothing else do intervene to counterbalance it . and this is what i did at first intimate , as disputable , whether we and they in new-england are to be said to keep our sabbath on the same day . but it is the same case as to the whole continent of america . and the same resolution will reach all . and therefore , the thing being once settled by the common consent of all , i would by no means advise to change the day . for the placing the first meridian is purely arbitrary . it might as well have been placed beyond america , ( if men had so pleased , and that america had been known in ptolemy's time ) as on this side : ( and we might have numbred our degrees of longitude westward , as now we do eastward : ) and may be so reputed now , if men so please ( as it is now reputed about or degrees more to the westward than it was in ptolemy's days . ) and it is purely arbitrary , where to begin to change the name of the day which is to be so called ; whether at the first meridian , or else-where . and consequently 't is purely arbitrary or discretional , whether in america such day shall be called sunday or monday . there is nothing in the fourth commandment , nor in the word of god , to determine it . but it so happening , that america hath been peopled from europe , traveling westward from hence ( without taking notice that we cross the first meridian , ) we have reckoned the days ( and so named them ) according as they appeared to those upon their voyage who went thither . whereas if it had been peopled ( i mean , as to the christians there ) from asia and the east-indies ( by people coming thence to the other side of america ) what there is now called sunday , would ( for the like reason ) have been called monday : and the fourth commandment equally observed either way . and upon a like account christians in the east-indies , and in china and iapan , traveling eastward from hence thither , do call their days there according as they appeared to fall out to them in the course of their voyage . now 't is true , that some part of the day which we here call sunday , is coincident with some part of what is so called in iapan , and also some part of our sunday ( though not the same part ) is coincident with part of theirs in america . but very little of theirs in the east of iapan , with theirs in the west of america . about eleven a clock at night in the one ( or yet later ) before it begins to be one a clock in the morning in the other , ( scarce an hour in common ) according to our ancient maps . ( our later maps make it somewhat more , as if it might be ten at night in the one , when it begins to be two in the morning at the other . ) yet these pass for the same sunday . and 't is well enough so to reckon . but it is prudentially so : because the chief trade and intercourse of america , is with europe ; not with asia . and therefore it is considered as lying west from europe ; rather than as east from iapan . and accordingly it is so placed in our maps . and though we continue to reckon our longitude as from a meridian between us and america , yet the account of our days we begin as from a meridian beyond it , between america and asia . which is not said to raise new scruples , ( as if i would advise an alteration of a received computation ; which is well enough as it is ; and i know not how to mend it : ) but to shew there is an unavoidable necessity of leaving much to prudential considerations , what day shall be reputed sunday , and what the sabbath , in this or that place . and therefore it cannot reasonably be thought the design of the fourth commandment to confine us to such circumstantial niceties , which do not at all influence the substantials of worship . the fourth commandment requires the seventh day of holy rest , after six days of ordinary labour . but of a seventh day in course from the creation to be so observed , it saith nothing : nor is it possible for us to know . the iews observed a seventh day in course from the first raining of manna ; but i do not know how that concerns us ; or , if it did , how we shall know which is that day ? ( for this gentleman will not allow tradition to be a good proof . ) we observe a seventh day in course from what ( we think ) the apostles did observe . if we mistake our reckoning ( which i think we do not ) it is not a culpable ignorance ; for it is according to the best light we have . this day we are in possession of , and the christian church hath so been for many hundred years . and he that would dispossess us of it , must shew a better title . ( the old rule is , possidentis potior est ratio . ) to change meerly for change sake , is foolish . if he would lay a divine necessity on us to observe the iewish sabbath from the first raining of manna ( if at least that be the day by them observed in our saviours time ; ) he must make it clear to us , which is that day ( by a better argument , if he can , than tradition : ) and , that we are of necessity obliged to that day ; which was ( himself acknowledges ) a distinctive sign of them from other nations , as circumcision also was . and if this distinctive mark ( when the partition wall is broken down ) do as much cease as that did : 't is as truly superstition now to put a necessity upon it , as upon circumcision . which though the apostles would , for a while , permit to the jews ; ( to whom it had once been a law ) till they should be better satisfied ; yet would by no means allow to the gentiles , to whom it had not before been a law. and i think the case is just the same of the iewish sabbath as contradistinguished to the lords day . i am yours , &c. finis . a defence of the royal society, and the philosophical transactions, particularly those of july, in answer to the cavils of dr. william holder / by john wallis ... ; in a letter to the right honourable, william lord viscount brouncker. wallis, john, - . approx. kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from -bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : - (eebo-tcp phase ). a wing w estc r ocm this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons . universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase , no. a ) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set ) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, - ; : ) a defence of the royal society, and the philosophical transactions, particularly those of july, in answer to the cavils of dr. william holder / by john wallis ... ; in a letter to the right honourable, william lord viscount brouncker. wallis, john, - . royal society (great britain) p. printed by t.s. for thomas moore ..., london : . reproduction of original in huntington library. created by converting tcp files to tei p using tcp tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between and available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the , texts created during phase of the project have been released into the public domain as of january . anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. % (or pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf- unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p , characters represented either as utf- unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng holder, william, - . blind-deaf -- education -- great britain. - tcp assigned for keying and markup - apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images - judith siefring sampled and proofread - judith siefring text and markup reviewed and edited - pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a defence of the royal society , and the philosophical transactions , particularly those of july , . in answer to the cavils of dr. william holder . by john wallis , d. d. professor of geometry in oxford , and fellow of the royal society . in a letter to the right honourable , william lord viscount brouncker . london , printed by t. s. for thomas moore , at the maidenhead over against st. dunstan's church in fleet-street . . to the right honourable , william lord viscount brouncker . march . / . my lord . in the printed paper of dr. holder , which your lordship shewed me when i was last in london , about a fortnight since , ( which , till that time , i had not seen ) i find great complaints of the royal society ; of the philosophical transactions ; ( particularly that of july , . ) of the publisher thereof , mr. oldenburg , ( who deserved better things ; ) of dr. plot ; and of some others , ( whom , because he did forbear to name in particular , i shall forbear it too ; ) but , most of all , of my self . he complains ( page , . ) of subtil contrivances , and subtil practices ; to abuse the reader with false shews , somewhat resembling truth . and they be so subtil , and so resembling truth , or rather so perfectly true , that there is not one sentence or clause in what he finds fault with , which ( notwithstanding all his displeasure ) he doth so much as charge with untruth . whereas his paper is full of gross mistakes . that in the year / ( or at any other time ) at bletchington near oxford , ( or any where else ) dr. william holder , ( or mr. william holder ) did teach alexander popham esquire to speak , ( as page . ) if it be true , is more than i yet know : that he did attempt it , i know very well ; but that he did effect it , i never yet heard any body say but himself . what there follows , that i saw and perfectly knew this ; that i resorted to blechington , to see and hear mr. popham , is a very great mistake . i never ( to my knowledge ) saw mr. popham , ( either at blechington , or any where else ) till that very day when his mother , the lady wharton , brought him to me at oxford ( in the year ) to stay with me , and learn to speak . much less had i heard him speak ; and least of all had seen dr. holder teach him . who were those many , pag. , . ( or those few , if any ) who did , on purpose , resort to blechington on that account , ( or , what they found there ) i cannot tell ; sure i am , that i was none of them . 't is true , i then liv'd at oxford , ( that is , i had an habitation there ) and have ( both before and since the time mentioned ) had conversation with dr. holder , and had ( before that time , but , i think , not since ) been sometimes with him at his house in blechington . but sure i am , that i was not with him there at any time when mr. popham was with him : for , had i been so , and on an account so remarkable , it is not possible that in so short a time ( as two years , or less ) i should so perfectly forget it , as then to take mr. popham for a strange person , whom i had never seen before ; and , that ( from that time to this ) i should never ( by any circumstance ) call it to mind that i had before seen him . it is much more possible , that dr. holder's memory may fail him , who , having divers times , before , seen me at blechington , might think one of those times to have been , while mr. popham was with him : if at least it be true , that so very many did resort thither , on purpose , upon that occasion , as page , . when mr. popham came to me , in the year . ( which was the first time that i ever saw him ) he had ( as dr. holder words it , page , . ) begun to loose what he had been taught : that is , he had so perfectly forgot ( if at all taught ) that i found him not able to pronounce one word or syllable . now , if so lately , as in the year , he had learned to speak so well , ( as page . ) to pronounce plainly and distinctly , and with a good and graceful tone , whatever words were shewn him , in print or writing ; or , represented to him by several ways ; or , as he had occasion to ask for , &c. ( as page . ) it is very strange it should so perfectly be forgotten within two years . and if ( as pag. . . ) so many did then , from oxford , resort to blechington , to see and hear him ; if it was then so publickly taken notice of , and known ( not onely to those eminent persons there named , but ) generally in oxford ; and that , from thence , so very many did resort thither , on purpose to satisfie their curiosity , and have a particular knowledge of what they had received by report . it is very much that there be now ( as page . ) so very few ( if any ) in oxford , who know or think otherwise , but that it was the effect of my skill , not of his . habits so well acquir'd , do not use to be so quickly lost ; and matters of fact , so remarkable , so publick , so generally known , so particularly inquired into , and by so very many , who did hear and see it , and did on purpose resort thither for that end , are not wont to be so suddenly forgotten , by the same persons , and in the same place . however , if i have never challenged it , ( as page . ) i have , at least , done him no wrong , ( 't is , at most , but , not being not so kind to him as he could have wish'd ) to say nothing of it . and if all people give me the credit of it without my claiming it ; surely they must therein be very kind , or there was some ground for their so doing . what he adds , page . that i had discourse with him on that occasion divers times , when we hapned to meet at oxford , is but a mistake like the rest ; for i do not remember that then he and i had ever discoursed this in oxford at all , much less divers times . and , it may be , he will begin to think so too , when he shall remember , ( what perhaps he did not so well consider when he wrote this ) that dr. wilkins ( at whose lodgings , in wadham colledge , it was , that he and i did use to meet in oxford , and but accidentally ) was in the year mentioned ( ) master of trinity colledge in cambridge . and though he did , for some part of that year , retain his title to wadham colledge , yet he was but little there , in that year , save when he came to resign , and carry away his goods . and if i did at that time chance to meet him there once , it is more than i do remember ; much less do i remember that i had then discourse on this occasion . but , if his . page . be the same with his / page . the thing is past dispute . for dr. wilkins was gone from oxford before that time ; and the meetings , page . ( which he makes the foundation of the royal society ) had been there disused long before , and were then held at gresham-colledge in london . not but that ingenious persons in oxford , as they met occasionally , ( whether in those lodgings , or else-where ) did oft discourse of philosophical affairs : but the set meetings for such purpose ( which had before been there ) were then dis-used , and had been for a good while . and , what was of this nature at oxford ( about experimental philosophy ) in those days , was rather at mr. boyl's lodgings , than at wadham-colledge . nor doth he pretend that , from any such meetings this was commended to him , but from dr. ward , dr. wilkins , and dr. bathurst , or at least some of them , ( the same persons from whom mr. popham was afterwards commended to me , when dr. holder had given it over : ) nor , that at any such meetings it was discours'd of , or that to any such meeting it was known . but onely that it might serve the ends of that worthy company before mentioned , and was known to those eminent persons above-named . ( so warily are his words penned . ) nor is it pretended , that i was privy to that recommending , or was before-hand acquainted with that undertaking : but onely , that , afterwards , upon my resorting to blechington to satisfie my curiosity ( which never was ) some after-discourses were had upon that occasion , pag. . or if his be not the same with his / it comes much to the same purpose . for , though it might at some time in ( without my privity ) be commended to him ( as page . ) yet , if not before / ( as page . ) he did teach , or had taught . my pretended resort to blechington upon the report thereof , would come too late to usher in those many discourses on that occasion in the lodgings of dr. wilkins . for , in summer , dr. wilkins was gone , and dr. blandford then warden of wadham-colledge ; and / must at least be later than the christmas following . if at any time before this undertaking ( which i do not remember ) he and i might chance to discourse of the possibility of teaching a deaf man to speak ; it may be as fairly supposed , that i might tell him i thought it fesible , ( for i never thought otherwise ) as that he might tell it me . and , if we came to discourse of means how this might be effected ; he may as well be supposed to learn of me , as i of him . especially considering , that my treatise de loquela , printed . ( at which he is now so much troubled ) had then been publick for many years , and known to him . when his elements of speech were neither printed , nor written , nor ( i suppose ) thought of ; and which ( i believe ) had it not been for that of mine , had never been thought of till this day . if of late years he and i have had any such discourse , ( which hath not been much ) it is nothing to the present purpose . for i am here charged with what i saw and perfectly knew , before my letter of march . . and truly , if he did not teach till / ( as page . ) and did in march / go to london , and , that summer , to ely , as page . ( before which time mr. popham and he were parted ) and dr. wilkins long before to cambridge : i know not well when ( within that compass ) he supposeth those divers times should be , that he and i hapned to meet at oxford , there to discourse on that occasion ; of my resorting to blechington on purpose to satisfie my curiosity , and have a particular knowledge of what i had received by report , page . or to see and hear mr. popham speak , page . for the thing we must suppose to be done before it was reported ; and reported , before i heard it ; and this , before my resort to blechington ; and this also , before those after-discourses on this occasion . besides this , i was my self very little at oxford all that time , ( and , much of it , my family was also absent , in london , kent , essex , and cambridge ) good part of november and december i was in london ; in january i went again : and from that time till toward michaelmas , i was hardly a fortnight together at home , and scarce a moneth in all ; ( partly upon occasion of my own affairs , partly upon those of the university , and some other concerns ) which perhaps your lordship may in part remember , if you call to mind what passed that year , both before and after his majesties return , and how much , during that time , i was with your lordship . however , let us a little consider his story , p. , , . in that time , viz. in the year . divers ingenious persons in oxford , used to meet at the lodgings of dr. wilkins then warden of wadham - colledge , where they diligently conferred about researches and experiments in nature , and indeed laid the first ground and foundation of the royal society . and ( at the instance of the said bishop wilkins , &c. ) alexander popham esq being deprived of hearing , and consequently of speaking , was recommended to the care of dr. holder ; vvho , desirous to serve the ends and contribute something to the design of that worthy company , viz. improvement of natural knowledge , and publick benefit ; did , in a short time , teach the said mr. popham , to speak well , to pronounce plainly and distinctly , and with a good and graceful tone , whatsoever words were shewn or represented to him , or as he had occasion to ask for . this was publickly taken notice of , and known ( not onely to those eminent persons , but ) generally in oxford . whence very many resorted to blechington , &c. amongst whom , dr. wallis was one ; with whom dr. holder had discourse , on that occasion , divers times , when they hapned to meet in oxford . how far this narrative differs from the truth of fact , may appear in part from what is already said . but we must not be so severe , as to consider this narrative according to the strict rules of history , ( where the writer should affirm nothing but what he knows to be true , or at least thinks so to be ) but rather as a chancery-bill , for discovery ; where the plaintiff ( being in the dark ) sets forth , not what he knows to be true , but what-ever he thinks possible , that would be to his advantage if true ; in order to make discovery ( from the defendants answer ) of what he did not before know . yet is not such bill to be charged with falshood , though the things affirmed chance not to be true . for , though the things so set forth be ( as to the grammar ) indicative , ( direct affirmatives or negatives : ) yet , as to common intendment , they are to be consider'd as interrogatories , to which he would have the defendant answer . and the same latitude i am willing to allow this writer , if he be contented so to be understood . in answer therefore to his bill of complaint ; i do acknowledge , that , some years before ( but not immediately before ) his majesties happy restoration , such meetings had been at those lodgings , ( though not at that time , viz. in the year . ) and that those meetings might be somewhat conducing to that of the royal society which now is : but ( without disparagement to bishop wilkins ) not , that the first ground and foundation of the royal society was there laid . which i take to be much earlier than those meetings there . i take its first ground and foundation to have been in london , about the year . ( if not sooner ) when the same dr. wilkins ( then chaplain to the prince elector palatine , in london ) dr. jonathan goddard , dr. ent , ( now sir george ent ) dr. glisson , dr. scarbrough , ( now sir charles scarbrough ) dr. merrit , with my self and some others , met weekly , ( sometimes at dr. goddards lodgings , sometimes at the mitre in wood-street hard by ) at a certain day and hour , under a certain penalty , and a weekly contribution for the charge of experiments , with certain rules agreed upon amongst us . where ( to avoid diversion to other discourses , and for some other reasons ) we barred all discourses of divinity , of state-affairs , and of news , ( other than what concern'd our business of philosophy ) confining our selves to philosophical inquiries , and such as related thereunto ; as physick , anatomy , geometry , astronomy , navigation , staticks , mechanicks , and natural experiments . we there discoursed the circulation of the blood , the valves in the veins , the copernican hypothesis , the nature of comets and new 〈◊〉 , the attendants on jupiter , the oval shape of saturn , the inequalities and se●enography of the moon , the several phases of venus and mercury , the improvement of telescopes , and grinding of glasses for that purpose , ( wherein dr. goddard was particularly ingaged , and did maintain an operator in his house for that purpose ) the weight of the air , the possibility or impossibility of vacuities , and natures abhorrence thereof , the torricellian experiment in quicksilver , the descent of heavy bodies , and the degrees of acceleration therein ; with others of like nature . some of which were then but new discoveries , and others not so generally known and embraced as now they are . these meetings we removed , soon after , to the bull-head in cheap-side ; and ( in term-time ) to gresham-colledge , where we met weekly at mr. foster's lecture , ( then astronomy-professor there ) and , after the lecture ended : repaired , sometimes to mr. foster's lodgings , sometimes to some other place not far distant , where we continued such inquiries ; and our numbers encreased . about the years , . some of our company were removed to oxford ; ( first , dr. wilkins , then i , and soon after , dr. goddard ; ) whereupon our company divided . those at london , ( and we , when we had occasion to be there ) met as before . those of us at oxford , with dr. ward , ( now bishop of salisbury ) dr. petty , ( now sir vvilliam petty ) dr. bathurst , dr. vvillis , and many others of the most inquisitive persons in oxford , met weekly ( for some years ) at dr. petty's lodgings on the like account ; ( to wit , so long as dr. petty continued in oxford , and for some while after ; ) because of the conveniencies we had there , ( being the house of an apothecary ) to view , and make use , of drugs and other like matters , as there was occasion . our meetings there , were very numerous , and very considerable . for , beside the diligence of persons , studiously inquisitive , the novelty of the design made many to resort thither ; who , when it ceased to be new , began to grow more remiss , or did pursue such inquiries at home . we did afterwards ( dr. petty being gone for ireland , and our numbers growing less , ) remove thence . and , ( some years before his majesty's return ) did meet , ( as dr. holder observes ) at dr. vvilkin's lodgings , in vvadham-colledge . but , before the time he mentions , those set meetings ceased in oxford , and were held at london . where ( after the death of mr. foster ) we continued to meet at gresham-colledge ( as before , ) at mr. rook's lecture , ( who succeeded mr. foster , ) and from thence repaired to some convenient place , in or near that colledge : and so onward ; till the fire of london , caused our removal to arundel-house ; from whence we are since returned to gresham-colledge again . in the mean while ; our company at gresham-colledge , being much again increased , by the accession of divers eminent and noble persons upon his majesties return ; we were ( about the beginning of the year ) by his majesties grace and favour , incorporated by the name of the royal society , &c. all this while , dr. vvilkins and dr. goddard , through all these changes , continued those meetings , ( and had a great influence on them , ) from the first original , till the days of their death ; and some others of us , to this day . this digression , though somewhat long , is not altogether impertinent , to rectifie what by dr. holder was so imperfectly reported , concerning those philosophical meetings . which yet do not concern dr. holder's business , nor were at all interressed in it . though ( if i may use his words , page . ) with subtilty of contrivance , he speaks like truth so artificially , that his reader is to believe more than is true , ( that from those meetings it was commended to him , and to those meetings it had been made known ) else , to what purpose are those meetings named . by what particular persons , or on what account , that business was commended to him , i cannot tell , nor was at all privy to it . nor do i know who those many ( or any ) were , that resorted to blechington on that account ; onely , that i was none of them . nor had i those divers discourses with him at oxford on that occasion , which he suggesteth to have then hapned . but now , what is all this to the business of mr. vvhaly ? and to my letter of march . ? was it not as lawful for me to undertake mr. whaly , as for him to undertake mr. popham ? had he , before that time , obtained a patent for the sole-teaching of dumb persons to speak ? or , was it a crime ( because he had failed of his enterprise on mr. popham ) for me to undertake mr. vvhaly with better success ? mr. vvhaly ( whom he calls the young gentleman , page . ) was then about years of age ; with some of whose relations i had been acquainted for years before , and more , ( though not with him , nor with his condition . ) about a year or two before he came to me , an uncle of his ( yet living , and with whom i had been long acquainted ) bewailing to me the sadness of his condition ; and finding , by my discourse thereupon , that i thought he might yet recover the use of speech , was very desirous that i should undertake him ; which , a good while after , was brought to pass . whether it were before or after dr. holder's attempt on mr. popham , that this uncle did first desire it of me , i do not well remember ; but i think it much about the same time , or before . sure i am , it was a long time before i had ever seen mr. popham , or heard him speak . when mr. vvhaly had been some while with me , and i began to find the business succeed , i wrote to mr. boyl ( then at london ) that letter of march . . ( of which there is now so great a complaint ) in answer to some of his , desiring that account from me ; ( as appears in the body of that letter , though dr. holder think fit to dissemble that matter . ) dr. holder had , at this time , given over his attempt on mr. popham ; that design being then deserted . whether because dr. holder himself was weary of the business , ( i cannot tell ) or rather ( which i take to be the true cause ) because mr. popham's friends saw so little of success , and to so little 〈◊〉 , that they did not think fit to pursue the design further . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dr. holder's removal to ely ( intimated page . ) should be the onely cause , seems not likely . for mr. popham might as well , at ely , be taught to speak , as at blechington , and , that his friends were willing to have pursued the design , if they had seen a likelihood of any considerable success ; we may judge , by their sending him to me in . on the same account . the great offence which is now taken , at the letter which was then written , is not , because any thing therein was not true , or not rationally said ; but rather because it was ( as he speaks ) so subtilly contrived , that there is nothing in it for him to cavil at . and therefore he cavils at what is not in it , viz. that amongst the considerations which induced me to undertake mr. vvhaly , i said nothing of dr. holder and mr. popham , p. , . the truth is , to the rest of those considerations , i might have added , nor am i discouraged from this undertaking by mr. holders unsuccessful attempt on mr. popham , &c. but i thought it more civil to say nothing of it . he would now have it thought , p. . a mocking of mr. boyl ( to tell him in that letter , how far , and upon what considerations , and by what ways , i thought it possible , or fesible ) when as i certainly knew it possible , having already given proof of it on mr. vvhaly . 't is true , i had then given a proof of it on mr. vvhaly , ( having at that time performed more on mr. vvhaly , than ever dr. holder did on mr. popham ; ) and , in that letter , i told him of such proof . but mr. boyle did not think it a mockery to be so used , having in two letters ▪ of jan. . and febr. . desired it of me ; and in another of april . he thanked me for that excellent paper . ) nor did those of the society at gresham-colledge , to whom he did impart it , and before whom ( in may following ) mr. vvhaly was heard to speak . and nothing is more common , than ( of things unusual ) to shew , how far , and upon what considerations , others should not think strange or incredible , what we certainly know to be true and fesible . yet mr. boyl did , in those days , live at oxford , as well as dr. wallis ; and ▪ within as few miles of blechington ; and , was as well acquainted at vvadham-colledge . and , if dr. holden's performance were so generally known in oxford , ( as p. . ) and in particular to those eminent persons with whom mr. boyl was so well acquainted : he had the same opportunity , of being made acquainted with it , as i had . and those at gresham-colledge did not want means of being dis-abused , if i had designed to impose them : since those eminent persons which he speaks of , were of that number , and some of them then present : and ( it seems ) dr. holder himself was there also , and saw this , p. . he might therefore as well , ( if things had been as he now represents ) have let that company hear mr. popham speak , as i mr. vvhaly , ( and they would as well have been pleased to hear it ) especially if mr. popham spake so much better than mr. vvhaly ; the one but some words , and with a harsh ill tone ; the other spoke well , with a good and graceful tone , and did pronounce plainly and distinctly , whatever words , &c. p. , . ) 't would certainly have been much more to their satisfaction , to have seen mr. whaly so much out-done by mr. popham . and dr. holder , who was so desirous to serve the ends , and contribute somewhat to the design , of that worthy company , ( p. , . ) should not have denied them this satisfaction , if he could have shewed it . but the truth is , he could not shew it ; ( and that 's the grief . ) for , when mr. popham , the same year , ( within a few moneths ) was brought to me to learn , i saw no foot-steps of those effects , nor that he was able to speak one word or syllable . 't was therefore wise in him , not to produce him ; as well as civil in me to say nothing of it . however , if dr. holder had caused this of mr. popham to be publickly known ; to many persons of all degrees ; at london , at westminster , at the anatomy-lecture ; ( as well as to those eminent persons above-named , and generally in oxford : ) and went with him to london and vvestminster , that those , on this occasion , might satisfie themselves , in hearing mr. popham , ( as p. . ) why might not , as well , mr. vvhaly go with me to gresham-colledge and vvhite-hall , that others might be satisfi'd in hearing him , p. . without so much clamour of my being greedy to spread my own fame ? especially when himself allows it , p. . to be very considerable and worthy to be known . and , if he may tell us , p. . that he taught mr. popham , by such means as are , since , by him made publick ( in ) why might not i as well say ( in my letter of . ) that i taught mr. whaly , by such as i had , before , made publick , ( in . ) but the mockery of this letter , would ( i suppose ) have been excused , had it not been published in the transactions , eight years after . ( for that 's the complaint , these considerations did not see light till eight years after , p. . ) i confess , it might have been printed sooner , ( if i had been as greedy and industrious as he would have it thought , p. . to spread my own fame . ) for there is nothing in it why it might not have been printed the next day . ( but not in the transactions ; for mr. oldenburg did not begin to write transactions , till . ) but 't was not too late in . however , 't was written sooner ; and published , ( though not in print . ) and 't is well it was so . for , if printing an old letter make so great a clamour ; what would have been , if i had at that time written a new piece ( to the same purpose ) and published that ? but the great complaint is , that in the post-script ( yes , and in the letter too ) mention is made of my treatise de loquela , published in . and that it is there commended , ( which troubles him much ; and he doth , at least six times , complain of it ; p. , , , , . ) that is , it is there said , ( but it is so said in the letter also ) that , in this treatise of speech , i do very distinctly lay down the manner of forming all sounds of letters usual in speech : and that , in confidence and pursuance of this , ( which the letter also mentions ) i did undertake that difficult task . and why might not all this be said ? would he have had me say , that i did ( in . ) pursue his elements of speech , ( which were not publish'd till and which i have never yet seen , ) rather than my own , published in ? but ( which troubles him yet more ) the writer of that post-script says also , that he thinks this to be the first book that was ever published in this kind . ( true , and i think so too . 't is at least elder than his of . nor doth dr. holder tell us of any precedent than that of mine . ) and all this , without determining that his ( of . ) is performed with more judgment and accuracy ▪ p , , . and this is the great fault . he was ( it seems ) not willing , that it should be at all remembred , that any had written of that subject before him . at lest , if he were not the first , he would be thought to have done it best . and he hopes ( though i will not determine against my self ) that the impartial reader will so determine , p. . yet bishop vvilkins , who ( as dr. holder tells us , p. . ) in his universal character , p. . mentions the papers of dr. holder ; doth not do it with any preference to those of mine . but ( having there named a great many , and some of them great men , who had written of the doctrine of letters , ) he concludes , that amongst all that he had seen published , dr. vvallis seemed to him , with greatest accurateness and subtilty , to have considered the philosophy of articulate sounds . had not this treatise of mine been remembred , he hoped to have passed for the first author in that kind . for , that his should be thought earlier than that of bishop vvilkins , he had provided , by what he tells us ( p. . ) that some papers of dr. holders were communicated to the bishop , and by him mentioned ; ( which we must suppose to be these ; ) and that those papers were lost in the bishops study , ( together with all his own ) in the dreadful fire of london , . ( and , therefore , must at least have been so antient ; and none but mine , of . may pretend to precedence . ) that some of the bishops papers , ( that is , so much of the fair copy of his universal character as was then unprinted , ) were lost in the fire of london , is true : but , not in the bishops study , ( as is here pretended ) but , at the printing-house , ( as the bishop himself , and mr. gillibrand , for whom it was printing , did both tell me ) where dr. holder's papers are not pretended to have been . nor were the bishop's own papers all lost , ( as is here affirmed . ) but , of what was printed , two copies were preserved . and , out of his foul papers , ( as himself told me ) which were preserved also , he did retrieve what of the fair copy was lost . nor is it likely , ( the fire having burnt for some days , before it came thither ) that himself , ( if at home ) and those about him , should be all so negligent , as that no care was taken of any of his papers , but that they should be all lost . ( which , though it do not much concern the present business , yet it shews how apt he is to trip in matters of fact. ) whether dr. holder's papers were then lost , or where they were lost , i know not : and i as little know whether , and by whom , dr. holder was importuned to renew those papers , as we are told , p. . however , those elements of speech , with its appendix , may ( for ought i know ) be an excellent piece ; ( and , for ought i know , it may be the contrary . ) i never read either the one or the other . nor do i know that i ever saw it ; at least , not so as to read a line of it . ( it 's possible i may have seen the book lying on a table , or standing on a shelf in a book-seller's shop , or the like ; but without knowing the particular contents of it . nor do i know ( otherwise than as he now tells me ) whether any one word therein do concern me , or mr. popham , or the business in hand . so far was i from being startled ( as p. . ) at the contents of it , or contriving to counterplot it . nor do i think my self concern'd , on this occasion , to seek it out . if there be any thing in it of like import with what he doth now publish ; or which doth otherwise need an answer : it is unknown to me ; and may ( i suppose ) without more ado , receive its answer from hence . the same post-script says also , ( and it says true ; ) that mr. vvhaly is not the onely person on whom i have shewed the effect of my skill ; but i have since done the like for another , meaning mr. popham . and dr. holder himself , p. , . cannot deny it to be all true . but it is not true ( he tells us , p. . ) that either mr. oldenburg or dr. plot did know or vvrite any thing of these matters , but what was put into their hands by me . ( and he would have the like to be thought of all other authors by whom i have been commended , p. . that they are but large characters of my own graving : that so he may at once destroy all the good things that any body hath said of me ; or , shall say . ) as to dr. plot , i shall speak by and by . mr. oldenburg is dead ; and cannot now be asked , what he knew , or vvrote ; nor answer for himself . ( i shall therefore do it for him . ) the best is , there is nothing there said , which is not true , or which he did not know , ( and a great many more beside him ) or which was not fitting for him to say : nothing which he did not say wittingly and willingly ; and nothing ( i suppose ) which he would un-say were he now alive . and strange it is that dr. holder should perswade us , that mr. oldenburg knew nothing of all this . he did know , that i had taught mr. whaly to speak ; and that mr. whaly was at gresham-colledge , and was heard to speak there ; and what was thereupon the sense of those present : ( for himself was one of them , and did see him , and hear him speak there ; and heard what the company did express as their sense of it . ) he knew , that this was there registred : ( for himself did it , as being then the secretary of that society . ) he knew ( from his own register and memorials , not from me ) that this was on may . . as to what is said to have been done at whitehall and my own house ; he knew them from the notoreity of the fact , and from the relation of persons present , whom he had no reason to disbelieve . he knew then ( and many years before ) my english grammar , and my treatise of speech ( prefixed thereunto , ) which ( the title-page tells him ) was printed in the year . he knew also , that of bishop wilkins's universal character ( published in . ) and that of dr. holder's elements of speech , publish'd in . ( and gives a particular account of both : the one , in his transactions of may , . the other , in that of may , ; ) and , that both those , were since mine of . and , if he did not think fit , to deliver an opinion , whether theirs or mine were better ; he knew this also . and he could not but know , that the way to teach a deaf person , to speak ; must be , by teaching how to apply the instruments of speech to form such sounds ; which is the profess'd design of that treatise of mine . and , that , in teaching mr. whaly , i pursu'd that treatise , and did in that letter refer to it ; he knew also , ( for he saw it there . ) and all these things , which he did thus know , if he had not also been willing to say : he would not have there inserted . nor would he have said , it was a difficult task ; or , that it was ingeniously and successfully begun ; or , that he thought that treatise of mine to be the first book that was ever publish'd in that kind ; if he had not thought so . ( and he could not but know , he did thus think : and dr. holder , i suppose , thinks so too . ) now , if he did know , and think all this : why was it unfit for him to say it ? and , with what ingenuity doth dr. holder then insinuate , as if mr. oldenburg know nothing of all these matters ; but did merely take it upon trust from me ? he knew also , what he says further ( which dr. holder seems most displeased at , ) that this was not the onely person , on whom the said doctor hath shewed the effect of his skill , but he hath since done the like for another ; ( meaning mr. popham : ) for this of mr. popham , was at that time as notorious and well known , as that of mr. whaly . and i know not well how he could express it more softly , then by saying , that on him also i had shewed some effect of my skill . that the thing said , is true ; dr. holder himself is so kind to me as not to deny ; but says freely , ( p. . ) that what i perform'd on those two gentlemen ( mr. whaly and mr. popham ; ) he esteems very considerable ; and worthy to be known and valued . and if , by doing the like for him , i mean no more but , that i so taught him to speak as i had done for mr. vvhaly ; he allows that to be true also , p. . and , if my teaching dumb persons , be meant but of two such , meaning these two ; ) he doth there affirm it . that is , he allows all to be true that is there said of me : and mr. oldenburg knew it so to be . but he excepts , p. . that this is added by way of comment on the letter ; and that mr. popham's name is ( wisely ) omitted . i confess , some part of it may be called a comment on that letter ; ( for it tells , what is the name of the person which the letter mentions ; and , in what year , the treatise of speech , and the english grammar , there mentioned , were printed . ) but , as to the rest , i should rather have called it a narrative of what happen'd after the letter was written . and it was but necessary : for it might be well supposed , that those who should find , in the letter , what had been undertaken , would be willing to know , with what success . ( and , of that , there could not well have been less said than is . ) and , my teaching mr. popham , being at that time as much known , if not more , that than of mr. whaly ; it would not have been congruous to mr. oldenburg's design in publishing his transactions , not to take any notice of him at all . as for that of not naming mr. popham . it is true , his name is omitted ; and ( i think ) not unwisely . for it is possible , that he , or his relations , ( being persons of quality , ) would not care to have that infirmity of his , so publickly exposed by name . ( and , whether they will think it more kindly done of mr. oldenburg in sparing to name him ; or of dr. holder who thus proclaims it , and brings his name upon the stage : is for them to judge rather than me . ) but , why dr. holder should be concerned for not naming mr. popham ; or what prejudice to himself he apprehends by it ; or , what plot he fancies in it , i cannot tell . how far i might be concerned in penning that post-script , ( which is the thing with which dr. holder labours so oft to reproach me ; twelve times at least , p. , , , , , , . ) i do not at present so well remember . some of it , it 's like , mr. oldenburg had from me , ( because it relates to what was done in my family : ) and some of it certainly was his own ; which relates to his own register ; ( for it is , what i could not have told without him : ) and the whole ( which is not much ) is what he knew , and what he was willing to say : and then , it is not much material who did write it ; ( himself , his clerk , or i : ) nor do i think it any fault at all in him or me. there is nothing more usual , than for one to draw that writing , which another is to sign ; ( a secretary , for his lord ; a clerk , for his master ; a lawyer , for his client ; and , one friend , for another : ) and , in men of much business it must needs be so . and , when it is so , it must be writ in such a phrase as is proper for him to use ( not who pens it , but ) whose act it is to be ; and by whom it is to be allowed and owned before it becomes his act. and dr. holder himself ( who would have it thought a crime in me ) doth not deny but that his narrative , p. , , , , . was of his own penning , ( but , as in mr. oldenburg's name , ) and was by him put into mr. oldenburg's hand , ( p. . ) desiring to have it inserted in the transactions , ( and complains , greatly , that it was not so done . ) and i have reason to believe , that what is said of dr. holder , and his elements , and appendix , in the transactions of may , ; was of his own penning also , but in mr. oldenburg's name . in the present case , ( who ever wrote it , ) i do not find any clause , or word , therein ; which is not proper enough for me to write , or him to say , or what he did not actually approve and own . however , ( if that will do him any pleasure ) i will give him leave to change the style ; and , what is said of me , in the third person , to read as said by me , in the first person ; ( leaving out the word ingenuously , if he do not think it belong to me : ) and i will then be answerable for it all : ( the rather , because mr. oldenburg is not now alive to answer for it . ) that which dr. holder is troubled at herein , is but an omission . not , that any thing of this is untrue , or unfit : ( he is rather troubled , that nothing is so : ) but , that somewhat else is not said . somewhat he had a mind should be said , which i could not say ; ( and , i am afraid , no body else : ) that dr. holder had taught mr. popham to speak well ; to pronounce plainly and distinctly , with a good and graceful tone , whatsoever vvords , &c. which he doth not there find . hinc illae lachrymae ! mr. oldenburg in his transactions of july . tells , what was done by me ; without saying ( at the same time ) what was done by dr. holder : like as , in those of may , . he had said , what was done by dr. holder ; without saying , what ( of that kind ) had been done by me. and he doth , in the one place , commend my treatise of speech , ( published in . ) without commending his elements of speech , ( published in . ) like as , in the other place , he had commended his , without taking notice of mine , ( which had been publish'd years before . ) as for me , ( so far as i may be concern'd in it ; ) i knew that , to touch upon this , was , to touch him in a sore place . i could not speak to his satisfaction ; and i was not desirous to disoblige him : and therefore ( as he phraseth it ) silently passed it over ; and left it for them to say who knew it . i do not know , that i have ever been heard to say , that he did , or , that he did not . the first i could not say ( knowingly ; ) the other i was loth to say . the case is this . in the year . i published ( together with my english grammar ) a treatise of speech : shewing therein , with what organs , in what positions , and by what motions , all sounds used in speech are formed : and that , upon such positions and motions , such sounds will certainly follow , ( whether he that speaks , do hear himself or not . ) this ( my letter says , as well as the postscript ) i think to be the first attempt in that kind . and there , to the commonly received organs of speech , instrument a novem , sunt , guttur , lingua , palatum , quatuor & dentes , & duo libra simul ; i add , one more , ( and , i think , i am the first that do so ) that is , the nostrils ; on the closure and different appertures , of which , ( by help of the uvula ) the sole difference in the articulation of divers letters depends : as of p , b , m ; and of t , d , n ; and divers others . which ( i think ) no body , before me , had taken notice of . but i am since followed by others . some years after ; mr. george dalgarno , at oxford , appli'd himself to write a treatise concerning an universal character ; ( which he published in the year , intituled , ars signorum : ) concerning which he consulted me , ( as he did also dr. wilkins , dr. ward , and others . ) i told him my sense of it , ( as i did also to dr. wilkins ) that the thing was certainly fesible in nature , ( upon such considerations as that letter of march . , mentions : ) but that i did not think it likely to obtain in practice . because this universal character , must be in the nature of a new language . ( which he was so apprehensive to be true , that , having once contrived his universal character , he did , upon this suggestion , accommodate thereunto his universal language , to make his character effable : as is there seen . ) so that , for all persons , to learn his character , and to have all books , written in it ; is the same thing as to translate all books into one language , and to have this language learned by all. which if it cannot be hoped , of any of the languages now in being , ( which have the advantage of being already understood , by more than ever are like to learn that other : ) much less is it to be hoped for , of a new language , now to be contrived . and , in case men should be willing , to change the way of writing , from vocal to real characters : there would soon arise a like variety of real characters , ( each fansying his own way the best , ) as now there is of vocal languages . nor is it to be expected , that a general law should be made , to confine all to the same characters ; any more than ( amongst our selves ) all writers of short-hand be confined to the same way and method of brachy-graphy , or short-writing : ( which we find to multiply , according to the variety of teachers . ) and specious arithmetick , ( which , as to so much , is a kind of real character , ) hath not , in all writers , the same characters : but very different , as different writers . this enterprise of mr. dolgarro , gave occasion to dr. wilkins ( the late bishop of chester ) to pursue the same design ( as himself intimates in his epistle ; ) both as to a real character , as he calls it , ( or characters of things instead of words ; ) and the expressing those characters by vocal sounds ; ( which he calls his philosophical language ; ) in his essay of a real character and philosophical language , published in the year . which is the result of his thoughts on that subject , for divers years before ; with the concurrence of dr. seth ward ( now bishop of salisbury , ) and dr. william lloyd , ( now dean of bangor , ) and others ; ( as himself mentions ; ) with whom he had frequent conference about that affair . and it would have been publish'd somewhat sooner , if not interrupted by the fire of london , in the year . not that he did expect , this real character of his , and his philosophical language , should universally obtain ; and all books be translated into it : but , to shew the thing to be fesible ; and divers advantages which might arise thence , if it could so obtain . and , to demonstrate the thing it self to be practicable ; he was pleased ( when his book was newly made publick ) to write a letter to me , in his real character ; to which i return'd an answer in his philosophical language : and we did perfectly understand one another , as if written in our own language . in order to this design ; he found it expedient ( for reasons by him expressed ) to consider , the formation of sounds in speech ; and to engraft ( in his essay ) a particular discourse thereof ( in chap. , , , , . of his third part. ) and , ( because i had particularly considered that subject , and published a treatise of it , ) he was pleased more particularly to discourse that part with me : which we did at divers meetings on that occasion . ( there being scarce any part , in all that discourse , wherein i was not advised with . ) in some things ; he was pleased , on those discourses , to alter his former thoughts for reasons which i suggested . as for instance . some vowels he judged to be of their own nature long , and could not be pronounced short , ( as ô in boat , oo in food , ū in lute , &c. ) others , in their own nature short , and not capable of being produced ; ( as the french e feminine , in je , ne , &c. and the english ū , in cut , but , &c. contrary to which , i suggested , that , in good , goode ; wood , woo'd ; full , fool ; pull , pool ; wooll , wool ; hood , hoo'd ; &c. there is a manifest distinction of the same sound ( of the vowel ) pronounced long , and short. and in recubo , tetubo , &c. we in england pronounce short , the same sound of ú , which in cubo , tubo , &c. we pronounce long. so in gula , régula , &c. and the like of ô , in potent , impotent ; dolent , indolent , rédolent ; solens , insolens ; vola , évola , benévola : &c. and that , in musick , the words cut , put , may be sung as a brief , or sembrief , as well as a crotchet or quaver , ( which depends onely upon the short or long sounding of that vowel ; those consonants c , b , t , not being capable of production , but the vowel onely : ) and the like of the french e feminine . and , contrariwise , tô , too , tú , may be a crotchet or quaver , as well as a brief or sembrief . whereupon he agreed with me ; that all vowels ( and some consonants ) are capable of production and contraction ; but that some vowels are , for the most part , produced in common speech ; others , mostly contracted . so the english vowel î , in bite , smile , &c. he first took to be a simple sound ( not compounded , ) but afterwards agreed with me , that it was a compound , of the feminine è , with the subjunctive i or y : as in the greek dipthong ei , and the english word ey ; ( which differs not in sound from i. ) and these are some of those things , about which ( he tells us , p. . ) he had , upon new considerations and suggestions , changed his former thoughts . in some others ; he continued to differ from me , as in the french feminine è and the english short ū . which letters he accounts to be the same : but i take to be different , ( that of ū being a broader sound than the other ; ) differing as e and u in our english pronunciation of fer , fur ; iter , itur ; terris , turris ; ter ter , turtur ; p●rperam , purpuram ; &c. he takes also the sound of the consonants y , and w , to be the same with that of the vowels ee , and oo rapidly pronounced : ( and the words yee , woo , in page . he writes u , ▪ ▪ . ) and , consequently , the latin i , u , vowels ; would not differ at all from j , v , consonants . for the latin i , j ; u , v ; had the same sounds with our ee , y ; oo , w. which i take to be different letters ; because , in pronouncing the words , yee , woo , there is a manifest motion of the mouth in passing from the sound of y to ee ; and of w to oo ; ( which is yet more manifest , if the words be several times repeated , yee yee , woo woo . this would not be , were there not a different position required , to form those sounds . yet he chose to retain his opinion ; and i , mine . he makes also some letters whispered , to be distinct from the same spoken-out : calling the one sonorous , the other mute . thus m , n , l , r , &c. as commonly spoken , he calls sonorous ; but if onely whispered , he calls them mute , and writes them hm , hn , hl , hr , &c. whereas i take this not to make a new letter , ( because not a new articulation , ) but refer it to the common affections , which respect the whole tenor of speech , not the formation of particular letters : of which there be divers . thus the word and may , with the same articulation , be sung in gam-ut , or in e-la , ( base or treble ; ) though with a different tone : and may be a sembrief or crotchet ; though with a different time : and may be spoken softly or aloud , with a different strength : so it may , with the same articulation , though with a different noise , be spoken-out or whispered ; ( in the former of which , there is a roughness of the sound from the concussion of the larynx ; whereas in whispering , though pretty loud , there is a smoothness for want of that concussion . thus in these words , [ the roving winds may blaze ] every letter hath a different noise when whispered , from what it hath when spoken-out : but , the same articulation . and therefore we do not reckon the word and when whispered , to be spelled with other letters than when it is spoken-out . much less is this ( as he makes it ) the difference between v , f , or d , t , or b , p , &c. that the one is ( in this sense ) sonorous , the other mute . for we may whisper the words ved , bed , without saying fet , pet. nor do i think the difference between v and f , to lie in this ; that f is formed by the two lips ; but the consonant v is formed between either lip and the opposite teeth , p. . ( he should rather have said , between the neather lip and the opposite teeth ; ) for each of those letters may be formed in either place : the difference of those sounds , lying ( not in the lips , nor in the larynx , but ) in the nostrils . and , in the formation of divers letters , he gives several particular directions , which i choose rather to omit , as being but accidental , and not essential to those letters , ( with , or without which , those letters may be formed : ) and it is our custom in mathematicks , so to form our definitions , as to contain just so much as is necessary to determine the subject , and no more . and these ( i suppose ) are some of those things , wherein ( he tells us , p. , , . ) he dares not be over-peremptory , or dogmatical , ( but onely , that he doth thus judge at present , ) having formerly , upon new considerations and suggestions , so often changed his thoughts in this inquiry . but , in most things , we agree , without any considerable difference of opinion in him , from what i had before publish'd : and , in what we do differ , ( which is not much ) i might modestly enough ( notwithstanding dr. holder's rebuke , p. , , . ) leave it to the reader to judge , without determining against my self : having not yet seen cause to vary therein , from what was my former opinion . nor do i mean to concern my self ( upon this challenge of dr. holder ) to write against bishop wilkins . it seems : dr. wilkins had conference with dr. holder also ( as well as others ) on that subject : and ( in the year . ) had seen some papers of his written on that occasion . but those papers of his , it is not pretended that i ever saw : nor have i yet read those which are since printed in . ( and therefore , as to those , i have no reason yet to determine against my self . ) nor doth he pretend , that i learned from thence , what i had before published in . it is more likely ; that , what i had before written on that subject , gave occasion to dr. wilkins next , and after him to dr. holder , to consider the formation of sounds , and teaching of deaf persons to do it : and , that dr. holder was not the first that thought of it . however ; that which i know of his business , is this ; that in the year / , dr. holder did attempt teaching mr. popham to speak ; but , soon after , gave it over : ( for what reasons , he knows best . ) as to teaching him to understand a language , i do not find him pretending to it ; ( so that , as to this , he will allow the work to be mine . ) nor doth he pretend to any thing as to mr. whaly ; ( so far therefore the coast is clear . ) what he pretends to , is , that he taught mr. popham to pronounce some words , ( which , by somewhat of rhetorical amplification , is now called , speaking well , and pronouncing plainly and distinctly , and with a good and graceful tone , whatever words were represented to him , as he had occasion to ask for . ) in order to this , i have been told ) he did direct mr. popham to those painful positions and motions of the mouth and face , which used to make him sweat so as to drop : ( a method which i have never had occasion to make use of with those i have taught ; putting them to no more of bodily pain , than we put our selves to in speaking : ) but , whatwas the effect of that pain and sweat , i do not know . this , whatsoever it were , was in the year , quite forgot . and mr. popham ( after i had ingood measure taught mr. vvhaly ) was brought to me to learn . whether any thing of disgust were in it , ( that i should venture upon what he had given over , ) i cannot tell . but , because such things oft happen , i was the less willing to undertake it ; and did , on that account , at first decline it , as not willing to take anothers work out of his hand ; ( which dr. bathurst , i presume , may still remember , who did once and a second time recommend that business to me from the lady vvharton : ) till dr. bathurst did assure me , that no more was to be expected from dr. holder , nor intended by him ; and that no offence should be taken on that account . when mr. popham ( by that lady his mother ) was brought to me ; i found no appearance of those fine things which are now said to have been done by dr. holder . ( and the stories , of my having seen and heard him , before , at blechington , &c. but fansies . ) i thought it best , therefore , to say nothing of it ; rather than to say , that , vvhat dr. holder had attempted , but given over ; i had undertaken with success : ( which would have look'd like insultation in me , and a reproaching of him . ) if any other who knew more than i did , could say of him all that which he now says of himself ; it was free for him , or them , to have said it if they so pleased . but from me , who knew it not ( nor do yet , ) it could not , in reason , be expected . and , for the same reason , i said nothing of the constable of castil's son. what pablo bonnet says of him , i know not , ( having never seen the book : ) nor what is said of him by sir kenelm digby , ( as not having read that . ) i have heard , it is said of him ; that , onely by seeing another speak , ( himself being deaf , ) though distant from him the breadth of a large room ; he was able to repeat perfectly what ever was said , though in vvelsh , or irish , or any other language of which he had no knowledge at all , and which had never been spoken to him . which seems to me , very unlikely , if not impossible , concerning which thing , i have also delivered my opinion in that letter of march . ( that i might not be thought to pretend to impossibilities : ) but , without naming any persons ; in pursuance of the old rules , parcere nominibus , &c. i know very well , ( for i have seen it in those that i have taught , ) that words of such unknown languages may , by a deaf man , be pronounc'd . but he must then be otherwise directed , what sound , or letters , he is to form : he cannot do it barely by seeing another speak . i know also , ( for the same reason , ) that a deaf person , by seeing another speak , may sometimes guess shrewdly at what is said . but it must be in such words and sentences as he hath been acquainted with : not in a strange language , of which he knows neither the sense nor the words . for certain it is , that the formation of divers sounds in speech , is perform'd so inwardly in the mouth , throat , and nostrils ; and , the distinction of sounds therein so very nice ; that it is not possible to be discerned by the eye of a by-stander . but , in known words , by seeing the formation of some letters , ( especially the labials , ) he may guess at the rest ( as we do , when , in a word , we find a letter or two mis-written , or left-out ; but , from the rest , may easily know what it should be . ) and , in known sentences , having thus discerned some words , he may , by them , guess at the rest of the sentence , or at least at the sense of it . and , when this very particular was , at gresham-colledge , discoursed , upon the occasion of mr. whaly's being there , it was then affirmed , by a gentleman there present , that himself ( beyond-sea ) had seen this constable of castil's son ; and ( having heard of these reports before ) did the more curiously observe him ; and found those about him to discourse with him by signs and gestures , in the same manner as is usual with other deaf persons . which ( as he well observed ) would not have been , if he , by seeing them speak , could tell what they said , and could himself , by speaking , give them an answer . so that there must needs be something of amplification in that story . since therefore i could add nothing ( from my own knowledge ) to what by others had been said of him : and ( though i did suspect somewhat of hyperbole in the case ) would not concern my self to contradict it : i thought best to say nothing of it , ( but leave the report as i found it , upon the credit of the reporters . ) without going about to extenuate anothers performance . and if any one else had , of his own knowledge , affirmed as much of dr. holder's performance ( without bespattering another ; ) it 's like ( whatsoever were my own sentiments of it ) i should have as little concerned my self to contradict that , as i did the other . but should choose rather ( if i might be permitted so to do ) to say nothing of either . another great complaint there is , concerning a book of dr. plott . ( it seems , he is very much concerned for every one that speaks favourably of me , p. , , , , . ) all that was past , might ( it seems ) have been pardoned , ( as p. , , . ) had it not been for this fresh occasion . the fault is this , that dr. plott , in his natural history of oxfordshire , hath said ( it seems ) somewhat of my teaching dumb persons to speak , and of my treatise de loquela ; as p. , . yet dr. plott he can forgive ( in hopes of a reformation , p. . ) but dr. vvallis must be doubly charged . 't was i ( he says ) gave this fresh occasion , p. . 't was my subtil contrivance , p. . i practis'd it ; i caus'd it to be publish'd ; 't is i that penned , and spread my own fame in several authors works , ( and in this amongst the rest ) they be large characters engraven by my self , p. . 't was i ( he says ) thrust my self into dr. plott's work ; i imposed upon that worthy person ; that i therein renew the challenge ; that i passed it into the book ; that those three whole paragraphs ( or the greatest part of them ) were certainly of my penning ; and that it may be justly thought , all the rest was so too ; that i imposed upon the good doctor , and penned it my self , p. . that i put upon him that great abuse , p. . that he hath indeed put it upon record , but did not know or vvrite any of those matters , but what was put into his hands by me ; that i imposed upon him , and prevail'd him to say it as from himself , p. . that i do there explain my self , p. . with much more to that purpose . not , that dr. holder knows this to be true : but because it is fit matter for a chancery-bill . that dr. plott did sometimes advise with me , while that book was writing and printing ; is very true : and that i was free to give him my opinion and advise when he desired it : and he as free to take it or leave it , as he saw cause . ( nor was it a fault in either of us , so to do . ) but i did not use to pen whole paragraphs for him ; or thrust him upon saying what he had not a mind to say himself . what is in those three paragraphs ; i cannot tell , ( nor is the book at hand to look , ) and therefore cannot say , whether i am or am not concerned therein . but , if any thing be there ( or any where else in that whole book ) which concerns the business in hand : sure i am that i penned it not . nor did i so much as know that he had therein said any one word of that whole affair ; till he told me ( after the book was published ) that , dr. holder was offended at it . ( nor do i yet know , what it is he hath said of it . but have reason to think , there is nothing therein said , but what was fit enough for him to say . ) so that , if dr. holder could find in his heart to pass by all the rest ( as he intimates , p. , . ) as to this last , i may plead innocence . and so i may , as to that his great aggravation , p. . that i knew this affair then to lie before the royal society . for this i knew not : ( nor , perhaps , was he desirous i should . ) i know indeed , that ( he and i with mr. oldenburg coming together one night from arundel-house , ) he made great complaint of us both , ( but without any just cause in either ; ) threatning , that in case mr. oldenburg did not retract that in the transactions ; he would himself publish somewhat against us . and , to the same purpose , when at another time he and i with sir christopher wren came together from sir william petty's house . and said , that he did forbear coming to the royal society , till he should in this be vindicated . ( so great a crime it was , to have it said , that mr. whaly was not the onely person on whom i had shewed the effect of my skill , but i had done the like for another ; meaning mr. popham . ) my answer was , the thing said was truth ; that neither of us in so saying had done him wrong , or given him any just cause of complaint ; that if himself had a mind to publish what concern'd himself without wronging others , 't was free for him so to do ; if he did it with any unhandsome reflections on me , i should ( when i found it abroad ) either answer it , or neglect it , as i should see cause ; that , as to mr. oldenburg's publishing any thing to satisfie his clamour , i would advise nothing one way or other ( as being a person concerned ) but leave mr. oldenburg to his discretion . ( and i then told him , as now i do , that his story of my resorting to blechington , &c. was a mistake . ) nor do i remember that ( from that day to this ) any word hath since passed between mr. oldenburg and me touching that affair , or that i have ever concern'd my self about it . i now find , from what dr. holder tells us , p. , . ( which before i did not know , ) that a paper of his own penning , but in mr. oldenburg's name , dr. holder desired to have licensed by the counsel of the royal society ; but , that they refused to do it . ( and , i think , with good reason ; if it were what he now tells us . by whose license it is since come out , i do not know . ) this he means when he says , that affair did then lie before the royal society , p. , . of this therefore , though there were enough to be said in justification , if it had been true : yet ( because i must answer punctually to his chancery-bill ) i must plead not-guilty . i know not that any such thing did lie before the royal society ; ( and can but thank them , for doing me that justice , without giving me the trouble to make a defence . ) nor did i pen , or croud-in , what of this matter is said by dr. plott . and dr. plott ( who yet survives , and to whom dr. holder applies himself , p. . ) will , i doubt not , be my compurgator in this point . but mr. popham also is yet surviving ; ( and of age , able to answer for himself : ( and knows as well as any , who it was that taught him . if he be ask'd , whether dr. holder taught him to speak ? he will answer , no. if , whether dr. wallis ? he will answer , i. for i have been present , when he hath been asked both qustions , and given those answers : ( without being prompted so to do . ) the bottom of the business seems to be this . dr. holder having attempted , what he soon gave-over , concerning mr. popham ( in ; ) was a little concern'd that i should ( the next year ) undertake mr. whaly with better success . ( had i then proceeded with mr. popham , it would have been but to go-on where he left ; and he might have been pretended to have done the hardest part of the work : but , on mr. whaly , it could not be denied but to be all my own . ) and he could not then , ( though he saw this , and was troubled at it , p. . ) shew the like effect of his skill on mr. popham ▪ ( because he had either not-learned , or had forgot it . ) and he was yet more concerned ; when , upon this success on mr. whaly , mr. popham also ( whom he had quitted ) was brought to me . and , seeing me to have a like success on mr. popham , as before on mr. whaly ; he would now ( play an after-game , and ) have it thought , that it was he , not i , that taught mr. popham to speak : and that , what he now hath , was learned from dr. holder ; without allowing , that dr. wallis had any share in it . and cannot be content to say , he had taught mr. popham somewhat , and leave it to some of his friends who knew it ( for i do not ) to say how much : but makes it a crime to say , that i have since shewed any effect of my skill on mr. popham . ( for this is all he hath to cavil at . and yet he allows it to be true , p. . ) and then imagins plots , and practises , designs , and subtil contrivances , and a great many more fansies of his own brain ; which never came into my thoughts . ( with which i am charged above twenty times at least , p. , , , , , , , , , , . ) he first imagins , that i had a long aking tooth , to joyn to my other trophies , what was performed by dr. holder . ( he should rather have said , to have the credit of performing , what dr. holder did attempt , but gave-over without performing , and so it came to nothing . ) then ; that , in order to this , i had recourse to a long train of subtil contrivances . first , to meet with mr. vvhaly , who being deaf ( from a child ) was consequently dumb. ( 't is well i am not charged , to have contrived , twenty years before , that he should be deaf , and consequently dumb : but , that this should be unknown to me for twenty years ; that i might then meet with him in an happy hour ; and teach him to speak , two years after dr. holder had quitted his attempt on mr. popham . next ; that i should contrive , to have this known at court , at gresham-colledge : ( as he had before contrived to have his attempt on mr. popham to be publickly taken notice of , and known generally in oxford , at london , westminster , the anatomy-lecture , to persons of all degrees , &c. p. . ) then ; that i contrived to have this entred into the iournal of the royal society , and there registred : ( as though they had not used to register what there passed , without my contrivance : ) and there reaped great praise for this atchievment . that then i contrived , ( for this is the main part of the plot , ) that the fame of this should bring mr. popham to me ; who was now gone home to his friends , and had forgot what he had been taught , p. , , . ) he should rather have said , for that would have been the more subtil contrivance , that i had contrived , that dr. holder should in vain attempt , and then quit this attempt , on mr. popham ; and mr. popham should either not-learn , or loose what he had been taught by dr. holder ; as mr. vvhaly had lost what he had been taught by his nurse , p. . that , when what dr. holder pretends to have done , was come to nothing , i might equally begin upon a new score with both. ) he should here have added another contrivance , ( as subtil as some of the rest , ) that i contriv'd , not to begin first with mr. popham , ( lest i might be thought onely to go on , where dr. holder left ; ) but , first to begin with mr. vvhaly ( to whom dr. holder could not pretend , ) contriving always to have it believed , that i could teach a dumb person , without the help of dr. holder . he fansies next , that i contrived and practised with so much industry and effect , to have dr. holder's attempt , ( which was , before , so publickly taken notice of , and generally known , as he tells us , p. . ) to be so quite forgotten , that few ( or none ) do now so much as know or think , that dr. holder had done those fine feats he now talks of . then ; that i contrived , a subtil letter to mr. boyl , of march . , ( before i had ever seen or known mr. popham ; and before dr. holder's elements of speech were written ; lest it might be thought to be written on that occasion ; ) giving mr. boyl an account , of what i had undertaken , and upon what considerations , concerning mr. vvhaly . but , that i contrived further , though this letter were then communicated to those of the royal society ; yet , not to have it published in the transactions , till a great while after . ( he should rather have said , that i contrived , that mr. oldenburg should not begin to write transactions before the year ; that my letter of might not presently be there inserted . for this contrivance is as true as the rest . ) then ; that i compassed to have my small treatise of speech , in a subtil postscript , to be commended and magnified by mr. oldenburg first , and then by dr. plot. ( he should rather have said , that i contrived to publish an english grammar , to which i subtilly prefixed my treatise of speech , in , thereby to undermine by anticipation , p. . dr. holder's elements , which were afterwards to be published in : and then contrived to have it printed again and again , at oxford , and hamburg , a second , third , and fourth time , that it might not be forgotten : and compassed to have it commended , by bishop vvilkins in his universal character , when dr. holder's elements were not yet extant : and , after that , by mr. oldenburg , &c. ) then ; that i was startled at his elements of speech with its appendix , published in . a book which i never yet saw ; nor did i know ( otherwise than as he now tells me ) that i was at all concerned therein . but do now guess , there is something in it , which he thinks i ought to take amiss . otherwise , he would not have been thus jealous for nothing . i would advise him , on the next occasion , ( since he finds some of his conjectures to be mis-adventures , ) unto these contrivances , to add two or three more . that i subtilly contrived , not to be made acquainted beforehand , with dr. holder's undertaking . and then , not to resort to blechington ( as is pretended ; ) lest i should there have seen and heard mr. popham . and , not to be much at oxford all that year ; lest it might be thought i had so resorted . and , not to be in company with dr. holder , all the while mr. popham was with him ; lest i might be thought to have had discourses with him on that occasion . and , that dr. vvilkins should , before that time , have left oxford ; lest we might happen to meet at his lodgings . and , not to have seen his elements of speech to this day ; that i might not be startled at them . and , never to enquire , vvhat applications dr. holder made to the royal society ; that i might not know of any such matter lying before them . and , that i never concerned my self to oppose him in it ; that i might be charged to have contrived , that they should refuse to license his paper . and , that i subtilly contrived , that dr. plot should say what he did say concerning this business , without consulting me at all therein , or letting me know that he said any thing of it ; lest i might be thought ( as is pretended ) to have penned it my self , and crouded it into his book . for all this is as proper matter for a chancery-bill , as what he suggests . and the matter of it is true ; without this , that the said doctor did contrive , &c. now , if i had a mind to recriminate , or put in a cross bill ; it were easy thus to do it in his own form and language . in the years , , ( as p. , , ) and some years before and after ; divers ingenious persons in oxford , used to meet at the lodgings of dr. petty , ( now sr. william petty ; ) where they diligently conferred about researches and experiments in nature . which meetings were some ground and foundation of the royal society . ( not indeed the first ground and foundation ; but earlier than those latter meetings at wadham colledge . ) in that time , viz. in the year . john wallis , then professer of geometry in oxford , near blechington ; having . ( as p. , . ) communicated to the then provost of queens colledge , some papers , wherein he did describe and discover , how all sounds used in speech are formed , and may be produced , ( whether , the person so forming them , do hear himself speak or not ; ) was desired and incouraged ( i should have said importuned , as p. . ) by that excellent person , and zealous promoter of learning dr. gerard langbain , late provost of queens colledg in oxford ; the learned and industrious mr. patrick young , then in oxford ; approved also by the incomparable dr. james usher , then arch-bishop of armagh , and lord primate of ireland ; with whom he had the honour , soon after , to be conversant in the lodgings of the said provost in queens colledg ; and by divers other persons , members of that worthy company before mentioned , to print those papers . ( not perhaps by any set meeting of that company : nor was dr. holder , by any such meeting of the royal society , importuned to review his papers , p. . nor by any such meeting at wadham-colledg , had the business of mr. popham , commended to him , p. . ) he thereupon ( as p. . ) in the year ; desirous ( as p. . ) to serve the ends , and contribute something to the design , of that worthy company , ( viz. the improvement of natural knowledg , and publick benefit ; ) published his english grammar , with his treatise of speech prefixed . this ( as p. . ) was publickly taken notice of , and known ( not only to those eminent persons above mentioned , but ) generally in oxford . where very many students , on purpose to satisfy their curiosity , and have a particular knowledg of what they had received by report ; bought the book , and read it . dr. william holder ( as p. , . ) then lived at blechington ; saw and perfectly knew this ; was conversant with dr. wallis ; was one of those who bought ( or borrowed ) that book ▪ did see and read it ; and had discourse with dr. wallis on that occasion divers times when they happened to meet at oxford . now dr. holder having a long aking tooth ( as p. . ) to do something to be talked of , and get himself a trophy ; had recourse to subtle contrivances . having learned therefore from pablo bonnet ( as p. . ) that the constable of castile's son , when deaf , had been taught to speak : and having learned , from dr. wallis's treatise of speech , how every sound in speech is formed : he thought it might prove ( and there was reason so to think , if well managed , ) a successeful way of teaching deaf and dumb persons to speak , by teaching them so to form sounds as dr. wallis had directed . not doubting ( as p. . ) but that a dumb person , dumb only in consequence of being deaf , might be capable of being instructed so to apply ( as is there taught ) the motions of his tongue and other instruments of speech ; and knowing it ( as another might have done ) to be both possible and fesible , from an example in that kind seen and heard by his late majesty in spain . and he meets in a happy hour , with a young gentleman ( as p. , ) mr. alexander popham ; deprived of hearing , and consequently of speaking . resolving therefore to assume to himself this experiment ; on him he would make the first attempt ( whatever be the success , ) that is remembred to have been made in england , ( whatever had been done elsewhere . ) and ( as p. . having got a hint ( for which he alwaies lay in wait ) of a new invention so considerable , ( from a small treatise of dr. wallis on that subject ; ) would ( by putting himself into the practise , of what dr. wallis had taught , ) intitle himself to the experiment . all possible noise is presently made of it ; it is showed ( as p. ● , . ) at london at westminster ; to persons of all degrees ; published at the anatomy lecture ; an express relation made of it , nameing also the persons concerned in this experiment , so far as served his turn , ( but not a word of dr. wallis in the cause : ) and ( if we may believe him ( p. . . ) a multitude of students resort from oxford to bletchington to see and hear it . ( magnis tamen excidit ausis . ) i confess , i was out of the noise ; and heard very little of it , ( save what i have from his paper ; in which i find very great mis-takes : ) and was far from oxford , the greatest part of that time . but the cry did not last long . this ( he tells us p. . . ) was in march / ; and ( within a few months after ) the summer following , he quitted that undertaking : mr. popham went home to his friends ; the labour lost ; and the cry ceased . so that there are at this day very few in oxford ( if any ) who know or think , that dr. holder taught mr. popham to speak . p. . the year following ( notwithstanding this mis-adventure of dr. holder ; ) dr. wallis ( thereunto induced by the considerations mentioned in his letter of march , / ; and in confidence of his treatise de loquela therein mentioned ; as p. , , , , ) undertook another person concerning whom dr. holder cannot pretend to any thing ) mr. daniel whaly ; who having lost his hearing while a child , was consequently dumb , p. , ( and had so continued for twenty years more . ) him he taught ( without any help or direction from dr. holder ) not only to pronounce some words ( which dr. holder had attempted on mr. popham ; ) but , in good measure , to understand a language also ; ( which dr. holder doth not pretend to ; and , without which , to speak , is but like a parrot . ) of which , in a letter of decem. . , he gave a short account to mr. boyle , and ( in answer to two of his , of january , and feb. . desiring it ) a fuller account in that of march . ; which mr. boyle imparted to divers of the society ; ( i do not say , to the royal society ; because i doubt whether the patent which makes them such , were then actually sealed ; though , i think , it bears date a little before that time . ) and ( upon a further solicitation from him and them , by letters of apr. , and may , to satisfy their curiosity , and have a particular knowledg of what they had received by report , as dr. holder speaks p. . ) in may , mr. whaly came up to london with dr. wallis ; was seen , and heard at court , and by the royal society at grasham college , 't was entred into the iournal of the royal society , and there registred ; dr. wallis reaped great praise for this atchievement , as dr. holder speakes , p. , , , . yet did not the doctor impose upon the society ; or confidently shew and boast it , ( as p. . ) as the first assay that had ever been in this kind . for they knew well , ( and did at that time discourse , ) what had been said of the constable of castiles son , and his being heard by the late king ; and had then a particular relation from one of themselves , who had seen the person . and some of dr. holder's particular friends were then present , who might ( if they had thought it considerable ) have acquainted the rest , what they knew of dr. holder's attempt on mr. popham . and dr. holder himself , who ( it seems ) was a witness of all this , and saw it , ( as he tells us p. ) had the opportunity , if there were occasion , to assert his own right ; and might have had it registred with the rest ; if the company had thought it had deserved it . dr. holder , who saw this , p. , was concerned at it . as to mr. whaly , he could pretend nothing . mr. popham had lost what he is said to have learned . the stories of dr. wallis's resorting to bletchington , and discourses with dr. holder on that occasion , were mistakes ; and that whole scene ill laid . and should he have then pretended to have done the like for mr. popham ; ( hic rhodus , hic saltus : ) the company would have been glad to have seen that too ( which was not to be done . ) but he was more concerned , when ( as he tells as p. . ) the fame of mr. whaly had brought ( to dr. wallis ) mr. popham also ; and that on him ( whom dr. holder had given over , ) he had ( as p. ) performed somewhat very considerable ; that is ( as p. . ) had done the like for him , as before for mr. whaly . he had , however , a design , ( by playing an after-game ) to make the world believe in time ; what he could not do , while things were fresh in memory and knowledg , in and about oxford . and therefore ( that we may still follow his own language ( he had recourse to subtle contrivances , and subtle practises ( as p. , . ) practising , from thence-forth to assume mr. popham's speaking wholly to himself ( p. . ) and not allow dr. wallis so much as to have shewed any effect of his skill on mr. popham , p. . to this end , ( that dr. holder might not be thought to have learned any of his skill from dr. wallis's treatise concerning the formation of sounds in ) speech ; he contrives to write some papers of his own ( as he tells us ) about that subject , p. . these papers , he compasseth to have mentioned ( p. , , in the bishop of chester's book , of the universal character , pag. . in the year . but he tells us further , that in the year , they were lost in the bishops study , together with all his own , in the dreadful fire of london , ( that we may at least think them to be so old . ) these papers , ( the bishop tells us , ) did concern the doctrine of letters : dr. holder tells us , they were to describe and discover the method he had used in bringing mr. popham to speak , p. . ( this , it seems , was what he aimed at : all the rest served but to hedg this in . ) so considerable he would have us think these papers were , that he was importuned to renew them ( like another phaenix out of its own ashes : ) and a little importunity ( we may think , ) served the turn . he then contrives further , to have the new phaenix , his elements of speech ( which we must now suppose to be those papers ) presented to the royal society , ; and to get their order to print it ; and ( as he speakes p. . ) had it registred , to perpetuat the memory of his atchievement . but dr. holder had a farther design in it . for these elements were to usher-in a subtle appendix , concerning persons deaf and dumb : and , in a few subtle lines , ( which was his chief design , ) to hedge-in what concerned mr. popham ; describing but ( wisely ) not nameing him : assuming mr. popham's speaking solely to himself . to which the other were only subservient ; to make a noise , while this slipt-in . having therein made mention of his success upon a deaf and dumb person , in tending mr. popham : as he tells us p. . these elements ( as p. , , , ) he contrives and compasses to have commended and magnified , ( as in mr. oldenburg's name , but , i suppose , of his own penning , in the philosophical transactions , of may as a well-considered and useful tract : concluding , with magnifying its usefulness , for instructing persons deaf and dumb ; as being by this author , excellently applied thereunto : ( modestly said of himself ! ) avouching therein his own practise . without taking the least notice of any thing written by dr. wallis , and others ( about the formation of sounds ; ) or the practise ( of teaching dumb persons ) by any other . and here ( as p. . ) he is secure to gain this point ; that in a book which swill come into the hands of all curious persons , dr. holder's fame is spread orth to all ; and few ( he hopes ) will ever happen to know , that dr. wallis ( in his treatise of speech ) had shewed him the way ; ( that being a small treatise ; and written in latine ; and a great while since ; and but annexed to another book , intended principally for forraigners desiring to learn english : ) or , that dr. wallis had done any thing of that nature , either to mr. popham , or to mr. whaly ; ( there being nothing at that time said thereof any-where in print ; so little was the industry , or rather so great was the negligence , of wallis , in spreading his own fame , p. . ) and all this he doth , under countenance of an order of the royal society by him procured for the printing of it , p. . as if they had been privy to this design . ) which would have been yet more advanced , if he could have gotten their license for this his new paper penned by himself , in mr. oldenburg's name ) put by him into mr. oldenburg's hand to be published in the transactions , ( as himself tells us p. . making the transactions , his market ( as p. . ) and a fair for this merchant of glory ; if he could have found way and leave to croud himself in . for who should now believe ( when every body else is silent ) that ever any one thought of a treatise of speech , or the formation of sounds , before dr. holder made this essay , in his elements of speech ? ( for , that they must be thought elder than that of dr. wilkins , he had subtly contrived already , by getting him to mention some papers of dr. holder , which might now be thought to be these elements : and the small treatise of dr. wallis , 't is hoped will be forgotten , or known to few . ) and who can believe , that any one but dr. holder , did teach , or attempt to teach , a deaf man to speak ; or ever thought of such a thing , ( so long as dr. wallis is silent ; ) there being no body then , in print , pretending to it ? and thus he hopes to bear it out ( as p. , . ) with subtilty of contrivance ; speaking like truth so artificially , that the reader is to believe more than is true : and it serves him to impose on those ( mr. oldenburg , and the royal society ) whose name and credit he borrows to commend him , who innocently suffer a demur truth of his own penning , unwittingly to pass into the transactions , suffering themselves ( as p. . ) to be imposed upon , to publish the fame and praise of dr. holder , in large characters engraven by himself . ( for that of p. , , , , . is certainly of his own penning , though in mr. oldenburg's name : and if , as p. . we may , by that guess at the rest : and for some other reasons : it may be justly thought , that in the transactions of may . is so ; at least of his superviding ) desiring and designing ( as p. . ) the world would be so kind as to be cajoled into such a belief , when he prevailed with mr. oldenburg so say as from himself , what dr. holder imposed upon him . ( ●nd very much concerned he is , that this subtle contrivance takes no better . ) dr. wallis was so ignorant of this contrivance , and so unsuspicious of a design upon him , and so unconcerned for what is said in those elements and appendix ; that he never yet read the one or the other . but so it happened the year following , that this mine was sprung unawares , and , play'd otherwise than was intended . mr. oldenburg in the transactions of july , published a letter of dr. wallis to mr. boyle , of march . . and , as he had , the year before given a large account of dr. holders elements of speech ( published in . ) and how this was by him applyed to the instruction of dumb persons ; without taking notice of what dr. wallis had writ or done : so now , ( without saying the same again of dr. holder ) he gives a brief account of dr. wallis's treatise of speech ( published in . ) and what , in pursuance of this , was done by him . dr. holder ( who thought he had put himself in sole possession of the repute of this experiment , ) was startled , as p. . ( or rather nettled ) for he doth winch and fling like hudibras's horse in such a condition , without any apparent cause ▪ ) as appears by his printed paper . he falls foul upon dr. wallis , mr. oldenburg , the royal society , dr. plot : and dreams of subtleties , practices , contrivances , designs , &c. ; no body can see why ; ( who doth not see the nettle , or know of the sore place . ) that dr. wallis had , in the year . published a treatise , de loquela ; and , that he had , in pursuance of what is there delivered , taught mr. whaly to speak , and , had since done the like for mr. popham , are things true , and known , and notorious ; nor doth he deny it . and why might not all this be said , without making such a clutter ? dr. holder , it seems , ( for so his paper tells us , p. . ) had , in his elements of speech , made mention of his success upon a deaf and dumb person , intending mr. popham , ( which yet dr. wallis knew not of , till he saw it in this paper , as having never read that book , nor doth yet know what is there said ; nor , how truly : ) and mr. oldenburg had given a large account of that book and the contents of it , in the transactions of may , . ( without saying any thing of dr. wallis : ) and no offence was taken . but when , in july . he gave a short account of dr. vvallis , and his treatise ; without speaking ( there ) of dr. holder and his elements , ( as having done it a year before : ) a great out-cry is made , of vvrongs and injuries , of plots , designs , contrivances , and subtle practises , and a great deal more of such rif-raf : as if every body were bound every-where , and at all times , to magnifie his elements of speech , &c. but it seems , ( as p. , . ) he could not help what was in his nature , or else habitual to him ; and could not conceal his particular emulation . he desired , and had designed it , that the world would be so kind as to be cajoled into such a belief , that he was the first that had consider'd the formation of sounds ; and , the onely person , who attempted to teach dumb persons to speak . ( for , if he designed any thing less than this , there was nothing there said to contradict him . ) yet he himself knew full well ( as p. ) dr. vvallis's treatise of speech ; and what he had done for mr. vvhaly , and mr. popham : but , the reader must not know of that . the disclosing of this marred his market . he knew full well , that dr. wallis had taught dumb persons : ( and he says it expresly , p. . so he did , for two were his scholars , mr. popham , and mr. whaly . ) and , ( if we admit what he there says ; that they had , formerly owed somewhat , the one to his nurse , and the other to dr. holder : yet , if they had equally forgotten , ( which is the case ) the one and the other ( whatever it were ; ) and , what now they have , they have from dr. vvallis , ( which , though true , dr. holder would not have known ; ) and mr. pepham , one no more to dr. holder , than mr. vvhaly to his nurse : it might very well be said without offence , ( that mr. whaly is not the only person on whom dr. wallis hath shewed the effect of his skill ; but he hath since done the like for another ; meaning mr. popham ) were there not some nettle that stings , but is not seen ; or some sore place wringed , which doth not appear , but must not be touched . 't was nothing therefore , but being disappointed in this his great design , which made him thus outragious . and ( persons faulty being mostly jealous ) he being conscious to himself of such petty contrivances ; made him fancy , that others were imployed in like plots . and knowing , it seems , ( though i knew it not , ) that he had done what i had no reason to take kindly ; he fancied me to be studying revenge , of what i never knew . now all this ( as p. . ) if being but nakedly exposed to light , in such a narrative , do seem severe , it must be imputed to the matter it self . and , if the language seem hard , he must not quarrel at it , ( like the black-smith who threw away the looking-glass , because it shewed him an ugly face ; ) since it is his own . but i shall forbear thus to charge him , ( though there be much more of truth therein , than in what he fancies of me ; and the language is his own . ) yet 't is not amiss , to let him judge , by hearing it ; how well it doth become him to use such language . as to what he complains of ; the sum of what i say , is this . that it was as lawful for me , to write and publish , a treatise concerning the formation of sounds , in ; as for him to do the like , in . that it was as lawful for me , to teach mr. whaly , to speak a language , and understand it , as for him to attempt , some what of this , ( on mr. popham , ) without success . that it was as lawfull for me to say , that what i did was in pursuance of what i had , before made publick ( in ; ) as for him to say , what he did , was in pursuance of what he hath , was since made publick , ( in . ) that it was lawfull also , ( when he had , two years before , given-over mr. popham , and all that he did attempt or perform on him was come to nothing ; ) for me to do the like for mr. popham , as i had before done for mr. whaly . that it was as lawful for mr. oldenburg , to say , what he knew of me and my book , in the transactions of july , ( without repeating , there , what he had before said of dr. holder ; ) as in that of may , to say , what he thought of dr. holder , and his book , ( without saying any thing of me . ) that it was lawful for dr. plot , to say , that he so found it said , in the place by him cited . ( especially when himself knew the substance of it to be true ; and had not cause to dis-believe the circumstances . ) that when i could not say my own thoughts ; without derogating somewhat from what others had said of the constable of castiles son ; and what dr. holder says of himself : it was neither uncivil , nor dis-ingenuous in me , to be silent in it ; and let it rest upon the credit of those who do , or can say it . and , consequently , that dr. holder hath no cause to complain of all , or any of this ; much less to write , print , or suggest a paper , full of so many great mis-takes in matter of fact ; and so many groundless surmises of designs . and lastly , that the counsel of the royal society acted with very good reason ; when they refused to license that paper . i have now done with this unpleasing task ( for i take no pleasure in quarrels , or blemishing another mans reputation . ) i had thoughts at first , to have neglected his paper without making any reply , ( because any indifferent reader would easily discern , that there is , in it , much more of passion , than of reason . ) but i find others of opinion , that it was fit somewhat should be said to it ; because so many are concerned in it as well as my self . i find , he doth mis-remember many matters of fact ; and mis-times divers others ; and fancies things of meer accident , to be matters of design ( a thing very incident to persons that are a little uneasie . ) he had attempted ( i know ) the teaching mr. popham to speak . but ( for what reasons he knows best ) quickly gave it over ; and mr. popham forgot all . what success he had in the mean time , i cannot tell . i saw nothing of it . ( and therefore he made an ill choice , in calling me to be his voucher . ) if any who knew more of it than i did , have said any thing of him advantagiously ; i have never concerned my self to contradict it . that i did teach mr. vvhaly , with better success , and without his assistance ; he knows very well . and , that i taught mr. popham too ; he knows also : and that i did not seek the imployment , or take mr. popham out of his hands ; but , two years after he had given over the attempt when mr. popham ( whatever it was he had learned ) had forgot all . this though perhaps it might cause somewhat of regret ; that another should succeed in what he had given over ; ) yet is no just cause of complaint . nor do i find any thing in the transactions of iuly , which can administer just occasion to find fault with it ; but if he will needs be angry , because i cannot affirm , what i do not know : or , will needs go about to perswade me , and tell all the world , that i did see and hear those things which i did neither see nor hear : i cannot help it . if , in giving your lordship this trouble ; i have already been too tedious : i shall now add no more to it , but subscribe my self , my lord , your lordships very humble servant , john wallis . finis . a defense of infant-baptism in answer to a letter (here recited) from an anti-pædo-baptist / by john wallis ... wallis, john, - . approx. kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from -bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : - (eebo-tcp phase ). a wing w estc r ocm this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons . universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase , no. a ) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set ) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, - ; : ) a defense of infant-baptism in answer to a letter (here recited) from an anti-pædo-baptist / by john wallis ... wallis, john, - . [ ], p. printed by leon. lichfield, for henry clements, oxford : . reproduction of original in huntington library. advertisement: p. [ ] created by converting tcp files to tei p using tcp tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between and available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the , texts created during phase of the project have been released into the public domain as of january . anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. % (or pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf- unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p , characters represented either as utf- unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng infant baptism. - tcp assigned for keying and markup - aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images - mona logarbo sampled and proofread - mona logarbo text and markup reviewed and edited - pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion dr. wallis of infant-baptism . a defense of infant-baptism . in answer to a letter ( here recited ) from an anti-paedo-baptist . by iohn wallis , d. d. and professor of geometry in the university of oxford . oxford : printed by leon. lichfield , for henry clements , . advertisement . this letter in defense of infant-baptism ( though written some while since , ) falling lately into my hands ; and being recommended by some knowing persons ; i thought fit to publish it . ( with the author 's good leave ) for the benefit of others ; omitting the name of him , who proposed the question ; because i do not know , whether or no he be willing to have it made publick . a letter from an anti-paedo-baptist , to doctor wallis . reverend sir , i have read the first part of your discourse concerning the christian sabbath , and liked it so well , that i was very eager to get the second : in reading whereof , i could not but admire at the large measure of understanding , which the lord , out of his goodness , has been pleased to bestow upon you , above many other pious and learned men , that have formerly treated of the sabbath , and disputed against the jewish sabbath , with so much weakness , that the sabbatarians have been greatly thereby incouraged in their errour . and coming in pag. . to these words of yours , you would have had — so much modesty , as to think , the mistake may possibly be on your side , rather than on the whole body of christians ( some very few excepted ) who religiously observed the lord's day ; i did reflect on my self , who am perswaded , that believers infants are not to be baptized in their infancy , contrary to the opinion of so many learned paedo-baptists in christendom , yea the generality of christians ; and it made me to think , the mistake might possibly be on my side , rather than on the body of christians ( some few excepted ) who conscientiously maintain infant-baptism . and supposing you , worthy sir , by your communion , to maintain paedo-baptism , i took courage and boldness , to write unto your self , for to know your grounds from scripture , on which you satisfy your conscience in that point . the main reason , which satisfies me against paedo-baptism , is , because i can find no where in scripture , either in express terms , or by any natural or necessary consequence , that it is the will of god , that believers infants are to be baptized in their infancy : i cannot find any precept to baptize them , nor so much that ever iohn the baptist , or christ , or his disciples ( that appears ) did baptize any of them . i know indeed , what dr. hammond , dr. light-foot , and the athenian society presume ( as to an institution ) from a custom among the iews , of their baptizing the infants of proselytes , as if christ out of condescension to the iews , to win them , did include infants in his precept of baptizing all nations , children being a part of them . but i cannot find in holy writ any such custom recorded , or that it had a divine institution . and if those writings from whence they would prove , that there was such a custom in our saviour's time amongst them , were of undoubted authority , yet i cannot see any reason to conclude , that christ would institute infant-baptism to gratify infidel iews , who were but the least part of all nations , ( if intended there by nations . ) as iohn's baptism was from heaven , and was so singular a thing , that the iews , ioh. . . wondring at it , asked him , why baptizest thou then , if &c. so the baptism christ instituted , was not from any jewish tradition , or rudiment of the jewish world , but from heaven , and differing from any jewish baptism . that iohn baptist , and our lord first made disciples , and then baptized those disciples , i think is plain from ioh. . . but i cannot find , that they also baptized the children of those disciples , as if they had been the children of new proselytes . as our lord did thus among the iews , by his apostles , so he did by them among the nations ; and i can no where in scripture find , that believing gentiles were counted and called proselytes , because christians , and that their children were baptized for that reason . the doctor doubtless can certify me , whether or no it was a custom among the iews and other nations , for great masters to initiate their disciples by baptism ; and if so , there would be more probability , that christ instituted baptism from that custom , if from any , and that as they did not baptize the children of those disciples too , until themselves became disciples , so the children of the disciples of christ , the great prophet of god , and our master , are not to be baptized , until themselves also become disciples . go ye , and teach all nations , is explain'd , mar. . . go ye into all the world , and preach the gospel to every creature ; and thus it is by several of the fathers understood . and by baptizing them , viz. all nations , there is no necessity to understand it of baptizing all persons absolutely , for we have the words [ all nations ] in other texts of scripture , where they do not mean all persons absolutely , but of a capable condition , as adorate eum omnes gentes , & psallitate deo omnes nationes , &c. and if baptism was the way of discipling persons , as some would have it , then the apostles needed not have first required of them repentance and faith , as previous dispositions and qualifications for baptism , but rather have exhorted them to be baptized , in order to their being taught faith and repentance , with other things commanded by christ to his apostles . but as it plainly appears from other scriptures , that our saviour here excludes from being baptized , those persons of all nations , that are not yet qualify'd for it , i. e. not yet become disciples , or repenting believers , tho' capable of faith and repentance ; so it does not appear to me , that infants disciples are here included , tho' neither qualify'd nor capable , as disciples should be . thus when , col. . the apostle tells gentile believers , that they were compleat in christ , seeing they were circumcised in him by his circumcision , and buried and risen with him in baptism , &c. some will from hence assert , that circumcision came in the room of baptism , * and consequently that infants are to be baptized , as before they were to be circumcised , which i can no ways see : nor was ever any such thing pleaded by the apostles , against the christian iews , that were zealous for circumcision . iohn , and christ by his apostle , administred baptism among the iews , while circumcision was still a duty to the iews and their children . i grant , that it may be proved from hence , that circumcision was a figure of the circumcision made without hands , in the putting off the body of the sins of the flesh , but not that circumcision figured baptism : which if it could be proved from hence , yet there does not necessarily follow a necessity of observing this circumstance of age , any more than many other circumstances of the type , as that of the eighth day , of the male sex only , &c. but the analogy will hold thus more properly : as infants in the latter were circumcised , so spiritual infants or babes in christ , that are become like one of these little ones , shall be baptized . therefore that argument from the circumstance of age , being but a meer conjecture , proves nothing . the argument which is taken from the action of christ's blessing infants , does not prove to me , that it is the will of god , that infants are to be baptized , but rather the contrary , in as much as we cannot learn , but that christ dismissed them without baptism . as for that saying of christ , except a man be born again , &c. it does no more infer a necessity of infant 's baptism , than that other of his , except ye eat the flesh of the son of man , &c. does infer a necessity of their partaking at the lord's table . the gospel speaks to persons of years and discretion , and it is they whom it ties to baptism for their salvation , and the baptism which saves them , is the answer of a good conscience towards god in their obedience to the gospel-requirings , which infants are uncapable to discharge . and for the salvation of infants , god is able still to bestow saving mercies upon infants now immediately , as he did before the institution , either of circumcision or baptism . even as it is in the case of faith , he that believeth not , shall be damned : now , because children are no more able to give assent to the gospel , than to dissent therefrom , shall we from thence infer their damnation ? and if the want of faith does not damn them till they are capable of faith , then much more the want of baptism will not damn them , till then , and may therefore be rationally deferr'd till then . as to the promise of the holy ghost to the iews and their children , i cannot understand it , but conditionally , viz. to them , if they should repent and be baptized , ( according to peter's exhortation to them , ) and also to their sons and daughters , of the same capacity to receive the holy spirit 's effects on their natural faculties , upon their repentance and obedience of faith : for , as the word [ children ] in scripture , does not always mean infants , else it would follow , that there were no adult persons in all israel ; so i see no necessity to take it here of infants . as for the holiness of the children of a believer , spoken of cor. . . ( whatever that holiness be ) it does no more necessarily prove , that infants of believers are for that reason to be baptized , than the holiness of the unbelieving parent there spoken of , will prove , that such an infidel is for that reason to be baptized . for , that holiness of the children , is derived to them from their believing parent , as it is to the unbelieving parent , and not from the gift of the holy ghost . and whereas for an apostolical precedent , there is one pretended from baptizing of stephanas's houshold , it is but a bare conjecture , first , that there were little babes in the family , and secondly , that they were baptized . it is said of the ruler at capernaum , that he believed , and all his house , but it does not thence follow , that there were infants in his house , and that they believed as well as he . one seems just as probable as the other . now , good sir , seeing i can find no certainty or domonstration , and i may say , no probability , in these arguments , that are usually brought from scripture for infant-baptism ; if you can produce any arguments that carry more weight and demonstration in them , for that which you believe to be the truth , and against that which you believe to be an errour , and i ( at present ) a truth , i do earnestly and humbly entreat you , for my soul's sake , and as you are in christian duty and conscience bound to god , to be so good as to impart them to me , for to save my soul from such an errour . and as your so doing may make much , not only for my spiritual , but also for my temporal benefit , so you will thereby greatly oblige , reverend sir , london , feb. . . your very humble , and affectionate servant , c. c .......... pray sir , will you be pleased to favour me with some lines , and to direct your letter for me , to be left with mr. — at the — in st. paul's church-yard , and there i will call for it , three weeks hence , and pay for it . vale. to the reverend john wallis , d. d. and professor of geometry in the university of oxford . an answer to the fore-going letter . sir , oxford , feb. . / i received last night , from i know not whom , a letter ( concerning infant-baptism ) dated feb. . and signed c. c .......... whether this be a true name , or but a feigned one , i am not certain . but guess it to be the latter ; because i do not remember that i have ever heard of any man of that name . and , as i do not know from whom ; so , neither do i know , how qualify'd : whether with a modest desire to be informed ; or a captious humour , to quarel or cavil at a received truth , as being prepossessed with a prejudice to the contrary . if the latter ; i might answer as the apostle doth in a like case ; if any man list to be contentious , we have no such custome , nor the churches of god. and the scripture seems to me to be written in such a stile , not as to gratify the nicely captious , but to give a reasonable satisfaction to such as are modestly willing to be taught . if any man will do his will , he shall know of the doctrine , whether it be of god. and , the meek he will teach his way . and i do not find that christ thought fit to comply with those who would be curiously inquisitive for a sign from heaven ( when and in what manner they pleased ) to confirm his doctrine : or , with the rich glutton , who would have one sent from the dead to warn his brethren : but would take his own time , and his own way , to satisfy those who were willing to be taught . and , in matters of fact , we must content our selves with a moral certainty , though we have not always a mathematical demonstration . and if , then , any doubt remain , as to matter of fact , we must content our selves with such reasonable satisfaction , as god thinks fit to give us , what is most likely to be true . but i am willing to understand the writer in the other sense ; as content ( without cavilling ) with a reasonable satisfaction . and then , as to this question , concerning matter of fact ; whether christ and his apostles , or the church in their time , did baptize infants : 't is clear , on the one hand , that we cannot be certain that they did not , ( there being no intimation to that purpose ; ) and it is much more reasonable to think they did ; and to practise accordingly . i shall parallel this with another question of like nature . whether women did then , and ought now , to partake of the other sacrament . if it be objected ; that christ at first did celebrate it with men only , ( the twelve apostles ; ) and the apostle directs , let a man ( not woman or child ) examine himself , ( not her self ) and so let him ( not her ) eat of that bread , and drink of that cup. nor do we any where , in scripture , find any express mention of women receiving it . yet i am satisfy'd , notwithstanding this objection , ( and so , i hope , are you ) that they did then , and ought now to receive it . because there is no intimation of the contrary ; and there seems to be the same reason for the women , as for the men , and the like benefit to each ; and women were baptized ( though not formerly circumcised ; ) and did ( as we have reason to presume , though i do not remember that it is expresly said so ) eat of the pass-over ( notwithstanding it be expresly said exod. . . no vncircumcised person shall eat thereof ; ) the words house and houshold being reasonably supposed to include women and children also ; and that the whole family is to be reputed as a circumcised family , wherein all the males are circumcised . and , the practice of the church , ( which is a great presumption ) hath been always consonant , to admit women , as well as men , to the lord's table . and , in many other cases , particular circumstances may be presumed to be supplied ( from the reasonableness of the thing , and parallel cases , ) though not distinctly expressed in the history of the fact ; as may be amply shewed , if that were necessary . now ( to apply this to the present case ) we are first to consider , what baptism is . it is a solemn rite , appointed by christ , for the solemn admission or incorporation , of the person baptized , into the christian church ; ( as circumcision was , into that of the iews ; ) and , a consecration or dedication of the person baptized , to the service or worship of the father , son , and holy-ghost . and consequently , those who have right to be so admitted , and so dedicated , have right to the solemn rite of such admission , and dedication . next we are to consider , that the children of christians now , have as well a right to be reputed members of the christian church , as the children of iews , of the jewish church ; and consequently to be solemnly received into it : that is , into god's visible church , both of them ; and both a like obligation to be offered or dedicated to the service of the true god. and it is not reasonably to be supposed , that god would so often , and so emphatically make promises to the righteous , and their seed , if there was not somewhat of peculiar preference intended them , beyond those of the wicked , or those that are out of god's visible church . for if no more be intended , than such a conditional promise , if they repent and believe ; this is equally true of the children of the most profligate ; and of heathens , as of jews or christians . how great that is , i will not now dispute ; but what preference did then belong to the jews , i think is now common to christians . otherwise , christ's coming would render the condition of children , worse than before . and particularly , those very children , who in the jewish church were members of the visible church of god , must have ceased to be so , when the christian church took place . contrary to what christ seems to intimate , in that of , suffer little children to come unto me , and forbid them not , for of such is the kingdom of heaven . which intimates a capacity in children of an interest in heaven hereafter , and in the visible church here ; ( especially if by kingdom of heaven , be here meant , the gospel church . ) as likewise to that of , else were your children unclean , but now are they holy . which implies a certain holiness , as to the children of one , though not of both , believing parents ; which they would not have , if neither of the parents were believers . which seems to me so clear an evidence , of some relative holiness , or interest in the visible church , or dedication to the service of god ; as is not easy to be avoided . and that slight evasion , as if it were meant as to bastardy , is so weak , as ( with me ) bears no weight at all . for , though both parents were heathen , the child would not be a bastard . and it is to be considered , that , in all religions , the children are reputed as of the same religion with the parents ( while under their care ) till they do by some act of their own manifest the contrary . the child of a jew is reputed a jew ; of a christian , a christian ; of a heathen , a heathen ; of a papist , a papist ; and so of others . now what belongs to a church , as a church , doth equally belong to the jewish and christian church , and needs no new institution : and consequently , that of having their children in the visible church-communion with themselves ; and the blessing appertaining to that visible communion ; as that of , i will be a god of thee , and of thy seed : and this blessing of abraham , is come upon the gentiles also . and though it is true , that this doth not presently intitle them to heaven ( unless their life be answerable , as neither did that of being the seed of abraham , ) yet it is to be reputed a real advantage , as putting them into a fairer prospect of heaven , and in a greater probability of obtaining saving grace , than if out of the church . and this advantage of the iew above the gentiles which they then had ; the apostle tells us , is much every way : ( yet not so , but that a believer , though not a jew , might be saved by faith ; and an unbeliever , though a jew , would be damned without it . ) and what advantage was then to the jews , ( as god's visible church , ) is now common to the gentiles also . so that the right of believers children , to be within the church , is not a new institution , ( as if we should now look for a distinct institution of infant-baptism , beside that of baptism ; ) but as old as adam , for ought i know ; but the solemn rite of admission into this church , ( to which the child hath a right to be admitted ) is a new institution ; then by circumcision , appointed to abraham ; and now , by baptism , upon a new institution , appointed by christ. by being believers children , they have ius ad rem ; and by being baptized , they have ius in re ; whatever be the priviledge of being within the pale and promise of the visible church . and so long as , by our fault , we debar them from baptism ; we do , so much as in us lyeth , debar them of that advantage , whatever it be . nor is it only a priviledge of the children ( to be thus early admitted into the visible church , with the benefits thereto appertaining , and thus dedicated to the service and worship of god ; ) but a duty of parents , and other superiors , thus to dedicate them , and ( so far as in them lyeth ) give them up to god. and we need not doubt , but that the parent hath a natural right over the child of so doing . and we do not know how soon the effect of such dedication ( upon god's acceptance ) may operate . samson , before he was born , was devoted by manoah , to be a nazarite . and samuel was , by his mother , vowed before he was born , and after presented while an infant , to the special service of god : ieremy is said to be sanctified from his mothers womb ; and paul likewise ; and iohn the baptist , while yet unborn ; and timothy , from a child . and we have no reason to doubt , but many children very early , and even before their birth , may have the habits of grace infused into them , by which they are saved , though dying before the years of discretion . my meaning is , that god may , by his grace , so pre-dispose the soul , to an aptness for good ; as ( by our natural corruption ) we are supposed to be habitually inclined to evil , though not yet in a capacity to act either . for as the habits of corruption , which we call original sin , by propagation ; so may the habits of grace , by infusion , be inherent in the soul , long before ( for want of the use of reason ) we are in capacity to act either ; as is also the rational faculty , before we are in a capacity to act reason . and we may have incouragement to expect , or hope for , such work from god on the heart of a child , from our early devoting him to god's service . and the proper way , by christ appointed , for thus devoting , or offering up persons to god , is baptism , into the name , and to the service of the father , son and holy ghost . i am loth to charge it , as a just judgment of god , for such neglect ; when we see the unbaptized children , of faulty parents , prove lewd and debauch'd persons ; though we have reason to fear , it may be an effect of not devoting them to god by baptism , and a neglect of suitable education . for as we find corruption doth , so ( through god's blessing ) grace may begin to act very early ; and if we may do it , certainly we ought to do it . and as persons , when they be come to age , ought themselves , to give up themselves , and ( as it were ) enter into a sacred covenant with god ; ( and renew it , from time to time ; ) so may the parents ( and ought to do it , so far as in them lyeth ) give up their children to god , and ingage them in such a covenant with him . we know , amongst our selves , a child by his guardians , or his parents , may be put into the possession of an estate , and engaged to the homage and fealty thereunto appertaining , before himself do understand what is done . and in such a covenant we find the israelites to enter ( deut. . . &c. ) in the name of themselves , their wives , and their little ones , and even of those then present , and those not present at that day . and of a like tenour we suppose to be those mention'd of ioshua , asa , iehojada , iosiah , that god should be a god to them , and they a people to him . which is the same , for substance , which a person of age makes for himself , and the parent for the child in baptism . and if children be thus capable , or their parents for them , of entering thus into covenant with god ; why not of receiving the seal of such covenant ? and why not that of baptism now , as well as of circumcision before ? for the child is passive in both . and , if capable , you admit it to be a duty . for your exception is , that it is to be understood of persons in a capable condition . now , that infants are capable of being admitted members of god's visible church ; and capable of being dedicated to god's service , i think is no question ; which are the business of baptism . i know it is objected , that it is said matth. . . go teach all nations , baptizing them &c. and therefore they are first to be taught ( which child●en cannot be ) before they are baptized . and others ( who put a greater force upon the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) chose rather to render it , go make disciples all nations , baptizing them &c. and therefore ( say they ) they are to be made disciples ( by faith and repentance ) before they are baptized . now i can well enough admit , that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may there be rendered by make disciples ( and perhaps better than teach ; ) but their inference from thence , is a great mistake . for , go make disciples by faith and repentance ; will not be good sense . for faith and repentance are to be works of the persons baptized , not of the baptizer . and 't is preposterous to think faith and repentance intended in the word matheteusate . for christ is here speaking to his apostles ; instructing them , what they are to do in planting a christian church . ( not what each respective christian is to do in a church thus planted : for that is to come-in after , amongst the things that are to be taught . ) and the words lie plainly thus ; go , disciple all nations , ( that is , gather disciples of all nations , or indifferently of any nation , jews or gentiles , all the world over , ) baptizing them in the name of the father , and of the son , and of the holy ghost ; teaching them to observe all things whatsoever i have commanded you . or thus , ( those who are here called disciples , being after called christians ; the disciples were called christians first in antioch , act. . . ) make christians of all nations , baptizing them — and teaching them — . and , ( if we would lay stress upon the order of the words , baptizing is to go before teaching . ) the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( make disciples ) is here a verb imperative , or preceptive ; and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( baptizing and teaching ) are participles , exegetical or declarative , how that precept is to be discharged . and it is in a like form as this , ( if the founder of a free-school should thus give instructions to him that he makes school-master , ) make latinists of any parish in london , taking them into the school , and there teaching them the latin tongue . or , in the language of the university ( to the governours there ) make scholars , or learned men , of any county in england , admitting them into the vniversity , or a college , and teaching them what is to be there learned . or , in the language of the city ( to the governours , suppose , of the merchants company ) make merchants of any country ; taking apprentices ; and teaching them the trade . ( for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a disciple , signifies the same as a scholar , a learner , an apprentice . ) would any man now think , that the boy must first be a latinist , before he may be taken into the school ? or , the academick must be a philosopher , or learned man , before he may be admitted in the university ? or , the citizen a skilful merchant , before he may be bound apprentice ? no ; but the quite contrary . so here , he is to be entered a scholar in christ's school , in order to be farther instructed in the christian religion , according to the capacity wherein he is . but , whether one do put himself an apprentice ( if a man , and at his own disposal ) or be put an apprentice by his parents or guardians ( at whose disposal he is ) if a child , is all one , as to learning a trade : and it is all one , whether ( before he be thus put an apprentice ) he have some little skill in the trade , or none at all . and so here ; whether he be of such years ( if not the child of a christian , or have been before neglected ) as to have been taught somewhat of christianity ; or yet an infant , and to know nothing of it . and whether ( as in the former case ) he offer himself to baptism ; or ( as in the latter ) he be tender'd to it by his parents ; he is to be baptized , and to be instructed , each according to the capacity wherein he is . but why it should be neglected , when it may be had sooner , i see no reason ; at least if it be allowed to be a thing desirable , and advantageous . now this , for the most part , was the case of the apostles , when they converted jews or heathens to the christian faith. it was not to be expected , that men at age , and at their own disposal , and brought up in another religion , would be willing to declare themselves christians , and be baptized as such , before they knew somewhat of it ; ( and therefore i would not lay so much stress upon the order of words , as if a person unbaptized might not be taught , if capable of it . ) but when they were so perswaded as to themselves , they did ( with themselves ) bring in those who were under their power . as lydia , and all her houshold ; the iaylor , and all his ; the houshold of stephanas , cornelius , and all his ; and the like , i suppose , of others . and to this purpose i understand that of act. . repent , and be baptized every one of you , whether jews or gentiles , ( this being a mixture of many nations ) for the remission of sins , — for the promise is to you , and to your children , ( as well as to abraham , and his children , ) and to as many as our lord shall call , ( and to their children ; for this i suppose to be understood . ) for , though i know that children doth not always signify infants ; yet , if no more were meant of their children , than of all the world beside , there was no occasion of naming children , but the sense had been as full without it . now it cannot reasonably be supposed , but that there were children in some of those houses ; ( at least it is more likely that there were in some , than that there were none in any of them ; ) and therefore that children were then baptized , as well as others ; especially when there is no intimation to the contrary . and in such cases , where there is a silence in matter of fact ; it is reasonable to think , it was so , as was most likely to be ; especially when nothing appears to the contrary , and great presumptions of it . i know there is sometime mention of faith , in order to being baptized ; but it is of grown persons . nor is it always meant of saving faith , and a cordial conversion ; but a profession of faith , or a professed willingness to be baptized , and declaring themselves christians . for 't is said , simon himself believed also , and was baptized : which cannot be meant of saving faith , and a real conversion ; for we find him afterward , in the gall of bitterness , and bond of iniquity . and when so many thousands were baptized in one day , we cannot think they were all singly examined , so as to give ( at least a probable ) evidence of saving grace : but , their willingness to be baptized , was a sufficient evidence of their declaring themselves christians , or professing christianity . and when all ierusalem , and all iudea , and all the region about iordan ( that is , great multitudes from all those parts , ) went out to iohn baptist , and were baptized of him , confessing their sins ; it cannot be supposed that such multitudes were all singly examined , and made particular confessions of their sins ; but , the verbal expressions of many , with the silent consent of the rest , and the concurrent actings of all , was an evident declaration of their common sentiments . and it can hardly be thought , that they did not ( many of them ) bring children with them ; since we know they had then an opinion , that children were capable of benefit from the benediction of prophets , and persons extraordinary ; as appears by their bringing of little children to christ , ( such as to be taken up in arms ) for him to lay his hands on them and bless them . now if each of these considerations be not , singly , convictive : yet so many together , of which each is highly probable , and when as nothing ( so much as probable ) doth appear to the contrary : it seems to me so great an evidence ( in matter of fact , ) that children were then baptized ; that i do not at all doubt , but that we are rather to think , that infants were then baptized , than that they were not . to which we may add , the continual concurrence of the churches practice , for near sixteen hundred years ; which , in matter of fact , is a great evidence . for i do not know , that in any age of the church , it was ever so much as questioned , or at all doubted , ( but that the children of christians might be lawfully baptized , ) till that about years since ( in our grandfathers time ) the anabaptists in germany did ( amongst many other extravagant notions ) begin to cavil at it . when as , in all the former ages of the church , nearer to the apostles time , i do not know that any history doth mention , that it was ever questioned . whereas a thing of such daily practice , if at any time , in any part of the christian church , it had received any considerable opposition ; it could not be , but that some history would have taken notice of it . and , in such a case , a constant silence is , to me , a sufficient evidence , that it hath been a constant practice ( even from the apostles time ) without any opposition . and , if so , no doubt , but by them also . and i do not know of any thing alleged , with any shew of evidence , why we should think the contrary . if any ( who were not the children of christians , but converted from heathenism ) have defer'd their baptism too long ; i think they were faulty in so doing . but if any will obstinately think , that paul and peter had not , each of them , two hands , and on each hand five fingers , because it is no where in scripture ( that i know of ) said that they had so : and , that therefore , we are rather to think they had not , than that they had ; i cannot help it . these are my thoughts , hastily drawn up ; and i pray god they may ( through his blessing ) be effectual to your satisfaction . yours , iohn wallis . for mr. c — to be left with mr. — at the — in st. paul's church-yard , till it be called for . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a -e * perhaps he meant to say , baptism came in the room of circumcision . due correction for mr hobbes· or schoole discipline, for not saying his lessons right. in answer to his six lessons, directed to the professors of mathematicks. / by the professor of geometry. wallis, john, - . approx. kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from -bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : - (eebo-tcp phase ). a wing w thomason e _ estc r this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons . universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase , no. a ) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set ) images scanned from microfilm: (thomason tracts ; :e [ ]) due correction for mr hobbes· or schoole discipline, for not saying his lessons right. in answer to his six lessons, directed to the professors of mathematicks. / by the professor of geometry. wallis, john, - . [ ], , [ ] p., folded plate printed by leonard lichfield printer to the university for tho: robinson., oxford, : . dedication signed: john wallis. a reply to: hobbes, thomas. six lessons to the professors of the mathematiques. with a final errata leaf. annotation on thomason copy: " ber [i.e. september] ". reproduction of the original in the british library. created by converting tcp files to tei p using tcp tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between and available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the , texts created during phase of the project have been released into the public domain as of january . anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. % (or pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf- unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p , characters represented either as utf- unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng hobbes, thomas, - . -- six lessons to the professors of the mathematiques. geometry -- early works to . mathematics -- early works to . - tcp assigned for keying and markup - aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images - emma (leeson) huber sampled and proofread - emma (leeson) huber text and markup reviewed and edited - pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion due correction for m r hobbes . or schoole discipline , for not saying his lessons right . in answer to his six lessons , directed to the professors of mathematicks . by the professor of geometry . hobs leviathan part . . chap. . pag. . who is so stupid , as both to mistake in geometry , and allso to persist in it , when another detects his error to him ? oxford , printed by leonard lichfield printer to the university for tho : robinson . . to the right honourable henry lord marquesse of dorchester , earle of kingston , vicount newark , lord pierrepoint , and manvers , &c. my lord , your honour may perhaps think it strange that a person so wholly a stranger as i , should tender you such a peece as this : yet will , i doubt not , acquit me of rudenesse and incivility in so doing ; when you consider , that the adverse party , whom it takes to taske , hath made his appeale hither ; and finding himselfe foiled in latine , hath here put in his english bill for some reliefe : and it is but reason that bill and answer be filed in the same court. he had the confidence , to tender his book first to another honorable person the earle of devonshire , with this presumption , that though things were not so fully demonstrated as to satisfie every reader , yet 't was good enough to satisfie his lordship , he did not doubt . which presumption of his was then the more tolerable , because he then thought his demonst●a●io●s good . but when he had been so fully convinced what weake stuffe it was ; that now the utmost of his hopes is ( for so i understand from his friends ) that though he be mistaken in the mathematicks , yet he hopes to prove himselfe an honest man , ( which yet is more i suppose than , by his principles , he need to be : ) to make the world believe , that your lordship doth approve of his principles , method , and manners in those writing ; and , that this is the only cause of the favours you have expressed towards him ; is so high an affront , as had he not a great confidence of your lorships magnanimity , to despise it , or clemency , to pardon it , he would not have offered to a person of so much honour and worth . since therefore he hath brought it before you as a controversy , wherein he desires your lordship to consider and judge , whether he have said his six lessons aright : i shall not at all demurre to the jurisdiction of the court ; but as readily admit his umpar , as allow him the choise of his own weapon ; and so tender your lordship an english answer to his english appeale from my latine confutation of his treatise in latine : that when in the judgement of this own umpar , he sees himselfe foiled at his own weapons ; he may hereafter make choise of french or dutch , or some other language , which he may hope to be more favourable to him , than latine or english hath yet been . he tells your lordship , what great feates he hath done in his book ; and your lordship knows as well , by this and my former answer , how they have been defeated . and then he reckons up certaine positions ( some of them absurd enough ) and would have you believe them to be our principles at oxford : but doth not tell your lordship where they are to be found in any writings of ours . now , ( that your lordship may not seek them there in vaine , where they are not to be found , ) i shall briefely shew where the rise of all these accusations lye ; in his own writings , not in ours . first , he had taught us cap. . § . . si ratio detur minoris ad majus , rationesque aliquot addantur ipso aequales non multiplicari proprie , sed submultiplicari dicitur : itaque quando additur primae rationi altera , ratio primae quantitatis ad tertiam , ●emissis est rationis primae ad secundam . that is , in plaine english , if there be any proportion assigned of a lesse quantity to a greater , and to that proportion be added another proportion equall to it ; that proportion that doth result by this addition , is not the double , but the halfe of that assigned proportion . now , because this is very absurd , and i had told him so ; he would have your lordship believe , that it was i had said ( not he , ) that two equall proportions , are not double to one of the same proportions . which is his first charge . secondly ; he had sayd farther , in the same place , cap. . § . . ratio ad vocatur dupla , & ad tripla , &c. ( and he saith true . ) but then ( forgetting that these were his own words ) he would have it thought ( less . . p. . ) absurd to say that the proportion of two to one is double ; and asks , is not every double proportion , the double of some proportion ? and doth here intepret that phrase ( of his own ) the proportion of two to one is called double , to be all one as to say , that a proportion is double , triple &c. of a number , but not of a proportion . which is his second charge . thirdly he had cap. . § . , . ( without any necessity ) layd ●he whole stresse of geometry , upon this supposition . that , it is not possible for the same body to possesse at one time a greater , at another time a lesser place . ( for , if this be possible , the same body is , by his definition , at the same time equall to a bigger , and to a lesse body than it selfe : as i there shewed by a consequence so cleare that he cannot himselfe deny it . ) which he there first , attempts to prove , ( as simply as a man would wish , ) but then presently flyes off againe , and say● that a thing in it selfe so manifest needs no demonstration . but sayd i , ( without declaring my own opinion in the case , which what it is he knowe● not ) an assertion of such huge consequence to his doctrine as this is , and being ( as he well knows ) generally denyed ( whatever he or i think of it ) by all those who maintaine condensation & rarification in a proper sense , ( without either vacuum , or the admission and extrusion of a forraigne body ; ) ought to be well proved , by him that builds so much upon it , and not be assumed gratis . now because of this it is , that he tells you in his third charge , that 't is one of our principles , that the same body without adding to it , or taking from it , is sometimes greater and sometimes lesse . so hainous a matter is it , to require a proofe from him , of what he doth affirme though of never so great consequence . fourthly , he tells us cap. . § . . ( and 't is true enough ) that an hyperbolick line , and its asymptote , doe still come nearer and nearer till they approach to a distance lesse then any assignable quantity : and consequently if infinitely produced , must be supposed to meet , or to have no distance at all ; ( and so the distance of that hyperbola so produced , from a line parallel to the asymptote , to be the same with the distance of that asymptote from the said parallell ; that i● , equall to a given quantity . ) and that this is a good inference , we are taught less . . § . . as standing on the same ground with the demonstrations of all such geometricians , ancient and moderne , as have inferred any thing in the manner following , [ viz. if it be not greater nor lesse , then it is equall . but it is neither greater nor lesse . therefore &c. if it be greater , say by how much . by so much . 't is not greater by so much : therefore it is not greater . if it be lesse , say by now much &c. ] which , being good demonstrations are together with this overthrown , if this inference be not good ; that is , if things which differ lesse than any assignable quantity may not be reputed equall , but now , to say thus , that the distance of an hyperbole , from a streight line drawn beyond its asymptote and the parallell thereunto , doth continually decrease , so as , if it be supposed infinitely produced , it must be supposed to be at length the same with that of the asymptote from the sayd parallell , because neither greater nor lesse by any assignable quantity ; ( which is but the result of his own assertion ) is all one as to say , that a quantity may grow lesse and lesse eternally , so as at last to be equall to another quantity ; or which is all one , saith he , that there is a last in eternity ▪ which is his fourth charge : and , what absurdity is in it , falls upon himselfe . just as , when having told us cap. . § . . punctum inter quantitates nihil est , ut inter numeros cyphra : and cap. . § . . punctum ad lineam neque rationem habet , neque quantitatem ullam : he railes upon me , twenty times over , as if i had somewhere said a point is nothing ; only because i say with euclide , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . fiftly 't is his usuall language , in designing an angle , to say , it is contained or comprehended by or between the two sides : as for example cap. . § . . ( three times in two lines ) idem angulus est qui comprehenditur inter ab & ac , cum eo qui comprehenditur inter ae & af , vel inter ab & af , and § . . cor . . angul●s comprehensos a duabus rectis . and § . . angulus qui continetur inter ab & eandem ab &c. ( and 't is well enough so to speake . ) but now , forgeting that it was himselfe that sayd so , he delivers it as a principle of ours , that the nature of an angle consists in that which lies between the lines which comprehend it ; that is , saith he , an angle is a superficies . sixtly ; when he had said ( absurdly enough , ) cap. . § . consistit ratio antecedentis ad consequens , in differentia , hoc est , in ea parte majoris qua minus ab eo superatur ; sive in majoris ( dempto minore ) residuo , &c and again , ratio binarii ad quinarium est ternarius , &c. and cap. . § . ratio inaequalium ( linearum ) ef , ig , consistit in differentia gf , ( and the like elsewhere . ) which is all one as to say , that the nature of proportion consists in a number , a line , an absolute quantity ( which how absurd it was i had let him know ; ) he hath then the impudence to say ( as though it had been i , not hee , had so spoken ) that , i make proportion to be a quotient , a number , an absolute quantity , &c. or , as he here speaks in his sixth charge , that the quotient is the proportion of the division to the dividend , ( as pure non-sense as a body need to read ; ) only because i affirm rationis ( geometricae ) aestimationem esse , not penes residuum , but penes quotum : that geometricall proportion is to be estimated , not according to the remainder , but according to the quotient ( which himselfe now knows , though he did not then , to be true enough ; for he hath now learned to say so too , less . . p. . as the quotient gives us a measure of the proportion of the dividend to the divisor in geometricall proportion ; so also the remainder after substraction is the measure of proportion arithmeticall . ) and by these means he goes about to prove himselfe an honest man : just like the honest man , who when he had cut a purse , put it slyly into another mans pocket ( after he had taken out the mony ) that so this other might be hanged for it . and i hope , by that time your lordship hath perused the peece which i now tender , you will be able to judge , whether m. hobs be not as well a good mathematician , as an honest man ; much alike . your lordship hath now the case fair before you ; if you shall think it worth the while to take cognizance of it . i shall leave it here , and permit it to your lordships judgement , whether to peruse and consider it , ( which by reason of your good accomplishment in these , as well as in other parts of learning , you are well able to doe , ) or to lay it by for those that will : as being unwilling , by any importune solicitation , to trespasse upon your lordships leasure , or divert your thoughts , from matters of more concernment , to consider of such toys as these . desiring mean while your lordships favour so far , as to give mee leave to honour you , and ( though i have not hitherto had the honour to be known to you ) to subscribe my selfe , my lord , your honours most humble servant , john wallis . oxford . oct. . . dve correction for mr hobs . sect . i. concerning his rhetorick and good languge . it seems , m. hobs , ( by the fag end of your book of body in english ) that you have a mind to say your lesson ; and that the mathematick professors of oxford should heare you . truth is , 't is scarce worth the while either for you or us . yet we could be contented , for once , to hear you ; ( if we thought you would say any thing that were worth hearing ) but to make a constant practice of it , or to entertain you as one of our schollars , i have n● mind at all . because , i fear , you are to old to learne , ( though you have as much need as those that be yonger ; ) and yet will think much to be whipt , when you doe not sa● your lesson right . but , before we go further , i should ask you ; what moved you to say your lessons in english , when as the books , against which you doe chiefely intend them , were written in latine ? but i foresee a faire answer that you might possibly make ; ( and therefore doe nor much wonder at it . ) there be many grave and weighty reasons that might move you thereunto . as first , because you doe presume , that there may be found divers persons , who may understand rayling in english , that yet doe not understand mathematicks in latin : and those being the persons on whom you have greatest hope of doing good , you ought to have a speciall regard to them , and apply your selfe to their capacities . secondly , because in case you should have attempted an answer in latin ; you had lost your labour as to the whole design : for then those who should read your answer , would be able also to read that against which you write : and , comparing both together , would presently see to how little purpose all is that you have said . whereas now your english readers must be faine to take upon trust what you please to tell them . ( whereby you gain clearly , as to them , the opportunity of misrepresenting at pleasure what you see good . ) and for this reason , if you shall think fit to make any reply to this ; i would advise you to doe it in latin ; that so forrainers , who understand not english , may take upon trust what you shall please to tell them . but thirdly , and principally ( which is the reason of greatest weight ) because that when ever you have thought it convenient to repaire to billingsgate , to leane the art of well-speaking , for the perfecting of your naturall rhetorick ; you have not found that any of the oister-women could teach you to raile in latin , and therefore it was requisite to apply your selfe to such lauguage as they could teach you . but prithee tell me , in good earnest , ( for i cannot think you so simple as you would seem to be , ) whether you doe indeed believe ( though you thought good to set a good face upon it , and talk big , ) that all that you have said is worth a straw , either as to the defending of your reputation , or the impairing of ours ? as to the rhetorick and good language of it , ( with which i shall first begin ) that you can upon all occasions , or without occasion , give the titles of foole , beast , asse , d●gge , &c. ( which i take to be but barking , ) with the rest of your course complements : you may take them , perhaps , to be admirable in their kind ; yet are they no better then a man might have at billingsgate for a box o' th ear . and of no better alloy are those other garnishes ; that we understand not what is quantity , line , superficies , angle , and proportion : ( and truly that 's a sad case : ) that neither of us understand any thing either in philosophy or in geometry ; ( a lack a day ! ) that you do verily believe ( it's pitty you can't perswade some body else to be of your fai●h , ) that since the beginning of the world there hath not been ( and who doubts but you are a good historian , ) nor ever shall be , ( and you hope your prognosticks may be believed , for you would have us think you have been taken for a conjurer , ) so much absurdity written in geometry , as is to be found in these books of mine , ( you should alwaies except your own learned works , which doubtlesse are , in this kind , incomparable pieces . but the truth is , you are not altogether out here ; for in my elenchus , which is one of the books you mention , you may see that there hath been mach absurdity written in geometry , and , they that read it , may know by whom . ) but you have confuted them wholly and clearly ( it seems you make cleare work where you come ) in two or three leaves , ( a quick riddance ! ) that , the negligences of your own you need not be ashamed of , ( because you are ashamed of nothing ; ) that you verily believe there was never seen worse reasoning , then in that philos●phicall essay , ( and that 's all the confutation of it : ) nor worse principles then these in our books of geometry ; ( and that 's another article of your faith ) that , by the use of symbols , and the way of analysis by squares and cubes , &c. you never saw any thing added to the science of geometry ; ( by which a man may see what a good geometer you are like to prove ; ) that the scab of symbols , or gambols , ( your tongue is your own , you may call them what you please , ) or the symbolick tongue is harder to understand then welch or irish , ( no marvaile then , you never saw any thing thereby added to geometry . ) that , to confute your learned labours , is but to take wing like beetles , from your egestions ; ( it seems it was but a shitten piece we had to deale with . ) that , what you like not , is worthy to be gilded , but you doe not meane with gold ; that symbols are pior unhandsome scaf , folds of demonstration ; and ought no more to appeare in publike , then the most deformed necessary businesse which you doe in your chamber ; ( one would think , by such stuffe as this , together with the ribauldry in your obscene poem de mirabilibus pecci , that you had not learned all your rhetorick at billingsgate , but had gone to turn-ball-street for part of it . ) that , your faults are not attended with shame , ( it 's no commendations , to be past shame ; ) that , you shall without our leaves be bold to say , ( who ever doubted but that you be bold enough ? ) that your selfe are the first that hath made the grounds of geometry firm and coherent , ( as if geometry were no lesse beholden to you , then civil philosophy ; which , you say , is not ancienter then your book de cive . ) that you have reason to blash ( not for any of your own faults doubtlesse , but ) considering the opinion men will have beyond sea , of the geometry taugh ' in oxford , ( no doubt but the university of oxford , if men knew all ; are much beholden to you for your tender care of them ; ) yet withall , that the third definition of the fift of euclide , is as bad as any thing was ever said in geometry by d. wallis , ( and , if so , then doubtlesse d. wallis need not be much dismaid ; for euclide hath not been accounted hitherto a despicable author . ) but such bumbast as this , and a great deale more of the same kind , i suppose , you doe not take to be mathematicall demonstrations ; nor to prove any thing , but the forehead and fury of him that speaks it . but because the stresse of all this lies only upon what you verily believe , and what you never saw , and what you feare men will think of us beyond sea : &c. to ease you of this fcar , i think it will not be amisse to let you heare the opinion of others both concerning your selfe and us , and the businesse of symbols ( with which i see no reason why you should be so angry , save that you do not understand them . ) that you may see ▪ whether others haze the same belief with you . i need not tell you what morinus and tacquet think of the businesse . for those you have heard already . i shall only give you an extract of two or three letters , which i have received from persons whose face● i never saw ; nor were they otherwise engaged to deliver an opinion in the case , then that they met with my books abroad : and yet no clergy men , he assure you . the first is from a noble gentleman of good worth , who hath deserved better of the mathematicks then ever m. hobs is like to doe ; and whom , i heare , you use to commend . his words are these . eodem ibi tempore [ paristis ] a viro nobili pagella vestra de circuli quadratura , londino mittebatur ; simulque hobbii philosolosophia nova . quam ubi primum examinare concessum est , continuo paralogismum eum animadverti , quo parabolicae lineae rectam aequare contendit , calculoque refutavi . deinde alia quoque notavi , quae nihilo saniora erant , authoremque ingenio minime defaecato praeferebant . miror te hunç dignum judicasse quem tam prolixe refelleres . etsi non sine voluptate elenchum tuum pervolvi , doctum equidem atque acutum . you see he hath no great opinion of you : he finds you full of paralogismes : he takes you to be a man of a muddy brain ; and wonders only that i thought it worth while to foul my fingers abou●●uch a piece as yours . the other is a publick professor of mathematicks , of known abilities , and beyond exception ; and he speaks yet somewhat fuller to the whole businesse . cum aestate praeterita in manus inciderit thomae hobbes elementorum philosophiae sectio prima ; abs●inere non potui quin tractatum istum leviter evolverim . instigabat me ad hoc , tum authoris hujus celebritas , tum etiam quod plura in eadem tractatu offen debam geometrica , quae si philosophiam non excelerent , saltem ut quam maxime illustratura forent , opinabar . sed me illum perlustrante , cum talia ibi invenerim ejus de algebra sive ana●ys● judicia , equibus mihi facile fuit colligere , quod author hic in eadem arte parum deberet esse versatus ; ( quandoquidem haec ill● ars existit , ut si liber suus in geometria egregii ac ardui quid contineret , qualia se passim invenisse praetendere mihi videhatur , id ipsum huic arti , judicio meo , in totum deberet ; ) cumque adhuc in perlustrando dum p●rgebam , non nulla de rectae ac curvae aequalitate , aliaque complura animadvertebam quorum cognitionem nunquam mihi pollicebar , ac inter seponenda not abam , vel certe si spos aliqua inveniendi illa mihi superesset , quin algebram in partes vocarem non dubitabam : aliam exinde de ipso ●pinionem concepi , credens quod illa quae illū ante e●proprio penu deprompsisse autumabam , non nisi aliorum inventa esse , sed in alium sensum ab eo traducta aut correpta : ideoque siquid boni in eo comprehenderetur , id quam maxime esse ventilandum ac excutiendum ; ac proinde illius examen , si vel utile aut necessum judicarem , in commodius tempus mihi esse differendum . quemadmodum autem haec ita conceperam , ita quoque evenit ut amicus , cui me eo tempore invisenti dictum tractatum exhibueram , falsitatem plurium illius propositionum haud longe post invenerit , illasque uno folio coram omnibus exponere decreverit . qui edere ista utiliter rotus , ubi se ad hoc accinxerat , tuum interim , vir ▪ clarissime , elenchum in lucent proditum vidit , ac postquam te isto munere optime defunctum deprehendit , a proposito suo destitit . egregie autem te eum , vir clarissime , sed pro merito tamen excepisse ibidem agnovi , ita ut credam eum in posterum a te prudentiorem doctioremque factum , licet ille tibi nullas gratias ( judicio meo ) pro beneficio isto sit habiturus , inter illa quae in elencho tuo offendi , nihil expectationem majorem mihi excitavit , quam arithmetica tua infinitorum , de qua subinde mentionem facis : quam novissime in lucem proditam , quamprimum cum caeteris tuis tractatibus vidi , mihi comparavi , ac multa praeclara & ingeniosa inventa , qualia mihi proposueram , continere deprehendi . perpl●● et autem quod tum in arithmetica tua infinitorum , tum in sectionibus tuis conicis pertractandis , calculum geometricum ubique adhibueris , tum propter brevitatem , tum quod is ( ut ipse mones ) demonstrationum omnium fons existat , atque demonstrationes omnes , solenni modo factae , certa arte ex illo confi●i possint . id quod prae aliis clarissimus d. des cartes in demonstrationibus suis est molitus , qui neglecta theorematum ac lemmatum longa serie , quibus alias in demonstrando difficulter carere liceret , calculo omnia constare voluit ; atque in eum finem passim aequationes investigat , quibus rei veritas , ac quomodo illa cognosci possit , absque verborum involueris , breviter atque perspicue ob oculos ponatur . quae autem de circuli quadratura tradis , utrum scilicet rem acu tetigeris necne nondum examinare mihi contigit : subtilissime autem cum illam prosecutus mihi videaris , atque etiam calculo ipsam inquisiveris , non dubito quin omnium saltem proxime atque accuratissime ad scopum collimaveris . you see what he thinks of you , and mee , and symbols . he discerns presently by your judgement of algebra , what a geometer you are like to prove ; that it must needs be one who understood it not , that rants at that rate ; and will yet talke of squaring a circle , and find a streight line equall to a crooked , and other fine things , without the help of algebra . he sees by a little what the rest is like to prove ; either little worth , or not your own . and therefore , though at first he made hast to get it , yet when he sees what is in it , he thinks your book may well be thrown aside , or at least be examined at leisure . he tells you of another , that , had not my elenchus prevented him , meant to have been upon the bones of you . he tells you , that my elen●hus , as sharp as it is , is no more then you had deserved . he supposed withall ( though therein it seems he was deceived ) that you would have learned from thence , more mathematicks , and more discretion for the future ; and yet did believe ( as well he might ) 〈◊〉 you would scarce thank me for that favour . he is well enough satisfied also with my other pieces , ( what ever you think of them , ) and likes them never the worse for that scab of symbols ( as you call it ) but much the better ; ( because , though you understand them not , he doth . ) and much more to that purpose . and by this time , i hope , you be pretty well eased of your feare , least the university of oxford should suffer in the opinion of learned men beyond sea , by reason of the mathematicks that we have written . ( nor have you reason to think , that malmesbury , will be much the more renowned for your skill in that kind . ) and , that you may not despise their testimonies , the persons are very well known to the world , by what works they have extant in print , to be no contemptible mathematicians . beside these , i shall , for the satisfaction of your english readers ( who perhaps may not so well understand the words of the authors above mentioned , ) adde an extract of one letter more ; from a noble gentleman , whom as yet ( to my knowledge ) i never saw , nor had formerly any the lest intercourse with him by letter or otherwise , though i had before heard of his worth and skill , both in mathematicks and other learning : and which is more , he is neither of the clergy ; nor any great admirer of them , beyond other persons of equall worth and learning . he was pleased , though wholly a stranger to mee , upon view of my elenchus , to intimate to me by a letter directed to a third person , that d. wallis had unhappily guessed , that those propositions which m. hobs had concerning the measure of parab●lasters , were not his own , but borrowed from some body else without acknowledging his author : and signified withall , that they were to be found demonstrated in an exercitation of cavallerius , de usu indivisibilium in potestatibus cossicis ; ( a piece which i then had never read : ) and that m. hobs , endeavouring to demonstrate them anew , had missed in it . for which civility from a person of quality , to mee a meer stranger , i could doe no lesse then returne him a civill answer of thanks for that favour . in reply to which ( having in the mean time seen and perused my arithmetica infinitorum ) he was pleased to honour me farther with this . i had not so long deferred &c. but that &c. and i beseech you receive it now from a person , who much honours your eminent learning and humanity , and would egerly imbrace an occasiō to give you most ample testimony of the esteem he hath for you . i had not , ( before &c. ) seen your arithmetica infinitorum , which alone , although your other labours were not taken in to make up the value , may equall you with the best deservers in the mathematicks . i was before acquainted with many excellent propositions therein by you demonstrated ( as you partly know , ) but admired them , there , as wholly new , not because you had demonstrated them only another way , but by a generall method , so little touched at by others , so in effect wholly new , and of so rare consequence for entring into the secrets and soul of geometry ( if my judgement may passe for any thing ) as truly i believe the art may reckon it among the most confiderable advances given it . sir , i wish all prosperity to your deservings , and humbly thank you for the fair admittance you have given me to your acquaintance and friendship , which i shall preserve with a tendernesse due to a thing so estimable ; and believe , sir , you have power at your own measure in yours &c. this is english , and therefore needs no exposition ; your english reader , whether mathematician or not , may understand it without help . you see all are not of your opinion concerning my scurvy book of arithmetica infinitorum . i will not trouble your patience with reciting more testimonies in this kind ; ( though , the truth is , very many persons of honour and worth , and eminent for their skill in these studies , have been forward of their own accord to put more honour upon me in this kind , then were fit in modesty for me to own . ) these you have heard already , are more , i presume , then you take any great content in ; and the lest of them , were abundantly sufficient to outway your verily believe ; upon the strength of which , you have the confidence to utter all those reproaches which in your scurrilous piece you endeavour to cast upon us ; but find them to fall back , and foul your self . and you see withall , both how little reason we have to fear the opinion that men will have beyond sea , of the geometry taught at oxford ; and with how much vanity it is that you tel us according to your rhetorick , that when you think , how dejected we will be for the future ; and how the grief of so much time irrecoverably lost , and the consideration of how much our friends will be ashamed of us , will accompany us for the rest of our life , you have more compassion for us then we have deserved . no doubt sir , but you are a very pittifull man ! ( who have so much compassion for us : ) and we are much bound to behold you . but since your cōpassion of us , is not only more then you think we deserve , but , likewise , more then we think we stand in need of ; we are loath your good nature should be injurious to your selfe . and therefore , knowing how much your selfe at present nay need compassion , we desire you to suffer that charity to begin at home , and not to be too lavish of that commodity upon us , of which at present we have so little need and you so much . but , that there may be no love lost between us ; know , that we have the like compassion for you , upon the same account . you have but prevented us ; and taught us , by your extreme civility , what might have better beseemed us to say . you tell us somewhere , the reason , why the ladies at billingsgate , amongst all their complements , have none readier then that of whore , because , forsooth , when they remember themselves , they think that likeliest to be true of others . and truly , we have reason to believe , that the anguish of such considerations as those you mention , being so frequently present to your own thoughts , makes you so apt to think that others may be tormented in the like manner . ( for who are more compassionate to those that feele the toothach , then those that are most tormented with it themselves ? ) for , as your words are elsewhere , a man of a tender forehead , after so much insolence , and so much contumelious language as yours , grounded upon arrogance and ignorance , would hardly endure to outlive it . as for our selves ; i do not find , that our friends do yet disowne us ; or , that we need to feare , in this contest , the fury of our foes . and , whatever diseases you may believe my conick , sections , and arithmetica infinitorum , to be infected with : i do not see , that wiser physitians can yet discerne , either the one to be troubled with the scab , or the other with the scurvy . but you tell us , ( and that may serve for answer to the testimonies but now recited ) though the beasts , that think our railing to he roaring , have for a time admired us ; yet , now that you have shewed them your eares , they will be lesse affrighted . sir , those persons ( as they needed not the sight of your eares , but could tell by the voice what kind of creature brayed in your books : so they ) doe not deserve such language at your hands : and , you would not have said it to their faces . i know your apology will be , that you say it provoked ; and that by vespasians law , when a man is provoked , it is not uncivill to give ill language . and that we may know you have been provoked , you tell us , how hainous and hazardous a thing it is , to speake against some sorts of men , whether that which is said in disgrace be true or false ; and by all men of understanding it is taken ( not only for a provocation , but for a defiance , and a challenge to open warre . and truly , so far as that may passe for law , i cannot deny but that you have been provoked ; for sure it is , that much hath been said against you , and that , as is supposed , to your disgrace , and , i believe , the provocation hath been the greater , because that which hath been said , is true . but is this such a provocation as may warrant you , by vespasians law , to rave at the next man you meet with ? and to revenge your selfe upon him that comes next ? is it such a provocation of m. hobs , for any man to admire us , that he may thenceforth , without incivility , be called a beast , or what you please ? is it not enough for you to involve the two professors in the same crime , and consider us every where as one author , and therefore both responsible , joyntly and severally , for what is said by either , because forsooth , we approve , you say , of one anothers doctrine : but must all that doe but admire us be under the same condemnation ? it 's possible that some of them may admire our folly ; ( you see , one of them wonders at my discretion , that i would foule my fingers with you , or think you worth the answering : ) must they be called beasts also ? it seems 't is a dangerous businesse for a man to admire any who do not admire you . but i have done with the rhetorick and good language . we have had a tast of it ; and that 's enough unlesse 't were better . they that desire to have more of it , may either read over your book , or goe to billingsgate , whether they please . but when men shall heare you rant it after this rate , and talk high ; surely they must needs think , that you have very good ground for it , must they not ? a shallow foundation would never bear a confidence of such a towring hight . one would hardly believe mee , if i should say , that notwithstanding these braggadocian words , there is not any one assertion of mine , that you have either overthrown or shaken ; nor any one of your own ( which i charge to be false , ) that you have defended ; yet that 's the case . a great cry , and a little wooll ! ( as the man said when he shore his hoggs . ) parturiunt montes . — and that 's it we have next to shew . sect . ii. concerning his grammar , and criticks . i shall therefore next after the rhetorick , consider the grammar , you 'l say , that grammar should have gone first . it may be so . but it 's no great matter for method , when a man deales with you ; for you are not so accurate in your own , that you need find fault with anothers . there be six or seven places ( and , i think no more ) where you would play the critick . first , you tell me pag. . that [ punctum est corpus , quod non consideratur esse corpus ] is not latin , nor the version of it [ a point is a body , which is not considered to be a body ] english . if you had said , it had not been good sense , i would have agreed with you . but why not that , latin ? or this , english ? ( nay stay there ; you are not to give a reason for what you say . it 's enough that you say so . ) quod esse videmus , id videtur esse . quod esse sentimus , id sentitur esse . quod esse putamus , putatur esse . quod esse cognoscimus , cognoscitur esse . quod esse dicimus , dicitur esse . and why not as well , quod esse consideramus , consideratur esse ? but what should it have been , if not so ? why thus , punctum est corpus quod non consideratur ut corpus . very good ! bur sir , it 's one thing , to consider a thing as a body , or as if it were a body , ( either of which the words ut corpus may beare ; ) another thing , to consider that it is a body , which was the notion i had to expresse , and therefore your word would not so well serve my turne , but rather the other . and when we have this to expresse , that though it be a body , and we know it to be a body , yet do not at present actually consider it so to be ; ( which i take to be neither irish , nor welsh , nor , which is worse then either , the symbolick tongue ; but good english ; ) it is better rendred in latin by esse , then by ut . secondly , you tell me pag. . i might have left out [ tu vero ] to seek an [ ego quidem . ] ( as though vero might never be used where there is not a quidem to answer it . ) and is not this a worthy objection ? but however , to satisfy you , look again and you may see a quidem which answers directly to this vero . my words are these articulo quarto ( cap. . ) curvilineorum illorum descriptionem aggrederis per puncta . quae quidem res est non ita magnae difficultatis , ut tanto apparatu , tantisque ambagibus opus sit . exempli gratia . &c. tu vero , quasi per planorum geometriam id fieri non possit , statim imperas mediorum quotlibet geometricorum inventionem . doe you see the quidem now ? very good ! but before i leave this , ( to save my selfe that labour anon , ) i must let your english reader see , how notoriously you doe here abuse him , ( him , i say ; for the abusing of me in it , is a matter of nothing ) my words were these ; in the th article ( of your chap. ) you attempt the describing of those curve lines by points , ( that is , the finding out as many points as a man pleaseth , by which the said curve lines are to passe , through which , with a steady hand , those lines may be drawn , not mathematically , but by aim , ) which is a matter of no great difficulty , and may be performed without so much adoe as you make , and so much going about the bush . as for example , &c. ( and so i go on to shew how those points may be easily found mathematically , by the geometry of plains , that is , by the rule and compasse , or by streight lines and circles , without the use of conick sections , or other more compounded lines . and , having shewed that , i proceed thus ) but you , as though this work ( the finding of those points ) could not be done by the geometry of plains , ( as i had shewed it might , ) require presently the finding of as many mean proportionals as you please ( viz. more or fewer according as the nature of those lines shall be ; ) between two lines assigned : ( which by the geometry of plains cannot be done : ) and so , of a plain probleme , you make a solid and lineary probleme . which how unbeseeming it is for a geometrician to doe , you may learne from those words which your selfe cite out of pappus , pag. . ( in the english , pag. . ) videtur autem non parvum peccatum esse apud geometras , cum problema planum per conica aut linearia ab aliquo invenitur . it 's judged by geometers no small fault , for the finding out of a plain problem , ( as this is , ) to have recourse ( as you here ) to solid or lineary problems . now these words , one would think , were plain enough for a man of a moderate capacity to understand . and is it not well owl'd of you , to perswade your english reader that i had here taught , that a man may find as many mean-proportionalls , as one will , by the geometry of plaines ? ( where i said only that the work before spoken of , might be done by the geometry of plaines , and therefore needed not the finding of such mean-proportionals ? ) and then ( because you doe not know whether or no , as many mean proportionals as one will , may be found by the geometry of plains , ) you tell us , that you never said it was impossible ; ( truly if you had said so , i should not have blamed you for it ; ) but that the way to doe it was not yet found , ( you might have added , nor ever will be , ) and therefore it might prove a solid problem for any thing i know . nay truly , sir , i know very well ( though it seems you doe not , ) that it is at lest a solid probleme , or rather lineary ; and that the way to doe it , mathematically , by the geometry of plains , is neither yet found , nor ever will be . for those problems which depend upon the resolution of a cubick or superior aequation , not reducible to a quadratick , ( which is the case in hand ) can never be resolved by the geometry of plains . which , if , instead of scorning , you had endeavoured to understand , the analyticks , you might have known too . but this by the way ; to save my selfe the labour anon . i returne to your criticks again . thirdly , whereas it is said c. . art . . longitudinē percursam cum impetu u●ique ipsi bd aequali ; i said the word cum were better out , unlesse you would have impetus to be only a companion and not a cause . for where a causality is imported , though we may use with in english , yet not cum in latin. to kill with a sword ( importing this to have an instrumentall or causall influence , and not only that it hangs by the mans side , while some other weapon is made use of ) is not in latin occidere cum gladio , but gladio occidere . so ebrius vino ; pallidus ira ; incurvus senectute , or , if you will , prae ir● , ob●iram , &c. not cum vino , cum ira , &c. you say , it is better in ( though for the most part your selfe leave it out in that construction ; ) let the reader judge ; for it is not worth contending for . all that you say in defence , is that impetus is the ablative of the manner . what then ? the question remains , as it was before , whether this modus do not here import a causall influence ? and 't is evident it doth ; for the effect here spoken ( that such space be dispatched ) doth equally depend upon two causes ; the one , that the motion be uniforme ; the other , that the impetus be so great . and therefore ( since you please to insist upon it , which i did but give a touch at by the way , as in many other places where you take it patiently , ) cum not proper in either place ; but either an ablative without a preposition ; or , if you would needs have a preposition , per , prae , pro , propter , ob , or some other which do import a causality ; not cum , which imports only a concomitancy . fourthly , you say , pag. . that you think , i did mistake [ praetendit scire ] for an anglicisme . your words were these at first , ( as that paragraph was first printed , pag. . ) tamen quia tu id nescis , nec praetendis scire praeter quam ex auditu , &c. as appears in the torne papers . and then , ( after you had new modeld that whole paragraph , as it now is pag. . ) tamen quid id nescit , nec praetendit scire &c. this i did and doe still take ( not mistake ) for an anglicisme and you cannot deny but that it is so . where is the mistake then ? you say t is a fault in the impression . yes that it is ; and that twice for failing . but was it not a fault in the copy first ? you say it should have been , praetendit se scire . that , i confesse , helps the matter a little . but why was it not so ? the printer left out se ( ●es , at both places . ) and why ? but , because the author had not put it in ? in like manner pag. . tractatus huius partis tertiae , in qua motus & magnitud● per se & abstracte consideravimus , terminum hic statuo . this was the printers fault too , was it not ? or , at least , a fault in the impression ? ( beside much more of the like language up and down ) and if you think it worth while to make a catalogue of such phrases ; tell me against next time , and i shall be able to furnish you with good store . there be two places more ( to make up the halfe dozen ) wherein you would faine play the critick : of which , i heard from divers persons , you made much boast , long before your book came out ; that you had d. wallis upon the hip ; &c. the one was that adducere malleum was no good latin , because that duco and adduco were words not used but of animals , and signified only to guide or leade , not to bring or carry . the other was , that i had absurdly derived empusa from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . it 's true , those charges , notwithstanding your first confidences , are not now layd in these words ; but the former extenuated , and the latter vanisht . yet some nibling there is at both . the former of these , ( which i make the fifth in order ) is pag. . where you tell me , that adducis malleum , ut occidas muscam , is not good latin ? but why ? when we speak of bodies animate , ducere and adducere , you say , are good . t is very true . did any body deny it ? but are they not good also , of bodies inanimate ? or other things ? ( i exspected , that in order to the confutation of my phrase you should have told us , in what cases they had not been good , and that this was one of those ; not , in what other cases they are good , as well as this ; for that hurts not mee . ) may they not be applied as well to a hammer , as to a tree ? though this be animate ; not that ? you were , i heare , of opinion , when you first made braggs of this notion , ( or else your friends belye you ) that they were not to be used but of bodies animate : but , that being notoriously false , some body it seems had rectified that mistake , and informed you better , and therefore you dare not say so now . but why , now , is not adducis malleum good latin ? because , forsooth , ducere and adducere , when used of bodies animate , signify to guide or lead ; ( and sometimes they doe so . ) now though a ninny may lead a ninny , yet not a hammer . very witty ? but i am of opinion , that he who leads m. hobs , leads both . or however , if a man may not lead a hammer ; yet , i hope , he that hits the naile at head ( which m. hobs seldome doth ) may be said to guide his hammer : may he not ? the phrase therefore is good , even by your own law . but heark you , man ; to lead , you told us , is the signification of the word , when it is used of animates ; why then do you talke of leading a hammer ? do you take the hammer to be animate ? or would have us take you to be the ninny ? but farther ; they singify you say to guide or lead . what then ? did i say they do not ? prithee tell me , what they do not signify ; not , what they doe ; if you meane to overthrow my use of the word . t is true , sometimes they signify to guide , or lead ; viz. with the parties consent , ( fata ●●lentem , du●unt , nolentemtrahunt : ) yet sometimes the quite contrary ; as ducere captivum , claud. cic. to take a man prisoner , or carry him captive , against his will : so ducere in carcerem ; ducere ad supplicium , & deducere , cic. to bring or carry a man to prison , to execution , &c. ( which for the most part is against his will. ) filia vi abducta , ter. my daughter was carried away by force . and so , frequently . but suppose they doe , sometimes , signify to guide , sometimes to lead ; what then ? doe they signify nothing else ? is ducere lineam , plin. to guide a line , or to lead a line ? and not rather to draw a line ? ducere ux●rem , cic. to guide a wife ? or to lead a wife ? ( though perhaps you will cavill at that phrase ) and not rather to take a wife ? but you say , of bodies inanimate adducere , is good for attrahere , which is , to draw to . very good ! but what is it not good for ? is it good for nothing else ? ducere somnos , soporem , somnium , virg. hor. insomnem ducere noctem . virg. ducere somno diem , noctem ludo ; sic horam , horas , tempus , aestatem , aevum , adolescentiam , senectutem , vitam , aetatem , coenam , convivium , &c. ducere , producere , traducere , hor. virg. claud. propert. ovid. cic. sen. plin. liv. &c. do they signify , to leade , to guide , to dran ? and not rather , to spend , to continue , to passe over , to passe away , &c. well! but however ▪ ( whatever they may signify else , ) duco , adduco , &c ( with the rest of its com●ounds , ) you would have us believe , ( for that 's it you drive at , though you dare not speak it out , or be confident to affirme it , ) do not signify to take , carry , fetch , or bring , ( which you suppose to be the sense ( aime at ) unlesse when used of bodies animate . but that 's as false as can be . adducere fehrem hor. adducere sitim , virg. adducere vini taedium . plin &c. doe they signify to lead a fever ? or to guide a fever ? or to draw a fever , ( with cart-ropes , or a team of horses ? ) and not rather to bring a fever , &c. in my dictionary , duco & adduco , signify to bring , as well as to draw . the truth is , duco , with its compounds , is a word of as great variety and latitude of signification , as almost any the latine tongue affords . and , amongst the rest , to bring , fetch , carry , take , ( to , from , about , away , before , together , asunder , &c. according as the praeposition wherewith it is compounded doth require ) is so exceeding frequent in all authors ( plautus , terence , tully , caesar , tacitus , livy , pliny , seneca , virgil , ovid , horace , claudian , &c. ) that he must needs be either malitiously blind , or a very great stranger to the latin tongue , that doth not know it , or can have the face to deny it . rem huc deduxi . cic. res eo adducta est , ( deducta perducta , ) in eum locum , in eum statum , in dabium , in certamen , in controversiam , in periculum , in maximum discrimen , &c. cic. liv. caesar . plancus ad cic. &c. add●cta vita in extremum . tacit. adducta res in fastidium , plaut . in judicium , cic. rem ad mucrones & manus adducere , tacit. contracta res est & adducta in augustiam . cic. rem co producere . cic. ad exitum , ad culmen , ad summum , ad umbilicam , ad extremum casum , &c. cic. caesar . liv. hor. &c. that is , the matter is brought to that passe , &c. so , sive enim res ad concerdiam adduci potest , sive ad bonorum victoriam &c. cic. so , ex inordinato in ordinem adduxit , ( speaking of gods bringing the world out of the first chaos , ) and again , eas primum confusas , postea in ordinem adductas mente divina . cic. so , aquae ductus , aquarum deductio , rivorum a fontibus deductio , aquam ad utilitatem agri deducere , cic. aquam ex aliquo loco perducere , plin. in urbem induxit , idem . to bring water from place to place . ( not to draw it , attrahere . ) thus adducere febres , to bring fevers . officiosaque sedulitas , & opella forensis adducit febres & testamenta resignat . hor. so , ova noctuae , &c. tadium vini adducunt . hor. addua●ere sitim tempora , virgi●i , [ sc . aestiva ) hor. in like manner , febres deducere , to take them away . non domus & fundus , non aeris acervus & auri , aegroto domini deduxit corpore febres , non animo curas . — hor. so , deducere fastidium . plin and then febrimque reducit , hor. to bring back again . so , frondosa reducitur aestas . virg. luctus fortuna reduxit . claud. reducere exemplum , libertatem , morem , &c. plin. aurora diem reduxit . virg. collectasque fugat nubes solemque reducit . virg. that is , restoreth . so , reducere somnum , hor. spem mentibus anxiis reducere idem . in memoriam reducere , plin. cic. now it would be hard to say , that in all these places adduco , deduco , reduco , &c. are put for attrabo , detraho , retraho , &c. attrahere febres , attrahere taedium , &c. so abduxi ●lavem , plaut . i took or brought away the key ( as had every whit , as adducere malleum , to bring a hammer . ) so navis a praedonibus abducta , cic. ter. the ship taken at sea by pyrats , and carried away . visaque confugiens somnos abduxit imago . ovid. so ( speaking of hercules loosing the chains whereby prometheus was chained to the rock ) vincula prensa manu saxis abduxerat imis val. flac. quidsi de vestro quippiam orem abducere ? plaut . what if i should desire to carry away somewhat of yours ? coeperat intendens , abductis montibus , unda ferre ratem . val. flac. abducti montes , id est , semoti . — abductaque flumina ponto . idem . quod ibidem recte custodire poterunt , id ibidem custodiant ; quod non poterunt , id auferre atque abducere licebit . cic. where abducere , all along , is no more then auserre . in like manner , conducere is oft times the same with conferre , congerere . as veteres quidem scriptores hujus artis , unum in locum conduxit aristoteles . cic. partes conducere in unum , lucret. ( i. e. in unum corpus componere . ) so deducere , to carry forth . ducere , deducere , producere , funus , exequias . plin. virg. stat. lucan . deducunt socii naves , virg. and to take away , ( the same with tollere , demere , auferre , ) as in deducere febrem , deducere fastidium , as before . thus deductio and subtractio for as you use to call it both in english and latin , substractio , as if it came from sub and straho ) is contrary to additio , and signifies all kind of ablation or taking away . addendo , deducendoque , videre quae reliqui summa fiat . cic. vt , deducta parte tertia , deos reli●ua reddatur africanus de pactis dotalibus . vt centum nummi deducerentur . cic. sibi deducant drachmam , reddant caetera . cic. ut beneficia integra perveniant , sine ulla deductione . sen. so , deducere cibum . ter. to abate , diminish , or take away ; as also , cibum subducere , cic. subducere vires , ovid. ●t succus ●ecori & lac subducitur agnis . virg. jam mihi subduci facies humana videtur . ovid. ignem subdito ; ubi ebullabit vinum , ignem subducito . cato de re rust . aurum subducitur rerrae . ovid. so , annulum subduco . plant. subducere pallium , mart. to take or steale away . deducere vela , deducere carbasa , ovid. luc. — primaque ab origine mundi , ad mea perpetuum deducite tempora carmen . ovid. that is , to bring down from the beginning of the world to his own times . — a pectore postquam deduxit vestes . ovid. deducere sibi galerum , vel pileolum , sueton. to putt off , or take off . et cum frigida mors animâ subduxerat artus . virg. — seductae ex aethere terrae . ovid. where seducere , is no more but separare . so , diducta britannia mundo . claud. ante se fossam ducere & jacere vallum , liv. vallum ducere , idem . fossam , vallum , praeducere , tacit. sen. perducere , caes . to cast up a wall , a bank , a trench before them . murum in altitudinem pedum sexdecim perduxit . duas fossas ea altitudine perduxit . munitio de castello in castellum perducta . caesar . so , ducere muros , virg. to raise up : and educere turrim . aramque educere coelo certant . sub astra educere . molemque educere coelo . idem . to raise up as high as heaven . thus , educere foetum , cic. claud. plin. educere , producere , faetum , partus , liberos , sobolem , fructus , &c. si●ius . plaut . hor. &c. to bring forth , so , educere cirneam vini . plaut , to bring out a flagon of wine , ( as bad , i trow , as adducere malleum . ) educere naves ex portu ; and in terram subducere , caesar . vn●que conspecta livorem ducit ab uva . hor. — arborea frigus ducebat ab umbra . ovid. animum ducere ( to take courage ) liv. ab ipso ducit opes animumque ferro , hor. argumenta ducere , quintil. ducere conjecturam , similitudinem , &c. cic. initium , principium , exordium ducere . cic. ortum , originem ducere , cic. quint. hor. ( i. e. sumee , ) producere exemplum , juvenal . ducere cicatricem . colum. liv. ovid. cicatricem , crustam , rubiginem , callum , obducere . plin. cic. obducere velum , torporem , tenebras , plin. cic. quintil. inducere , introducere , consuetudinem , morem , ambitionem , seditionem , discordiam , novos mores , cic. stat plin. qua ratione haec inducis , e●dē illa possunt esse quae tollis . cic. inducere formam membris , ovid. cuti nitorem , plin. tenebras , nubes , noctem , ovid. senectus inducit rugas , tibul. tentorium vetus deletum sit , novum inductum , cic. introducere , quod & in medium afferre , dicitur . bud. cic. obliviae poenae ducere . val. flac. sollicitae vitae , hor. nec podagri●us , nec articularius est , quem rus ducunt pedes , plaut . ( whose feet can carry him , not lead , guide , or draw him . ) transducere arbores , ( to transplant or remove from place to place , ) colum . quod ex italia adduxerat . caes . and if these authorities be not enough ; it were easy to produce a hundred more , ( to justify my use of the word , and bring your new notion to nothing ; ) wherein duco ( both in it selfe and its compounds ) signifies to take , bring , fetch , carry , &c. without any regard had at all to your notion of guiding , leading , or 〈◊〉 , that we may see what a deale of impudence and ignorance you discover , when you undertake to play the critick . and when you have done the best you can , you will not be able to find better words then adducere malleum , and reducere , to signify the two contrary motions of the 〈◊〉 ; the one when you strike with it , the other when you take it back to fetch another stroke . to all these examples i might , if need were , adde your own which though it would be but as anser inter olores ; nor would it at all increase the reputation of the phrase , to say 〈◊〉 you use it : yet it may serve to shew , that it is not out of i●dgement , ( because you think so ; ) but out of malice and a designe of revenge ( that you might seem to say somewhat , though to little purpose , ) that you thus cavill without a cause . for duco , adduco , circumduco , and the rest of the compounds , are frequently used by your selfe , in the same ●●nse and construction which you blame in mee . lineam ●●cere , producere , &c. a puncto , ad punctum , per punctum , &c. are phrases used by your selfe fourty and fourty times . if 〈◊〉 do not seem to come home to the businesse ; that of ●um-effectum , rem a●i●uam &c. producere , ( to produce , ●ring forth , bring to passe , ) comes somewhat nearer ; which 〈◊〉 at lest twenty times in one page . p. . and within three leaves , ( cap & , ) above fifty times : and elsewhere frequently . so , actus educi poterit , p. . partes flui●●● educi ●osse . p. . deduci hinc potest . ( i. e. inferri ) p. . 〈◊〉 inde deducere non possum . p. . fluviorum origines 〈◊〉 possunt . p. . ratio quaevis ad rationem linearum reduci 〈◊〉 . p. . linea in se reducta p. . quibus & reduci cogi●●● nes praeteritae possint . p. . copulatio cogitationem inducit . p . n●men aliquod idoneum inducat . p. . phantasma finis 〈◊〉 thantasmata mediorum . p. . in animum inducere non 〈◊〉 p. ● . parallelismus ob eam rem introductus est . p. . 〈◊〉 instantia adduci potest . p. . and particularly of 〈◊〉 dies , in flectione laminae ( lege , flexione ) capita ejus addu●●●ur . p. ● . flexio est , manente eadem lineâ , adductio extre●●●●●unctorum , vel diductio , p. . terminis diductis , ibid. 〈…〉 adductio extremarū linearum . p. . cujus puncta ext●ema diduci non possunt . p. . adductio vel diductio terminorum , ibid. and so again five or six times in that and the next page . so ex cujuspiam corporis circumductione . p. . corpus circumductum , ibid. si corpus aliquod circumducatur , ibid. in●elligi potest planum circumduci , p. . si planum circumducat●● , ibid. punctum ambientis quodlibet ab ipso circumducitur , p. ● . and the like elsewhere . in all which places , by your law , it should have been circumlatio , circumlatus , circumfer●●● , circumferri , circumfertur , &c. as it is , p . p. . and 〈◊〉 some other places . now if circumdaci and circumferri , 〈◊〉 be used promiscuously , and so circumductio and circum●●● , &c. why not as well in the same cases adducere and 〈◊〉 & c. ? and if corpus quodpiam , may , without absurdity , be 〈◊〉 circumduci , why not as well adduci ? in like manner , 〈◊〉 sum est conduci mobile ( i. e. simul ferri ) ad e ad a , concu●●● duorum motuum &c. p. . and moti per certam & design 〈◊〉 viam conductio facilis , p. . with many the like phras● which are every whit as bad as adducere malleum . and therefore , you had very little reason to quarrell at that phrase ; save that there was nothing else to find fault with , and somewhat you were resolved to say . and the like is to be said of that other phrase , next before , quod non consideratur esse corpus , which , though it be 〈◊〉 latine , when i speak it ; yet , with you the same construction comes over and over again , as least a hundred times 〈◊〉 simulachrum hominis negatur esse verus homo , p. . qu● 〈◊〉 gantur esse verae . p. . singulae partes singulas lineas conficere ●●telligantur , p . si corpus intelligatur moveri , — redigi — 〈◊〉 escere , ibid. severall times intelligitur quiescere , — 〈…〉 . agens intelligitur producere effectum , p. . du● 〈◊〉 intelliguntur transire , p. ostenderetur ratio esse 〈◊〉 p. . lineae extendi intelligautur , p. . intelligatur radius ●●veri , p. . si partes fractae intelligantur esse minim● , p ▪ ● ▪ supponatur longitudo esse , p. , altitudo ponitur esse in 〈◊〉 basium triplicata , p. . sphaera intelligatur moveri , p. 〈…〉 haesio illa supponatur tolli , p. . intelligatur radius 〈◊〉 materia dura , ibid. vis magnetica invenietur esse motus , p ▪ 〈◊〉 ▪ and so punctum , corpus , res aliqua , ponitur , supponitur , inte●●●gitur , ostenditur , &c. esse , quiescere , movere , circum 〈…〉 &c. p. , , , . , , , , , 〈…〉 , , , , , , , , , 〈…〉 . and many other places : which are every whit 〈◊〉 as consideratur esse . yea and consideratur also is by your 〈◊〉 so used p. . eaedem duae lineae — prout considerantur pro ipsis magnitudinibus — poni . &c. so that 't was not judgement , but revenge , that put you upon blaming this phrase also . and you care not , all along , how much you bespatter your self , ( for , you think , you cannot look much fouler then you doe already , ) if you have but hopes to be a little revenged on us . and truly you have that good hap all the way , that there is scarce any thing ( right or wrong ) that you blame in us , but the same is to be found in your selfe also with much advantage . but this fault ( adducis malleum ) you should not , you say , ( though it had been one , ) have taken notice of in an english man ; but that you find me in some places nibling at your latine . yes ; i thought , that was the matter . you had a mind to be revenged . and ha'nt you done it handsomely ? was there nothing else to fasten upon with more advantage then these poor harmlesse phrases ? 't is very well . it seems my latine ( though as carelessely written as need to be ; for 't was never twice written , and scarce once read , before it was printed , ) did not much lye open to exception ; for if it had , i perceive i should have heard of it with both eares . but you are offended , it seemes , that i should offer to nibble at your latine . and truly , if that were a fault , i know not how to help it now . i must needs confesse , i did some times ( when i stumbled upon them , but never went out of my way to seek them ; for , if so , i might have found enough ) correct some phrases , as i went along , ( sometime to make sense , where the sentence was lame ; sometimes to make it latine , where the phrase was incongruous or barbarous ; ) because i did not know , that your being an english man , had given you a peculiar priviledge above others to speak barbarously without controll . such as these , nescit , nec pratendit scire praeterquam ex auditu . p. . or as it was first printed . p. . nescis , ne●p praetendis , &c. and accipiat lector tanquam problematice dicta . p. . and placuit quoque ea stare quae merito pertinent ad vindicem , ibid. so p. . ( at lest in my book ) progressio stabit hoc modo , . . . . . &c. and diverse other places , which i do not now remember . but you know there be many more , which , had they come in my way , i might have found fault with , as well as these ; as that p. . falsae sunt , — & multa istiusmodi ( propositiones . ) and p. . definiemus lineam curvam esse eam cujus termini diduci posse intelligimus . and p. . quantitas anguli ex quantitate arcus cum perimetri totius quantitate compaeratione aestimatur . ( for ex quantitatis — comparatione , or ex quantitate — cōparata● p. . ducatur a'termino primae , ad terminos caeterarum , rectae lineae . and p. . partitertiae , in qua motus & magnitudo consideravimus , terminum hic statuo . and p. . ex quo intelligitur esse ea ( phantasmata ) corporis sentientis mutatio aliqua . so p. . exeuns , for exiens . and p. . exemplicatum esse , for exemplo explicatum , aut comprobatum . and p. . exemplicativum ; and many more of the same stamp ( as barbarous every whit , as those of the schoolemen , which you blame as such , p. ▪ non sunt itaque eae voces essentia , entitas , omnisque illa barbaries , ad l'hilosophiam necessarius non est . ) i might adde that of p. . tanquam diceremus , ( as if we should say , ) and p. . tanquam possent , and elsewhere , instead of quasi , acsi , ( or some such word ) or tanquam si , which is tullies phrase , ( tanquam si tua res agatur . tanquam si consul esset . tanquam si clausa esset asia &c. ) for tanquam without si ▪ signifies but as , not as if : but because i know you are not the first , that have so used it , of modern writers ; and that even of the ancients , some of them doe sometimes leave out si , ( as in other cases they doe ut ; ) i shall allow you the same liberty , and passe this by without blame ( as passable , though not so accurate . ) to these we may adde those elegances p. . ( syllogismus ) stabit sic . p. . sed haec dicta sint pro exemplo tantum , and so , p. . ventus aliud non est quam pulsi aeris motus rectus ; qui tamen potest esse circularis , vel quomodocunque curvus . and a multitude more of such passages , ( which , were it worth while to collect them , might be added as an appendix to epistolae obscurorum virorum , ) of which some are incongruous , some barbarous , some bald enough , and some manifest contradictions , or otherwise ridiculous but these are but negligences , as you call them , and therefore not attended with shame : for we doubt not but that , if you had particularly considered them , you could have mended them . only , me thinks , he that is so frequent in such language , need not have quarrelled with such harmelesse phrases as adducere malleum , or consideratur esse . but i go on . the other place ( which makes up the halfe dozen ) you talked much of it at first , yet before it comes to be printed , 't is dwindled to nothing . it was , that i had derived your athenian empusa , from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; and said it was a kind of hob goblin that hopped upon one legge , ( which you take to be a clinch , forsooth , because your name is hobs ; ) and hence it was that the boys play , now a daies in use , ( fox come out of thy hole , ) comes to be called empusa . this derivation you did , at first , cry out upon as very absurd ; and you meant to pay me for it : till you were informed , as i hear , by some of your friends , that the scholiast of aristophanes ( as good a critick as m. hobs ) had the same ▪ ( and so have eustathius , erasinus , caelius rhodiginus , s●ephanus , scapula , calepine , and others : ) and therefore you were advised not to quarrell with it . whereupon waving your main charge , you only tell mee ( pag. ult . ) that it doth not become my gravity , to tell you that empusa , your daem●nium atheniense , was a kind of hob-goblin , that hopped upon one legge ; and that thence a boys play , now in use , comes to be called ludus empusae . and withall , pray me to tell you , where it was that i read the word empusa , for the boys play i spake of ? to the question , i answer , that i read it so used in junius's nomenclator ; riders , and thomas's dictionary ; sufficient authors for such a businesse . and then as for the clinch you talk of , in hobs and hob-goblins , and the jest you suspect in hobbius , and hobbi , which you say , is lost to them beyond sea ; i hope that losse will never undoe mee : and when you can help me to a better english word for your daemoniū , thē hob-goblin ; or a better latin word for hobbes then hobbius ( whose vocative case , in good earnest , is hobbi , ) i shall be content , without any regret , to part with the jest , and the clinch too , to do you a pleasure ; who tell us presently after , that you meant to try your witt , to do something in that kind . and then shew your selfe as great a witt , as hitherto a critick . there is yet a seventh passage , p. . which may be referred also to this place . the words mathematicall definition do not please you those termes or words , which do most properly belong to mathematicks , we commonly call mathematicall termes , and the definitions of such termes , in mathematicks , mathematicall definitions . and is it not lawfull so to do ? no , you tell us . but why ? because it doth bewray another kind of ignorance . what ignorance ? an inexcusable ignorance . how doth it bewray it ? it is a marke of ignorance ; of ignorance inexcusable . ignorance of what ? ignorance of what are the proper works of the severall parts of philosophy . and , i pray , why so ? because it seems by this , that all this while , i think it is a piece of the geometry of euclide , no lesse to make the definitions he useth , then to inferre from them the theorems he demonstrates . a great crime , doubtlesse ! but how doth it appeare , that i think so ? may not a man recommend hellebor to you , as a good physicall drug , ( because used in physick , and proper for some diseases , ) unlesse he think , it is the physitians work to make it , as well as to make use of it ? but suppose i do ; what then ? do you believe no body thinks so , but i ? or do you believe , that any body thinks otherwise but you ? is it not proper for words of art , ( voces artis , ) to be defined and explained in that art to which they belong ? is it not proper for a grammarian to define gender , number , person , case , declension , coniugation &c. in the sense wherein they are used in grammer ? and for a logician to define genus , species , vniversale , individuum , argumentum , syllogisinus , &c. in the sense wherein they are used in logick ? and may not those be called grammaticall , and these logicall definitions ? and for a mathematitian , to define or tell what is a triangle , a cone , a parabolaster , what is multiplication , division , extraction of rootes , what is binomium , apotome , potens duo media , &c. and may not these definitions be called mathematicall ? no , by no means , you tell us , to call a definition mathematicall , physicall &c. is a marke of ignorance , of unexcusable ignorance . ( and doe you not think then , that gorraeus was a wise man , to write a large volumne in folio , intituled definitiones medicae ? ) but why a marke of ignorance ? because a mathematitian , in his definitions teach you but his language ( not his art ) but teaching language is not mathematick , nor logick , nor phisick , nor any other science , ( but some art perhaps , which men call grammar . ) some men would have thought that to define , had belonged to logick ; but let it passe for grammar at present . do you think , nothing , is mathematicall , wherein a man makes use of grammar ? can a man teach mathematicks , in any language , without grammer ? ( unlesse , perhaps , in the symbolick language , which is worse then welsh or irish . ) but you say , he that will understand geometry must understand the termes before he begin : ( because a man ought not to go into the water , before he can swim . ) well , but if not his definitions , what then is it , in euclide , that is mathematicall ? it is , you tell us , his inferring from them the theorems he demonstrats . ( and why not the solution of problems also ; as well as the inferring of theorems ? ) but to infer and to demonstradte , are , i suppose as much the work of logick ; as , to define , is the work of grāmar . and therefore , by the same reason for which you will not allow the definitions to be mathematicall , because to teach a language is the work of grammar , you must also exclude the propositions and demonstrations , because to inferre and demonstrate , is the work of logick . and so , nothing in euclide will be mathematicall . 't will be grammar and logick , all of it . and are not these pure criticismes ; think you ? do not these wofull notions of yours , and the language that doth accompany them , shew handsomely together ? but enough of this . sect . iii. concerning euclide : and the principles of geometry . we have seen your elegances already , in the first section , and then your critsicismes in the second . it 's time now to look upon your geometry . and i should here begin with your first lesson ; but that , by what we heard even now , you will not allow me to call it geometricall , or any peece of geometry , consisting , as it doth , of definitions . and yet , what ever the matter is , me thinks you come pretty neer it : for you call them principles of geometry . but you 'l say , perhaps , they be principles of geometry , but not geometricall principles , ( for to call any definitions geometricall , were as bad as to call them mathematicall , which were a marke of ignorance unexcusable . ) acutely resolved ! but , whatever else they be , principles they are without doubt . for , as you define p. . a principle , is , the beginning of something : and no man can deny , but that the first lesson is a beginning of something : and therefore , a principle . now contra principia , we know , non est disputandum . i must take heed therefore , what i say here . in this lesson , you take euclide to task , and give him his iurry : ( and when you have lesson'd him , it is to be hoped , wee will not think much to be lesson'd by you : ) and withall intermingle some principles of your own , for his and our correction and instruction : such as these , that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 can have no place in solid bodies . p. . ( because you know not how to distinguish between a mechanicall and a mathematicall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as knowing no other way of measuring but by the yard and the bushell , or at least by the pound . p. . & . ) and yet you tell us by and by . p. . that there may be in bodies , a coincidence in all points ( which coincidence , had it been greek , would have been as hard a word as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ) and that this may properly be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : and yet presently p. . you tel us again , that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath no place in solids ; nay more , nor in circular , or other crooked lines ; ( as though you did not know , that two equall arches of the same circumference , would 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ) that the length of t●me , is the length of a body . p. . ( as though he had not spoken absurdly , that said , profecto vide , bam fartum , tam diu , pointing to the length of his arme . ) that an angle hath quantity , though it he not the subject of quantity . p. . ( for there be octo modi habendi . ) that the quantity of an angle , is the quantity of an arch. p. . ( and why not as well of a sector , since sectors , as well as archs , in the same circle , be proportionall to their correspondent angles . ) that 't is a wonder to you , that euclide hath not any where defined , what are equalls , at least , what are equall bodies . p. . ( as though every body did not , without a definition , know what the word meanes . any clown can tell you , that those bodies are equall , which are both of the same bignesse . ) that homogeneous quantities are those which may be compared by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or application of their measures to one another . p. . ( and consequently , two solids cannot be homogeneous ; because , you say , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath no place in solids p. . & . and also , that incommensurable quantities , cannot be homogeneous ; because by d ▪ they have no common measure . ) that the quantity of time , and line are homogeneous , p. . because time is to be measured by the yard ; ( or , in your own words , because the quantity of time , is measured by application of a line to a line ; ) but why not , by the pint ? for you know time may be measured by the hour-glasse , as well as by the clock . and though the hand of a clock or diall , determine a line , yet the sand of an hour-glasse fills a vessell . that , line and angle have their quantity homogeneous , because their measure is an arch or arches of a circle applicable in every point to one another . p . ( as though you had forgot , that you told us but now , that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or application , hath no place in circular or crooked lines . ) and all hitherto , you say p. . is so plain and easy to be understood that we cannot without discovering our ignorance to all men of reason , though no geometricians , deny it . nay more , 't is new , 't is necessary , and 't is yours . very good ! now have at euclide . euclid's first definition , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. a marke is that of which there is no part ; is , you say , to be candidly construed , for his meaning is , that it hath parts , and that a good many . for a marke , or as some put instead of it , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which is a marke with a hot iron , is visible ; if visible then it hath quantity ; and consequently may be divided into parts innumerable p. . ( a witty argument ! 't is visible , therefore 't is divisible , but could you not as well have said , that a marke consists of two nobles ? for that is as much to the businesse , as a marke with a hot iron . ) nay more euclids definition , you say is the same with yours , which is , a point is that body whose quantity is not considered . lay them both together and look else . a marke is that of which there is no part . a point is that body , whose quantity is not considered . just the same to a cow's thumb . they begin both with the letter . as like , as an apple and a oyster . but by the way , how comes a point on a suddaine to be a body ? you told us just before , in the same page , p. . that a point is neither substance , nor quality , and therefore it must be quantity or else 't is nothing . if it be no substance , how can it be a body in your language ? but we have not done yet . prithee tell me , good tho. ( before we leave this point ) who t was told thee , that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was a marke with a hot iron ? for 't is a notion i never heard till now , ( and doe not believe it yet . ) never believe him againe , that told thee that lye ; for , as sure as can be , he did it to abuse thee . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies a distinctive point in writing , made with a pen or quill , not a mark made with a hot iron , such as they used to brand rogues and slaves with ; ( and accordingly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , distinguo , interstinguo , inter●ung● , &c. are oft so used ; ) it is also used of a mathematicall point ; or somewhat else that is very small : as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a moment , or point of time , and the like . what should come in your cap , to make you think , that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies a mark or brand with a hot iron ? i perceive where the businesse lies . 't was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 run in your mind , when you talked of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and , because the words are somewhat alike , you jumbled them b●●h together , according to your usuall care and accuratenes● 〈◊〉 as if they had been the same . ( just as when , in euclide 〈◊〉 you would have us believe that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is but one word . ) do you not think now , that a boy 〈◊〉 westminster schoole would have been soundly whipt for such a fault ? me thinks i heare his master ranting it at this rate ; how now sirrah ! is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , all one with you ? i 'le shew you a difference presently . take him up boyes . i 'le shew you how 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be made without a hot iron , i warrant you . and after a lash or two , thus goes on : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is a point made with a pen , quoth he ( with a lash ) will you remember that ? 't is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is a mark with a hot iron , ( lashing again , ) think upon that too . henceforth , quoth he , ( setting him down , ) remember the difference between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . the second definition . a line is length which hath no breadth ; you would have to be candidly interpreted also . if a man , you say , have any ingenuity , he will understand it thus , a line is a body &c. very likely ! the fourth definition , is this , a streight line is that which lies evenly between its own points . p. . well ; how is this to be understood ? nay , this definition is inexcusable . say you so ? let it passe then , and shift for its selfe as well as it can . it hath made a pretty good shift hitherto ; perhaps it may outlive this brunt also . but , because you are willing to lend it a helping hand , you say , he meant , perhaps , to call a streight line , that which is all the way from one extreme to another , equally distant from any two or more such lines , as being like and equall have the same extremes . it may be so . many strange things are possible . but it would have been a great while before i should have thought this to be the meaning of those words . the seventh definition , you say hath the same faults . then let that passe too ; and answer for it selfe as well as it can . the eighth , is the definition of a plain angle . against which you object onely this of your own , that by this definition , two right angles taken together are no angle . and 't is granted . euclide did not intend to call an aggregate of two right angles , by the name of an angle : and therefore gave such a definition of an 〈◊〉 , as would not take that in . where 's the fault then ? the thirteenth definit●●● , a terme or bound , is that which is the extreme of any thin● 〈◊〉 you say , is exact , ( very good ? ) but , that it makes against 〈◊〉 doctrine . what doctrine of mine ? viz. that a point is nothing . who told you , that this is my doctrine ? i have said , perhaps , that a point hath no hignesse ; or , that a point hath no parts , ( and so said euclide in his first definition , ) but when or where did i say , it is nothing ? but how do you prove hence , that a point hath parts ? because , you say , the extremes of a line are points . true. what then ? a point therefore , you say , is a part . it doth not follow . how prove you this consequence , if an extreme , then a part ? but , say you , what in a line is the extreme , but the first or last part ? i answer ; a point , which is no part . have you any more to say ? — if you have no more to say , then heare mee . a point is the extreme of a line : therefore it hath no parts . i prove it thus ; because , if that point have parts ; then , either all its parts are extreme , and bound the line , or some one , or more : not all : for they cannot be all utmost ; but one must stand beyond another : if onely some , or one ; then not the point , but some part of it , bounds the line , which is contrary to the supposition . you see , therefore , the definition doth not make against my doctrine . the fourteenth definition of euclide , you would have abbreviated thus . a figure is quantity every way determined , and then tell us , it is in your opinion as exact a definition of a figure as can possibly be given . but i am not of your opinion ; for by this definition of yours , a streight line ( of a determinate length ) must as well be a figure , as a circle . for such a line , having no other dimension but length , if its length be determined , it is every way determined ; that is , according to all the dimensions it hath . ( if you object , that it hath no determinate breadth ; i answer , the breadth of a streight line is as much determined , as the thicknesse of a circle , or other plain figure . ) and , by the same reason , a pound , a pint , a hundred , an hour , &c. must be figures , because they are quantities every way determined , viz. according to all the dimensions that those words import . this definition of euclide , — ( stay a while , the definition mentioned is not euclides , nor equivalent to it his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , imports more then your determined . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . should be rendred a figure , is that which is every way encompassed by some bound , or boundes . which can be only in such a quantity as hath locall extension ; and that , finite . ) but the definition , you say , ( whose soever it be ) cannot possibly be imbraced by us who carry double , namely mathematicks and theology ; ) but by you it seems , it may , who carry simple , and care not how destructive your principles are to theology . ) your definition , we ( whether theologers or mathematicians ) cannot admit ; for the reason by us already assigned . but it seems you have a farther reach in it : le ts hear what it is . for this determination , say you , is the same thing with circumscription . a locall determination , intended by euclide , is so . but what then ? and whatsoever is any where ( ubicunque ) definitivè , is there also circumscriptivé . how do you prove this ? or how doth this follow from the other ? — you cannot but know this is generally denyed . have you any thing to offer by way of proof ? — not a word . well ; but what is it you drive at ? you offer nothing of proofe , for what you affirme ( by your own confession ) against all divines , or as you call them theologers . but le ts see what you would gather from it . by this means , you say , the distinction is lost , by which theologers , when they deny god to be in any place , save themselves from being accused of saying he is nowhere ; for that which is nowhere is nothing . 't is true , that divines do ●ay , ( and i hope you 'l say so too ) that god is not bounded , or circumscribed , within the limits of any place ; because they say , and do believe , there is no place where he is not . and he that saies the latter , must needs say the former . for to say that god , who is every where , & fills all places ; is yet bounded within certain limits ; were a contradiction . for , to be concluded within certain limits , is to be excluded from all places without those limits ; and therefore not to be every where . and if this be not your opinion too , speak out , if you can for shame , that the world may see what you are . do you believe , that what thing soever is at all any where , ( not excepting god himselfe ) must needs be circumscribed within some certain bounds , so as not to be without or beyond them ? and that whatsoever is not , in any place so circumscribed , is no where , and therefore nothing ? if so ; then whether of the two do you affirme ? that god is so circumscribed or concluded within certain limits , and excluded from all others at the same time ? or , that he is not so concluded , and therefore no where , and so nothing ? if you say the first , you deny god to be infinite : if the second you deny him to bee . and , either way , you may without injury be affirmed to maintain horrid opinions concerning god. as for that distinction of definitivè and circumscriptivè , with which you say the theologers think to save themselves : you are wholly out in the businesse : theologers use not that distinction in this case . it 's true , that , in the case of angells , and the soules of men , there are that affirme them to be in loco definitivè , but not circumscriptivè : because though they be not bodies , and so locally extended per positionem partis extra partem ; yet neither are they infinite , or every where , but have a definite , determinate existence , as to be here , and not at the same time elsewhere . but as to god , we neither affirme him to be circumscribed , nor to be confined within any bounds ; but to be infinite and every where . and if any be so absurd as to affirme that god is determined within some place , so as not to be at the same time without or beyond it , whether by circumscription or definition , we shall without scruple , ( notwithstanding that we carry double , ) reject the distinction so applied , and your opinion with it , without fear of being cast out from the society of all divines . but in the mean while , i wonder how this definition of euclide comes to have any thing to doe with this businesse . a figure , saith euclide , is that which is incompassed within some bound or bounds . well , what then ? will you assume but god is a figure ? and then conclude , that , if god be at all any where , he must be so concluded within bounds ? if you do , you argue profanely enough , and deserve as bad epithites as any have been yet bestowed upon you . we should rather , admitting euclides definition , argue thus , a figure is concluded within certain bounds ; but god is not so concluded , ( as being infinite , and so without bounds ; ) therefore god is not a figure : and be neither in danger of being cast out of the mathematick schooles , nor yet , from the society of schoole-divines . the fifteenth definition , which is , of a circle , you grant to be true . and skip over the rest to the five and twentieth , which is , of parallell streight lines . this definition you think to be lesse accurate , and think your own to be better : but of this it will be time enough , if need be , to consider in its proper place . after this , you let all the definitions passe untouched , till the third of the fift book . saving that you touch by the way , on the fourth of the third book , which you grant to be true : and the first of the fift book , which , you say , may passe for a definition of an aliquot part , as was by euclide intended . but , the third definition of the fift book ( the definition of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ratio , ) you say , is intollerable . yea 't is as bad as any thing was ever said in geometry by d. wallis . ( because forsooth , you can make nothing of it , but this , that proportion is a what-shall-i call it asnesse or sonesse of two magnitudes &c. ) yet this definition hath hitherto been permitted to passe , and may do still . and when you understand it a little better , perhaps you may think so too . but of this i have discoursed more at large , in a peculiar treatise against meibomius : and shall therefore forbear to examine it here . against the fourth definition , you object nothing , but that the sixt might be spared . the fourteenth , you say is good . and tell us farther , that the composition here defined , is not the same composition which he defineth in the fourth def . before the sixth book . and you say true ; for this is a composition by addition , and that is composition by multiplication . and therefore do not think much if hereafter i shall say , that there be two compositions of proportion . to the rest of his definitions you give a generall approbation . his postulata you allow also : and so give over lessoning of euclide : but tell us before you part , that a man may easily perceive , that euclide did not intend , that a point should be ( without parts , which you call ) nothing ; or a line , without latitude ; or a superficies , without thicknesse : though it be evident that he hath defined them so to be . but why must we not think , he meant as he saith ? ( because , say you , lines are not drawn but by motion , and motion is of body only . a pretty argument , and worth marking ! like that above , of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a mark or brand with a hot iron . sect . iv. concerning the angle of contact . having dore schooling of euclide ; in your second lesson you fall upon us . four peeces of mine , you take to task . p. . ( my elenchus of your geometry ; my treatise concerning the angle of contact ; and that of conick sections ; and my arithmetica infinitorum . ) yet have not been able to find , either one false proposition , or so much as a false demonstration ; in any one of them . yet , that you may seem to say something , you 'l blunder on , though you break your shinnes for it . and you 'd have it thought , that you have wholly and clearly confuted them ep. ded. ( for you use to make clear work where you goe , ) and that i have performed nothing in any of my books . p. this is the charge . let 's see how you can make it good . wee 'l begin with that of the angle of contact ; which you undertake in your third lesson . p. . the subject of that treatise , is , a controversy between clavius and peletarius . clavius is of opinion , that the angle of a semicircle eac ( fig. . ) is lesse then the rectilineal right angle pac ; because that is but a part of this ; the other part eap , the angle of contact , ( which with that of the semicircle makes the right angle pac , ) being , as he supposeth , an angle of some bignesse . peletarius is of opinion , that the angle eac , is equall to pac ; and not a part of it , but the whole ; the supposed angle pae being , as he thinks , no angle , or an angle of no bignesse . this being the state of the controversy : i take peletarius his part . and my first argument is from the nature of a plain angle , which euclide defines to be the mutuall inclination of two lines &c. and therefore the lines ea , pa , in the point of concurse a , not being at all inclined each to other ; but in the same coincident position without inclination ; they do not contain an angle . the tendency of the circumference ean , before it comes at the point a , is towards the tangent pt ; when it 's past that point , the tendency is from it ; but in the point a , it doth neither tend toward it , nor from it , nor crosse it ; and therefore must be either in parallell position , or coincident . and this argument is managed in the and chapters . you tell us to this , that peletarius did not well — clavius did not well — euclide did not well — that is , you think so . and it 's like , you think , i have done worst of all . but i doe not much stand upon your thoughts . you say particularly , p. . that i am more obscure then euclide . ( it may be so . ) that i am contrary to him , ( that you are to prove . ) that i make two lines when they ly upon one another , to lye 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , without inclination : i do so . shew me if you can , where euclide saith the contrary . tell mee , where lines , either in the same or in parallell positions , are by euclide said to incline or be inclined each to other ? to thwart , or crosse each other ? according to euclide , you say , an angle equall to two right angles should be the greatest inclination , and so the greatest angle , where as , by this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , it should be the least that can be , or rather no angle . shew me where ever euclide doth acknowledge any angle to be equall to two right angles ? or , which is all one , that too contiguous parts of the same right line , are by euclide said to be inclined to each other , or to contain an angle ? nay he says the quite contrary . for in his definition of a plain angle , he makes it one qualification , that the lines containing it , must be such as are non indirectum positae . and therefore two streight lines in directum positae ( such as those must needs be , which are to contain your supposed angle equall to two right angles ) cannot , by euclides definition , contain an angle . we do not therefore in this disagree . you adde farther , ( as giving this for lost , though it be granted ( as it must needs be ) that there be no inclination of the circumference to the tangent ( and consequently no angle ; by that definition of euclide . ) yet it doth not follow that they forme no kind of angle . and why doth it not follow ? because say you , euclide there defines but one of the kinds of a plain angle . that euclide doth not there define , an angle in general or all kinds of angles , is very true ; for there be many other both superficiall and solid angles , which are not plain angles : but that he doth there define a plain angle in generall , and therefore all kinds of plain angles is evident frō his words . for in the eighth definition he defines a plain angle , ( as the genus ) a plain angle , saith he , is the mutuall inclination of two lines , &c. and then in the next definition , defines a right lined plain angle , ( as one species of it ) viz. when both these lines be right lines . it 's manifest therefore that he intended in the former definition to define a plain angle in generall ; whether the lines containing it be streight or crooked . and therefore since the angle of contact falls not within that definition , it is not to be reputed a plain angle . and so my first argument stands good . the second , is an argument of peletarius , drawn from the first proposition of the tenth of euclide ; ( and enforced likewise by me , from the second proposition of the first of archimedes de sphaera & cylindro : ) to which clavius rejoyns , that the proposition is to be understood only of homogeneous quantities ; & ; of such , grants the argument to proceed . and you ; supposing these to be heterogeneous , say , it is like as to seek for the focus of the parabola of dives and lazarus . to your scoff at scripture , i reply only this , that the focus of that parabola is a bad place to be in , & wish you to take heed of it . with clavius , we joyn issue ; granting the propositions cited not to be understood of heterogeneous quantities ; and prove these not to be such ; by this argument : if any thing make the angle of contact pae , to be heterogeneous to a rectilineal angle ; it must be the crookednesse of the side ae . ( for if that side were streight ; the angle were rectilineall ; ) but that hinders not , ( for i prove the angles cae , and sae , notwithstanding the same side ae , are homogeneous to right lined angles ; as you grant , and clavius could not deny : ) therefore nothing hinders . and this is done in my fift chapter . what clavius had brought to prove the contrary , is answered in the sixth chapter . and if you had not thought his arguments to be all answered , you should have done well to have undertaken the managing of some one of them . that you mention , doth only , upon supposition that it is a quantity , prove it to be heterogeneall ; because not homogeneall . which is to beg the question . for we , as well as he , deny it to be a homogeneall quantity ; and therefore conclude it to be no quantity ; for heterogeneous it is not . his argument amounts but to this , 't is not a quantity homogeneous , ( by d ) therefore 't is a quantity heterogeneous . i grant his antecedent , but deny the consequence ( which proceeds only upon supposition that it is a quantity , which is the thing in question . ) he should first have proved it to be a quantity ; which peletarius and i deny . in the seventh chapter i prove , by other arguments , that if the angle of contact be an angle , it must be homogeneous to rectilineal angles . . that which may be added to , or subtracted from , a right lined angle , is homogeneous to it : because heterogeneous quantities are not capable of addition , or subduction . ( and this you grant . ) but so here ; for pae if an angle , may be added to the angle sap , making the angle sae ; ( which therefore , saies clavius , is bigger then sap ; ) and taken from the angle pac , leaving the angle eac , ( which therefore , saies clavius , is lesse then pac ; ) therefore , if an angle , it is homogeneous you grant the major ; and deny the minor : that is , you deny the only foundation upon which clavius builds his opinion ; and so yeeld the cause . for he doth upon no other ground maintain the angle of the semicircle eac , to be lesse then the right angle pac , but because the angle of contact pae , is a part of it , and therefore the other part eac , must be lesse then the whole . . those which are to each other as greater and lesse , have proportion each to other ; and are consequently homogeneous ; by the third def . of the fift of euclide . ( and this you grant . ) but , the angle of contact pae , is lesse then the angle sap ; by the of the third of euclide ; ( for his words are , that it is lesse then any right lined angle . ) and this clavius would not deny , but oft affirmes it . therefore they be homogeneous . all that you have to say is , that though euclide say it is lesse , yet ( to your understanding ) he doth not mean so . but doth he not , to your understanding prove , that the least right lined angle is bigger th●n it ? and if so , supposing it to be angle , must it not be homogeneous ? even by your own concession . to the third and fourth arguments in that chapter , you object nothing ; and therefore those , i suppose , you allow to conclude what is contended for . viz. that the angle of contact is not heterogeneous to other plain angles : and therefore , this being the only exception , my first main argument stands good . the eight chapter you say , contains nothing but the authority of sir henry savile . and you say true ; for no more was intended . the third main argument is proposed in the ninth chapter ; because the angles of semicircles ( because like segments ) are equall . whence peletarius infers , that the angle of contact is no quantity . clavius grants the consequence of the argument ; but denies the antecedent : affirming dac ( fig. , ) to be lesse then eac , though both angles of semicircles , this of the bigger , that of the lesse . to this you say , that in my and chapters i prove with much adoe , that the angles of like segments are equall : ( if i prove it , though with much adoe , then i carry the cause ; for that was the only thing denied by clavius . but you adde ) as if that might not have been taken gratis by peletarius , without demonstration : ( implying thereby , that i need not have proved it . ) and this is like your selfe , who care not how you abuse your english reader . the case is thus . peletarius had taken it gratis , as a thing that in reason should not have been denied him . yet 't is denied by clavius ; and the whole issue of the cause put upon it . had i not reason then to prove it ? yet i prove it thus ; first , that peletarius had reason to take it gratis , and that it was unreasonable in clavius to put him upon the proofe ; and this is done in the ninth chapter . but then , because he had denyed it , how unreasonable soever it were so to doe , and withall put the whole issue of the cause upon it ; therefore in the tenth chapter i undertake to prove it by argument . and you grant , i prove it. what should i doe more ? the th chapter clears the same argument from a seeming difficulty . and you say nothing to it , but that the objection was of no moment , and needed no answer . to the arguments of the and chapters , ( and those are a pretty many , for in one of them are contained six , ) your answer is ( and that 's all ) that they are grounded all on this untruth , that an angle , is that which is contained between the lines that make it , that is to say , is a plain superficies . which is ( i will not say a lye , though that also be your language , but ) manifestly false ; and you could not but know it so to bee . for there is not , in those whole chapters any such thing assumed for proofe ; nor doth any one of those arguments depend upon any such notion ; but let your notion of angle be what it can , my arguments will hold their weight . this therefore is nothing but a notorious untruth , wherewith ( because you had nothing to say to the arguments ) you meant to abuse your english reader . but suppose i had said , ( as it is like i may sometimes ) that an angle is contained by , or between the two sides ; is this any more then to say that the two sides contain the angle ? and doth not every body say so as well as i ? are they not euclide's own words , d . when the lines ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) containing or comprehending the angle be right lines , the angle is called rectilineall ? nay are they not your own words , cap. . § . anguli qui rectis continentur lineis , rectilinei ; qui curvis , anguli curvilinei sunt ; qui recta & curva continentur , misti ? what a doe then doe you make for nothing ? perhaps the word between troubles you . but is not by and between in this case all one ? it is to mee ; and if you doe not like the one word take the other ; 't is all one to mee , ( but , by the way , the phrase , contain between , is not so much as once used in either of those chapters : and therefore that cavill is to no purpose at all , but to abuse your english reader , who cannot contradict you . ) and doth not euclide's word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signify to contain between ? and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the lines which do comprehend , ( or contain between them ) the angle ? nay doe not you your selfe use it again and again , cap. . § . ad quantitatem anguli neque longitudo , neque aequalitas aut inaequalitas linearum quae angulum comprehendunt , quicquam faciunt , idem enim angulus est qui comprehenditur inter ab & ac , cum eo qui comprehenditur inter ae & af , vel inter ab & af. and again cap. . parag . . angulus qui cont●netur inter ab & eandem ab &c. and soon after , angulus qui sit inter gb & bk , aequalis est angulo qui sit inter gb & arcum bc. ( which is also retained in the english . ) and so elsewhere . but say you , to say that an angle is contained between the lines that make it , is as much as to say , that it is a plain superficies . and was it so when you wrote those passages last cited ? were you then of opinion that the angle contained or comprehended between the lines ab and ac , ( as you there speak , ) was a plain superficies ? or , if those words do not import so much when you speak them , why should you think they doe when i speak them ? but , it seems , having nothing else to cavill at , you thought fit to tell your english reader , who must take it upon trust from you , that i affirme a plain angle , to be a plain superficies , because , forsooth , i say ( as euclide and all others doe , and your selfe among the rest , ) that it is contained between two lines . you might , with much better logick , have concluded the contrary for though euclide , as i doe , said that two streight lines may comprehend an angle , d . yet he affirmes , that two streight lines cannot comprehend a superficies , ax . and therefore , when i affirme that an angle may be comprehended between two streight lines , you might ( at least a sober-man might ) have concluded , that i did not take it for a superficies , because that cannot be comprehended by fewer streight lines then three . but enough of this . and , if this be all you have to say against the arguments of the and chapters , i hope they may passe for current : and be judged to conclude the cause . to that of the last chapters ( as you speak ) where i prove the same from a proposition of vitellio : ( which proposition of his i doe also vindicate from an exception of cabbaeus : ) you object nothing , but that i defend vitellio without need ( and yet i had there told you , that cabbaeus denies his argument : ) for say you there is no doubt but whatsoever c●ooked line be touched by a streight line , the angle of contingeuce will neither adde any thing to , nor take any thing from a rectilineall right angle ; that is , there is no doubt but that clavius was in the wrong , and i in the right , all the way : for this was the very thing that was in controversy betwixt us . and so you have brought your confutation to a good catastrophe . and thus much for the angle of contact . sect . v. arithmetica infinitorum , vindicated . let 's see now what you have to say against my arithmetica infinitorum . five propositions you there take to taske ; the first , the third , the fift , the nineteenth , and the thirty ninth . the first you , you say , is this lemma ; in a series of quantities arithmetically proportionall , beginning with a point or cyphar , ( as for example , , , , , &c. ) to find the proportion of the aggregate of them all , to the aggregate of so many times the greatest as there are termes . very true , this is the first proposition ; what then ? this you say , is to be done by multiplying the greatest into halfe the number of termes . what is to be done thus ? finding the proportion ? no such matter . that 's the way to find the summe , ( upon supposition that the proportion is already known to be , as to , ) not to find out what is the proportion , ( supposing it yet unknown , ) which the lemma proposeth to be inquired , and finds it to be as to . but 't is well however that you can at length tell how to gather the summe of such a proportion ( after i had taught you in my elenchus , ) for you were , it seems , of an other opinion , when you said cap. . parag . . in hujusmodi progressione ( . . . . . &c. ) summa numerorum omnium simul sumptorum , aequalis est semissi ejus numeri qui fit a maximo termino ducto in minimum , id est , hoc loco in ciphram . which you now confesse pag. . to be a great error . you go on , and say , the demonstration is easie . but how , say you , do i demonstrate it ? you should have asked rather , how i find it , ( then how i demonstrate it : ) for that was it the lemma proposed . but you are so well acquainted with the analyticks , that you know not how to distinguish between the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . by the first we find out the solution of a problem ; by the second we prove it . now if you can find a more naturall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or way of finding out the solution of this and the other problems ( for i was here shewing a generall method for this and others that follow , ) pray let us know it in your next , and i shall thank you for it . but doe not talk of demonstrating , when i propose the finding out ; for , if you doe , i shall say , that 's nothing to the purpose . you tell us next , that an induction , without a numeration of all the particulars is not sufficient to inferre a conclusion . yes , sir , if after the enumeration of some particulars , there comes a generall clause , and the like in other cases , ( as here it doth ) this may passe for a proofe , till there be a possiblity of giving some instance to the contrary ; which , here , you will never be able to doe . and if such an induction may not passe for proofe , there is never a proposition in euclide demonstrated . for all along he takes no other course then such , ( or at least grounds his demonstrations on propositions no otherwise demonstrated . ) as for instance ; he proposeth it in generall e . to mak an equilater triangle on a line given . and then shews you how to doe it upon the line 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he there shews you : and leaves you to supply , and the same by the like meanes , may be done upon any other streight line ; and then inferres his generall conclusion . yet i have not heard any man object , that the induction was not sufficient , because he did not actually performe it in all lines possible . you then aske , whether it be not also true in these numbers , , , , , &c. or , , , , & c ? yes , and in these also ( which perhaps you would little think ) , √ , √ , √ , √ , √ , &c. but why , say you , doe i then limit it to the numbers , , , , , & c ? i should rather wonder why you think i doe . no wise man would have thought it ; when he sees that i speak in generall of any series in continued arithmeticall progression , that begins with a point or ciphar . and there had been no colour , for you to aske such a question , if , in reciting my proposition , you had not in stead of saying as , for example , said only as . for doubtlesse those are continued . arithmeticall progressions beginning with a ciphar ; and they are also juxta naturalem numerorum consecutionem , that is , like progressions to those of the naturall numbers , , , , &c. you ask then ( very wisely ) whether it will hold in , , , , . i answer , no. ( nor is any such thing affirmed . ) because , , , are not arithmetically proportionall . and when you have done catechizing us , you then conclude , well , the lemma is true : ( in good time ! ) that is as much as to say , you were willing to shew your teeth though you cannot bite . what 's next ? the first theorem that i draw from it , is , you say , that a triangle to a parallelogram of equall base and altitude , is as one to two . well ; and what of this ? the conclusion you say is true . very good , then two of the five have scaped already . but you doe not like of the demonstration , because of the words as it were ( and the like exception you took before , at the word scarce , ) which you say , is no phrase of a geometrician . yes sir ; a very good phrase , if the geometrician doe determine precisely ( as i have done ) how much by that quasi he intends to limit the accuratè . for i doe not suffer either the scarce , or the as it were , to runne at randome without bounds . i tell you that by quasi linea , or vix aliud quam linea , i doe not meane precisely a line , but a parallologramme whose breadth is very small , viz. an aliquot part of the whole figures altitude , denominated by the number of parallelogramms . ( which is a determination geometrically precise . ) and by triangulum constat quasi , &c. i tell you that i mean , that a figure , consisting of such parallelogramms , inscribed in a triangle , whose difference in bignesse from that triangle is lesse then any assignable quantity , is so constituted . as you may see precisely determined in the place to which this demonstration referres . the words therefore vix and quasi , being thus determined , are here very good geometricall words ; and your cavills come to nothing . my fift proposition is , you say , the spirall line is equall to half the circle of the first revolution . but , in saying so , you say not true . for that is not my proposition ; but one of your own , patched together , after your fashion , out of my fift and sixth put together . and , as it stands , i cannot own it . the words of the first revolution , should have been adjoyned to the spirall line , not to the word circle : to shew how much of the spirall line is intended . and , instead of halfe the circle , you should have said , halfe the circumference of the first circle ; for i did not compare the spirall line with the circle ( that is , a line , with a figure , ) but that spirall line with the circumference , ( viz. as to , ) and the spirall figure , with the circle , ( viz. as to ) and the circle you intend , is not by mee , or by archimedes , called the circle of the first revolution , but the first circle ; which is conterminate with the first revolution of that spirall line . but if you will needs have my fifth and sixth propositions put together , pray let it be thus , that so much of the spirall line , in the sense of the proposition , as belongs to the first revolution , is equall to halfe the circumference of the first circle . now in what sense i take the words spirall line , in these propositions , is so clearly defined in the scholium of pag. . that it is not possible for any man , unlesse willfully , to mistake mee . viz. that i doe not intend the true spirall of archimedes , but the aggregate of the arches of infinite like sectors , constituting a figure inscribed within that spirall of archimedes . and thus , both those and the other propositions are true . nor can you deny them . but now because you have nothing to say against the proposition in the true sense of it : you will needs perswade mee , ( because you know what i meant better then my selfe . ) that i did not so mean , nor would be understood , so , as i said , i meant and desired to be understood ; but that i meant somewhat else . and you have this ground for it ; because in the sense wherein i said i would have it understood , the proposition is true ; but you have a desire that it should be false ; and therefore it must be understood in some other sense . let 's see therefore what it is , that i may at length know what it was i meant . what spirall is meant , you say , we shall understand by the construction . yes , if you take in the whole construction ; but not by a peece of it . my construction begins thus , let a streight line ma , turned about the center m , be supposed , by a uniforme motion , to describe , with its point a , the circumference aoa ; whilest a point in the same line , so carried about , is supposed to describe a spirall line mta . this is the first part of the construction ; ( and from hence i inferre , by the way , that the streight lines mt will be proportionall to the angles amt , and the archs ao . ) this therefore , say you , is the spirall of archimedes . very true : and it was intended so to be . but let 's goe on and heare the rest of the construction , ( for hitherto we have had but a part of it . ) which if you may be believed , is this ; inscribing in the circle an infinite multitude of equall angles , and consequently an infinite number of sectors , whose archs will therefore be in arithmeticall proportion ; ( which , you say , is true ; ) and the aggregate of those archs equall to halfe the circumference aoa . which , you say , is true also . but , if i had said so , i had lyed ; for i know it to be false : ( in you it was only an error , or , as you use to call it , a negligence ; because you thought it had been true . ) for this is neither my construction , nor are those things true which you affirme . for , if in a circle , there be a number of sectors inscribed ( whether finite or infinite ) both those sectors , and the archs of them , are proportionall to their angles ; and therefore , the angles being equall , the archs will be equall also , and not arithmetically proportionall : and the aggregate of those archs , will not be equall to half the circumference aoa , but , to that whole circumference . but my construction was this ; within the spirall line , described as above , supposing an infinite multitude of sectors continually inscribed on equall angles , their radii at will be arithmetically proportionall , viz. as , , , , and consequently their archs will be so too . and this , i suppose , is that which you intended to grant as true ; being the result of the second part of my construction . then followes the third part of the construction ( which hath the nature of a definition ; which , till thus much of the construction was past , could not conveniently be expressed , ) the spirall line ( intended in the proposition , not that of archimedes ) is supposed therefore to be made up , of the archs of those infinite sectors , arithmetically proportionall ( for so they are already proved to be ) beginning with a point or o. ( and then goes on the demonstration . ) but the circumference consists of so many archs equall to the biggest of them ; as is evident . therefore ( by the second prop. ) that to this , is as one to two . which is the thing to be proved . now this , to some capacities , though not to m. hobs , would have been easy enough to understand . yet that it might not lye open to any cavill , or misunderstanding ; i thought fit in a particular scholium , to expresse my meaning so fully , as that there might be no possibility of mistaking what i intended . ( and , the truth is , i would have had that scholium printed next after the fifth proposition . but finding , that , through some neglect , the printer had there left it out , i gave him order to put it in , at the next convenient place ; which was , in the next sheet , at the end of the proposition : a place proper enough for it . ) and you cannot deny , but that my words there , be plain enough to be understood , and not capable of any distortion to any other sense . and that the proposition in this sense is true , you cannot deny ; and so much ( i suppose ) you intended to grant , when you said , that the aggregate of those archs is equall to halfe the circumference aoa , is true also . three therefore of the five are already found to be true . my . prop. you say , is this lemma . in a series of quantities , beginning from a point or ciphar , and proceeding according to the order of square numbers , ( as for example , , , , , &c. ) to find what proportion the whole series hath , to so many times the greatest . 't is true ; this is my proposition . what then ? i conclude , you say , the proportion is that of to . no sir , i do not conclude it to be so . i conclude it to greater then that of one to three . my words are these , ratio proveniens est ubique major quam subtripla excessus autem perpetuo decrescit prout numerus terminorum augetur , &c. ut sit rationis provenientis excessus supra subtriplam , ea quam habet unitas ad sextuplum numeri terminorum p●st o. that is in plain english thus . the series so increasing , is alwaies more then a third part of so many times the greatest . for it containes evermore , a third part thereof , and moreover , an aliquot part denominated by six times the number of termes following the o. and is not this true ? can you have the face to deny it ? wee 'l try if you please ; take your own instances . let the series be of three termes , , , the aggregate is : the greatest so many times taken , that is times , is . i say contains of , a third part ( viz. = ⅓ × . ) and moreover a part denominated by times , ( for there are two termes besides o. ) that is a twelfth part of the number . ( viz. = / ; × . ) and is not this true ? is not = × ? again , let the termes be four , viz , , , , . = . and the greatest so many times taken , , , . = . i say that containes ⅓ of , ( that is , ) and moreover , ( because × = ) / of , ( that is . ) and is it not true , that is equall to + ? i think it is . again , let the termes be five , viz. , , , , , = . and therefore so many times the greatest is , , , , , = . i say that contains , ⅓ of , that is / & moreover ¼ of ; ( because × = ) that is / ● . and is it not so ? is not ⅔ + ½ = ? you may try it farther if you please . my skill for yours , 't will hold . ( and that 's fair odds in a wager . ) the proposition therefore is true thus farre . well but i said farther ; that though the proposition be still more then the subtriple ; yet the excesse doth still decrease . doe you not think that true too ? if not , let 's try . if the termes be three , you see the proportion is as to , that is as ⅓ + ½ to . if four , the proportion is as to , that is ½ + ½ to . if five , then as ⅓ + / to . &c. as we have seen already . but the proportion of ⅓ + ● to , is more then of ⅓ + ½ to , and yet this more then ⅓ + / to . and so forward . but you forsooth would faine perswade us , that as the number of termes increase , so the proportion increaseth . as if the proportion of ⅓ + / to , were greater then that of ⅓ + / to one . and yet would pretend to understand proportions , and tell us what m. oughtreds meaning is &c. as if we did not understand m. oughtred , and his meaning too , better then you . but , by the way , i wonder how you durst touch m. oughtred for fear of catching the scab . for , doubtlesse , his book is as much covered over with the scah of symbolls , as any of mine . which makes me think , you understand his and mine much alike . i adde farther , ( though not in this proportion , ) that the proportion doth so decrease , as that ( though it be never lesse then a subtriple , yet ) the excesse above the subtriple , will by degrees vanish , as the number of termes increaseth , till it grow lesse then any assignable quantity . and it is proved thus : because the second fraction , which with ⅓ makes up the antecedent of the proportion , whose consequent is ; doth proportionally decrease , as the number of termes doth increase . and therefore , as the number of termes may increase beyond any assignable number : so may the excesse decrease below any assignable quantity . and , if the number of termes be supposed infinite , the proportion will be infinitely near to the subtriple . but you tell us upon this , ( and wittily doubtlesse , as you suppose , by a sly transition from the phrase infinitely near , to that of eternally nearer , ) you tell us , i say , that if the proportions come eternally nearer and nearer to the subtriple , ( supposing them at first bigger then it , which you should have added , for else the case alters , ) they must also come eternally nearer and nearer to the subquadruple , and so to the subquintuple , &c. i grant it . but what then ? it doth not follow , that if it come eternally nearer to the subquadruple , then it will come infinitely neare , or nearer then any assignable difference ; for it can never , upon that supposition , come nearer to it then the subtriple . like as the hyperbole , doth eternally come nearer and nearer to its asymptote , and consequently , will eternally come nearer also to a parallell that lyes beyond it ; but not infinitely near ; for , since that it never pas●es the asymptote , though it doe eternally approach , yet it never comes nearer to that parallell , then the asymptote doth . and indeed if it should , it could not eternally approach to the asymptote , but so soon as it is passed it , it would then grow farther and farther from the asymptote , while it doth approach to the parallell beyond it . and , in the present case , this proportion which doth eternally approach , and may come infinitely neer to the subtriple , doth indeed eternally approach , but not come infinitely near , to the subquadruple . for it never comes nearer to it , then is the subtriple . and i would not have you think us such weak mathematicians , or such young birds , as to be caught with such chaffe , or not see through so weak a fallacy as that is . and therefore when you inferre , that we may as well conclude thence , that the proportion , is as one to four , or one to five , &c. ( supposing the number of termes infinite ) as to conclude , it is as one to three : we suppose that you would have us think withall , either that you doe not speak in good earnest , or else that you are not well in your wits : for otherwise , doubtlesse you cannot be so simple as to believe it . there is but one proposition more that you undertake to deal with . which is the , viz. this lemma , in a series of quantities beginning with a point or cipher , and proceeding according to the series of cubick numbers , ( as for example , , , , , &c. ) to find what proportion the whole series hath to so many times the greatest . and you deal with this , just as you did with the last . first you mis-recite it , and then say 't is false . i conclude , you say , that they have the proportion of to . which is false , i do not so conclude ; but that it is more then so ; viz. it contains a fourth part , and moreover another aliquot part , denominable by four times the number of termes following the cipher . that is , if the termes be three , the proportion is as ¼ + / to . if four , it is as ¼ + / to . if five , it is as ¼ + / to . and so forward . and if you make triall , you shall find it so to be . ( for + + = ; and + + = . now is equall to ¼ + / of , viz. to + . so + + + = . and + + + = . now is equall to ¼ + / of , viz. to + . so + + + + = ; and + + + + = . now is equall to 〈◊〉 + / of , viz. to + . and so of the rest . ) if you think it to be otherwise ; shew , if you can , one instance to the contrary . the proposition therefore is true ; but you had not the honesty to report it right . ( or else your witts were at wooll-gathering . ) and so of all those five propositions which you have taken to taske , there is not any one faulty . and i should now have done with this businesse , but that i discern , upon these two last propositions , your reason why you are so much out of charity with the symbolick tongue . 't is very hard , you have told us diverse times ; yet here , it seems , you mean to try what you could doe at it . and 't is to be hoped , you may , in time , learne the language ; for you be come to great a already . ( but truly were it not that you must defend your reputation , you tell us , you should not have done so much . ) but such pittifull work dost thou make with poor great a , and to so little purpose , that if there were no better use to be made of symbols , then so , it 's pitty they should ever be used at all . and truly , were i great a , before i would be willing to be so abused , i should wish my selfe little a , an hundred times . yet thus much , i confesse you have done : you have clearly convinced me , that you have reason not to be much in love with symbols . for to what purpose ? since you can neither use , nor understand them . and truly , upon this very account , i am apt to think , that much of your chapter , is none of your own . well ; arithmetica infinitorum is come off clear . wee 'l see next what you have to say to conick sections . sect . vi. my treatise of conick sections vindicated . as for my treatise of conick sections , you say , it is so covered over with the scab of symbols , that you had not the patience to examine whether it be well or ill demonstrated . a very fine way of confutation ; and with much case . you have not the patience to examine it , ( that is , in plain english , you do not understand it , ) ergo i have performed nothing in any of my books ( for that is the inference in the same page , p. . ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . but , sir , must i be bound to tell you a tale , and find you ears too ? is it not lawfull for me to write symbols , till you can understand them ? sir , they were not written for you to read , but for them that can . however , whether you understand it or not , yet somewhat you observe , you say , ( though you have not the patience to examine whether it be well or ill . ) pray le ts heare your observations ; ( for they be like to be wise ones . ) you observe , you say , that i find a tangent to a point given in a section , by a diameter given : ( very good ; there 's no hurt in that , i hope , is there ? ) and in the next chapter , i teach the finding of a diameter . you should have done well to have told us , where to find those chapters . for i do not remember , that that treatise is at all divided into chapters . well! but suppose i had in one chapter , by the help of diam●ter given , found a tangent ; in another chapter , by the help of a tangent , found a diameter : had there been any hurt in all this ? you observe also , you say , that i call the parameter an imaginary line , as if the place thereof were lesse determined then the diameter it selfe . ( but did you observe , whether i did well or ill , so to call it ? ) and then , you say , i take a mean propoirtionall between the intercepted diameter , and its contiguous ordinate line , to find it . pray tell me where you observed that . for , had i observed it , i should have observed it as a great fault ; and not said as you doe , and 't is true , i find it . for , believe mee , that is not the way to find a parameter . nor doe i give you any such direction . you may ( in a parabola ) find the parameter by taking a third proportionall , but not by taking a mean proportionall , to those two lines . you say , the parameter hath a determined quantity . yes doubtlesse . and , in some writers , it hath a determined position too ( viz. in the tangent of the vertex : ) but because i make no use of any such position , i give you leave either to draw it where you will , or not to draw it at all . for by a parameter , i mean only , a line of such a length , where ever it be ; whether at rome , or naples , or in m. hobs his brain . they that make use of the parameters position , as inferring any thing from it , must assigne it a certain place . i make use only of its bignesse , and therefore care not where it stand . lastly you observe , you say , that i doe not shew how to find the focus . ( nor was ) bound to doe . ) and that 's all . and is not this a worthy confutation ? yes doubtlesse ; worthy of you ; for how could you else inferre , that i have performed nothing in any of my books ; if you had not confuted them all . and thus much of those three treatises . which , you see are come off safe and sound , without the losse of leg or limb . and with this advantage , ( if m. hobs his testimony , in point of skill , were worth any thing , ) that they have obtained from him as ample a testimony as he is able to give . viz. that when as he hath imployed the utmost both of his skill and malice , to find what faults he could , he hath not been able to discover any one : ( which testimony , from a considerable adversary , would have been worth something ; but , from m. hobs , j confesse , it signifies little : ) and all the attempts he hath made to that purpose , have not been so strong , but that a butter-fly might have broken through them . sect . vii . concerning the eighth chapter in m. hobs his book of body . hitherto we have tryed your skill and valour in point of assault : and found , that , though you charge as furiously as if you meant to look us dead ; yet you come off as poorly as a man could wish . j am apt to think , that your weapons were not well made , and that your musket was of a bad bore , ( for it hath done no execution , save only in the recoile ; ) or else you held it by the wrong end , ( like the jack-an-ape that peep'd in the gunns mouth to see the bullet come out , ) for though it made a great noyse , yet it hath hurt no body but your selfe . my colleague and i , are both of us alive , and live-like ; and euclide sleeps as securely as he did before . wee 'l try now , how good you are in point of defense ; and see how you can defend your corpus against my elenchus . perhaps you may have better luck at that . but , mee thinks , it begins unluckyly . before you fall to work with elenchus ; you traverse your ground , that you may take it to the best advantage : and distinguish , between faults of ignorance , and faults of negligence , ( pag. . ) you tell us that from right principles to draw false conclusions ( which you are very good at ) are but faults of negligence and humane frailty , and such as are not attended with shame , &c. that 't is only as being lesse awake , &c. ( and yet think much to be told , that you discourse as if you were halfe a sleep : ) and much more your preface to that purpose . as if the first consideration to be had , in the choice of your ground , were , whence you might with best advantage runne away ; ( a businesse of ill omen in the beginning of a combate ; ) that when you shall be forced to quit your ground , you may , at least , shew a fair pair of heeles . my elenchus , as i then told you , begins at first with some lighter skirmishes , shewing how unhandsome some of your definitions and distributions are , giving instance in a few ; which though faults had enough , yet are but small ones in comparison of those greater which follow , in false propositions and demonstrations . i begin with that of chap. . § . where you define a line , a length , a point , in this manner . if when a body is moved , its magnitude ( though it alwaies have some ) be not all considered , the way it makes is called a line , or one single dimension ; the space through which it passeth is called length ; and the body it selfe a point . but what if a body be not moved ? i● there then neither point , nor line , nor length ? a point there may be , which is not a body , much lesse a body moved : and a line , or length , through which no body passeth : and therefore the definitions are not good , because not reciprocall . the axis of the earth , is a line , and that line hath its length ; yet doe i not believe that any body doth , or ever did , passe directly from the one to the other pole , to describe that line . the notion therefore of motion or body moved , i then said , was wholly extrinsecall and accidentall to the notion of line , or length , or of a point ; no waies essentiall or necessary to it , or to the understanding of it : and that therefore it was not convenient , to clog the definitions of these , with the notion of that . to this you answer , ( having waved first , what you attempted , as from the example of euclide , ) that , how ever it may be to others , it was fit for you to define a line by motion . and i doe acquiesse in that answer . for , though it would not become any man else so to define it ; yet it becomes m. hobs very well ; as well agreeing with his accuratenesse in other things . i said farther , that the distance of two points though resting , was a length , as well as the measure of a passage , ( and therefore the notion of a body moved , not necessary to the definition of length . ) to which you answer , that the distance of the two ends of a thread wound up into a clew , is not the length of the thread . much to the purpose . i asked , whoever defined a line to be a body ? and you tell mee , you take it for an honour to be the first that doe so . and you may , for ought i know , have also the honour to be the last . and as to that long rant against euclide ; that if a point have no parts , and so no magnitude ; a line can have no breadth , nor can be drawn ( mechanically you mean ; ) and then there is not in euclide one proposition demonstrated , or demonstrable . we doe not think , that your asseveration a sufficient argument , more than we take a word of your mouth to be a slander ; but desire some better proofe of that consequence before we assent to it . you tell us else where , that a point is to magnitude , as a ciphar is to number ( cap. art . . ) and yet i suppose you will not say that , unlesse a ciphar have some multitude , as well as a point some magnitude , there is not in euclide any one proposition demonstrated . and to the same purpose is that cap. . § . an angle of contingence , if compared with an angle simply so called how little so ever , hath such proportion to it , as a point to a line , that is , ( neque rationem , neque quantitatem ullam , ) no proportion , nor any quantity at all . which how well it agrees with your other doctrines , it concerns you to see to , ( for if a point to a line , have no proportion nor any quantity at all , then is it not a part thereof ; ) and how little this comes short of what you so often rant at , as making a point to be nothing . again , whereas in the place cited ( both in latine and english ) you thus define ; the way ( of the body so moved ) is called a line , or one single dimension ; and the space through which it passeth , is called length . i argued , that length , doubtlesse , was one single dimension ; and therefore , if one single dimension , as in your definition , be the same with line ; then length will be a line , and not therefore need a second definition . now , to help the matter , in your lessons ; you define thus , the way is called a line ; and the space gone over by that motion , length or one single dimension . whence my argument is yet farther inforced , if one single dimension signify the same with line , ( as in your book ; ) and also the same with length , ( as in your lesson ; ) then line and length signify with you the same thing ; & therefore with you , should not have had two distinct and different definitions . which i take to be ad hominem , a good argument . you answer , that to say line is length , proceeds from want of understanding english . it may be so . but what 's this to the clearing of your definitions ? where those two words are made equivalent . yet farther , chap. . parag . . there are , say you , three dimensions , line ( or length , ) superficies , and solid . where again line and length are made the same . now whether or no line be length , or whether it be for want of understanding english that you affirme it , it concernes you to cleare ; for 't is you , not i , that affirme it so to be . your next definition is of equall bodies ; which you thus define , equall bodies , are those which may possesse the same place . against which definition j objected , that you should rather define a thing , by what it is , then by what it may be : that the notion of place , was wholly extrinsecall to the notion of equality ; for time , tone , numbers , proportions , and many other quantities are capable of equality , without any connotation of place ; and the notion of equality in them , is the same notion with that of equality in bodies ; ( else how can you say , that two equall numbers , and two equall bodies , are in the same proportion ; ) and therefore , that one good definition of equality , or equalls , in generall ; had been much better , then so many particulars , of equall bodies , equall magnitudes , equall motions , equall times , equall swiftnesse , &c. as you here bring ; and yet , when you have all done , there be a great many more equalls , which you leave undefined : ( and your bare assertion , that there is no subject of quantity , or of equality , or of any other accident , but body , doth not help the matter at all ; for we are not bound to take your word for it : ) that , if you would needs mention place , you should rather have defined them by the place they have , then what they may have ; & so , defined those bodies to be equall , which do possesse equall places , rather then , which may possesse the same place : that a pyramid , remaining a pyramid , may be equall to a cube ; yet cannot , remaining a pyramid , possesse the place of that cube : or , if you will , that a pyramidall atome , though so adamantine as to be incapable of any transmutation , ( as those who teach the doctrine of atomes doe maintain , ) may yet be equall to a cubicall atome , though not possesse the place thereof : that you might as well have defined a man , to be one who may be prince of transilvania , as to define equall bodies , to be those which may possesse the same place . ( with much more , of which you take no notice . ) to that last particular , you answer , that 't is wittily objected , as i count witt , but impertinently . and why impertinently ? is not that definition of a man ; as good as yours of bodies equall ? you think not , because if so , j must be of opinion , that the possibility of being prince of transilvania , is no lesse essentiall to a man ; then the possibility of being in the same place , is essentiall to equall bodies . and truly j am of that opinion . j think it every way as possible for for any man living , to be prince of transilvania ; as for the arctick and antartick circles , ( or the segments of the sphere which they cut off , ) be they never so equall , to possesse the same place . nor is that possibility lesse essentiall , than this . you adde , that there is no man ( beside such egregious geometricians as we are ) that inquires the equality of two bodies , but by measure : and , as for liquid bodies , &c. by putting them one after another into the same vessell , that is to say , into the same place ; and , as for hard bodies , they inquire their equality ●y weight . to which i shall reply nothing at all ; because you speak therein so like a geometrician . i objected farther , that it is not yet agreed amongst philosophers ( and your authority will not decide the controversy , ) whether or no , the same body may not , by rarefaction and condensation , ( words understood by other men , though you understand them not , ) sometimes possesse a bigger , some times a lesser place . we see , that the same air in the head of a weather-glasse , doth sometimes possesse a bigger , sometimes a lesser part of the glasse , according as the weather is cold or hot , and you cannot deny , ( what ever others may ) but that both are filled ; for you doe not allow any vacuum at all . we know , that into a wind-gun , though it were full ( you say ) before , yet much more air may be forced in . and into the artificiall fountain , ( which you mention cap. . fig . ) though full of air , may be forced also a great quantity of water . now how to salve these phaenomena , ( with many others of the like kind ) without either allowing vacuum , which you deny ; or condensation , which you laugh at ; ( one of which others use to assigne ) because you find it too hard a task for you to undertake , ( as well you may , ) you leave to a m●lius inquirendum p. . l. . ( or in the english , p. . l. . ) now if it be true , that the same body doth , or possible , that it may , possesse , some time a bigger , sometime a lesse space , ( as those who deny vacuum doe generally affirme , ) then , by your definition , the same body ( i doe not say may possibly become , but ) at present is both bigger , and lesse , and equall to it selfe : because it hath at present a possibility of possessing hereafter both a larger place , by rarefaction , and a lesser place , by condensation , than now it doth . and so you , by determining the equality or inequality of bodies , not by the place they have , but by such place as possibly they may have ( upon any supposed metamorphosis or transmutation , ) doe confound bigger , and lesse , and equall , and so take away the whole foundation of mathematicks : for if there be no difference between bigger , lesse , and equall , there is no roome either for mathematicks or measure . but , whether that opinion of rarefaction and condensation be true or not : yet since you cannot deny , but that it is at least a considerable controversy , and , by men as wise , and as good philosophers as m. hobs , maintained against you ; yea and a controversy not belonging to mathematicks but physicks , or naturall philosophy , and there to be determined ; it was not wisdome to hang the whole weight of mathematicks , upon so slender a thread , as the decision of that controversy in naturall philosophy , which whether way it be determined , is wholly impertinent to a mathematicall definition . to which you reply onely this , ( which is easy to say ) that rarefying and condensing , are but empty words ; and that ( of which we have spoken already ) mathematicall definition , is not a good phrase . to that definition you had annexed this also ; eadem ratione , magnitudo magnitudini , &c. vpon the same account one magnitude is equall , or greater , or lesser , then another , when the bodies whose they are , are greater , equall , or lesse . these words , i said , must bear one of these two ●enses , either , that equall bodies , or bodies equally great , are of equall greatnesse , ( which is no very profound notion : ) or else , that the magnitudes , towlt the lines , superficies , &c. or at least , the length , bredth , &c. of equall bodies , is equall , ( taking the words for a definition of equall lines , equall superficies , &c ) and this , i said , was manifestly false : for no bodies may be equall , whose length , breadth , superficies , &c. are unequall . you say now , that you meant the former , ( and i cannot contradict it , for you know your own meaning best , yet you must give me leave to think : ) and so leave us without any definition of equall lines , plaines , or superficies which yet , considering how oft you are afterwards to . make use of , might have been as worthy of a definition , as some of those equalls that you have defined . in the next paragraph , cap. . parag . . you undertake to prove , that one and the same body , is alwaies of one and the same magnitude , and not bigger at one time then another , or at one time fill a bigger place , than it doth at another time . let 's heare how you prove it ( for , by what we heard but now , you are much concerned to make good proofe of it , because if there be a possibility of possessing at any time a bigger or lesse place than now it doth , than it is , by your definition , at present bigger or lesse than it selfe . ) your proofe is in these words , for seeing a body , and the magnitude , and the place thereof , cannot be comprehended in the mind otherwise than as they are coincident , ( observe therefore , that this argument doth no more prove , that a body cannot change its magnitude , than that it cannot change its place , for you make place as much coincident with body , as you doe magnitude , and the argument proceeds equally of both : ) if any body be understood to be at rest , that is , to remain in the same place during some time , and the magnitude thereof be in one part of the time greater , and in another part lesse , that bodies place , which is one and the same , will be coincident sometime with greater , sometime with lesse magnitude , that is , the same place will be greater and lesse than it selfe , which is impossible . this is your whole proof to a word . now this , i told you , is no sufficient proof , because it proves only that a body doth not change its quantity so long as it is at rest , and doth precisely keep the same place ; ( which no body doth affirme . ) and , pray look upon the argument once again : doth it prove any more than so ? but that which you undertook to prove was , that it doth never change its magnitude , but hath alwaies the same , as well when its place is altered , as when it remains in the same place : ( for , j suppose , you will not deny , but that a body may change its place . ) those that hold the contrary opinion , doe not say that a body doth change its greatnesse while it doth precisely keep the same place ; but that , with change of place , it may change its dimensions too : and to this , if you would have said any thing , you should have applied your argument . and is not this then a just exception to your argument ? will this argument hold , think you , because a body doth not change its magnitude so long as it keeps precisely the same place : therefore , it never changeth its magnitude , but hath alwaies the same ? this argument hath no appearance of consequence , but only upon this supposition , that a body doth alwaies keep precisely the same place . and , then , i confesse , the argument looks like an argument , in this forme , so long as a body keeps precisely one and the same place , it hath precisely one & the same magnitude : but a body doth alwaies keep precisely one and the same place : therefore it hath alwaies one and the same magnitude . and if this be your argument , we allow the form , but deny the matter of it , and say , the minor ought to be proved . for we are of opinion , that it is possible , for the same body , not to be alwaies in the same place . if you think otherwise , pray prove it . for 'till that be proved , your present argument is to no purpose . sed rem ita per se manifestam , demonstrare opus non esset , &c. but , say you , a thing of it selfe so manifest , would need no demonstration at all , ( a fine facile way of demonstration , that which you know not how to prove needs no demonstration . ) but that you see there are some , whose opinion concerning bodies and their magnitude , is , that body may exist separated from its magnitude , ( no not so , but that it may change its magnitude , for they doe no more believe that it can exsist without magnitude , than that it can exsist without a figure : it cannot be but that a finite body must have alwaies some figure , though not alwaies the same : and so alwaies some magnitude , but whether alwaies the same or no , you should have proved if you could : ) and have greater or lesse magnitude bestowed upon it ; ( as well as different figures : ) making use of this principle for the explication of the nature of rarum , and densum . since therefore you know there are that do so ; why did not you , ( at least in your english editition , after you had notice of the weaknesse of your latine argument ) bring some good argument to overthrow that opinion ; and not content your selfe to say that it is so manifest of it selfe , as that it needed no demonstration . especially , ( as i then told you ) since you doe not allow that euclide may assume to himselfe gratis without demonstration , that the whole is greater than its part ; ( those were my words , though you recite them a little otherwise . ) but you say , i know this to be untrue , that is , i lye : my words were these ; non interim euclidi permittis , ut citra demonstrationem hoc sibi gratis assumat , totum esse majus sua parte : that is , you do not allow it euclide , that he may without demonstration assume to himselfe , or challenge , that the whole is greater then its part . now let your own words be judge , who is the lyar , you or i. cap. . artic . , . the whole method of demonstration , you say , is syntheticall , — beginning with principles , or primary propositions . now such principles are nothing but definitions , — and , besides definitions , there is no other proposition that ought to be called primary or ( si paulo severius agere volumus ) be received into the number of principles . for those axioms of euclide , seeing they may be demonstrated , are no principles of demonstration . and accordingly art . . you define demonstration , to be a syllogisme , or series of syllegismes , derived and continued from the definitions of names , to the last conclusion . and parag . . you require to a demonstration , that , the premises of all syllogismes be demonstrated from the first definitions . ( and the like cap. . parag . . diverse times . ) so that these axioms , being no definitions , nor any principles of demonstration , no demonstration can take rise from them , nor can they be otherwise assumed in demonstration , than as they are themselves deduced or demonstrated from definitions . and doth not this come home to what i said ? and cap. . parag . . of which axioms ( omitting the rest ) i will only ( say you ) demonstrate this one , the whole is greater then any part thereof . to the end that the reader may know , that those axioms are not indemonstrable , and therefore not principles of demonstration . and yet again less . . p. . as for the commonly received third sort of principles , called common notions , they are principles only by permission of him that is a disciple ; who being ingenuous , and coming not to cavill but to learn , is content to receive them ( though demonstrable ) without their demonstration . and again pag. . you exclude those common notions called axioms , from the number of principles , as being demonstrable from the definitions of their termes , acknowledging no other principles , but definitions , and postulata , ( those the only principles of demonstration ; these of construction . ) if therefore they be no principles of demonstration ; if only principles by permission of the disciple , and only in curtesy ; then , though your selfe possibly may he so gracious or liberall , as to admit of them without their demonstration ; yet the teacher cannot , without this favour , assume to himselfe , or require them to be granted , as he may doe principles , without demonstration . 't was not i therefore was the lyar , when i said , you doe not allow that euclide may assume to himselfe gratis , or require to be granted , without demonstration , that the whole is greater than its part . for 't is but in courtesy , if you grant it him , as you may any other true proposition , and only upon supposition that it may be demonstrated : upon which supposition , you may also allow all the propositions in euclide , for they may be all demonstrated . and thus much concerning your eight chapter . sect . viii . concerning his , and chapters . wee shall next consider what you have to say in defense of your and chapters , concerning proportion . and here after a freak ; and then a rant against euclide ; you have a large discourse about proportion ; p. , . the summe of which , so farre as is to the purpose , is this , that there betwo kinds of proportion , ( as the word is now adaies taken ; ) the one of which is called arithmeticall proportion ; the other , geometricall proportion : and as the quotient gives us a measure of the proportion of the dividend to the divisor , in geometricall proportion ; so the remainder , after subtraction , is the measure of proportion arithmeticall . pag. . and thus much is both true and clear , and to the purpose . and had you but thus delivered your doctrine of proportions , in your book de corpore , i should never have found fault with it . but you , not knowing ( till you learned it out of my elenchus , ) that the quotient did as well determine geometricall proportion , ( and give name to it ) as the remainder doth proportion arithmeticall , were fain to blunder on as well as you could , without it : and put your selfe upon a great many unhandsome shifts , and which will not hold water , to give account , even of geometricall proportion , from the remainder or difference , which was not to be done otherwise then by the quotient , as you here clearly confesse ; for the measure , you say , of geometricall progression , is ( not the remainder , whether absolutely or comparatively considered , but ) the quotient . but before you come thus farre ; you tell us by the way , that i say , that you make proportion to consist in the remainder , and that i make it consist in the quotient . as to the former of these , i did not then say , that you make proportion to consist in the remainder ; though if i had said so , i had said true enough , for you doe so , more than once . cap. . parag . . in ratione inaequalium , say you , ratio minoris ad majus , defectus ; ratio majoris ad minus excessus dicitur . and again par . . consistit ratio antecedentis ad consequens in differentia , &c. sive in majoris ( dempto minore ) refiduo . and. soon after , ratio binarii ad quinarium est ternarius , &c. you cannot deny but that these are your words , and that i blamed you for them , as a piece of non sense ; all that you have to say is , that it was too hastily put : & therefore you labour in the english a little to disguise it . so cap. . art . . cum ratio inaequalium , per cap. praeced . art . . consistit in differe●tia ipsarum , &c. and again , ratio inaequalium , eg , ef , consistit in differentia ef , quae est quantitas , ( yes , quantitas absoluta , for 't is a line . ) and these , because i did not particularly tell you of them , are yet uncorrected in your english ; seeing ( by the fifth article of the precedent chapter , ) the proportion of two unequall magnitudes consists in their difference , &c. and again , the proportion of unequalls eg , ef , is quantity ; for the difference gf , in which it consists is quantity . now when , you say in expresse words , as in the places cited , the proportion of the antecedent to the consequent consists in the difference , or the remainder ; it had been no wrong if i had said , as you say i doe , that you make proportion to consist in the remainder ; and that absurdly enough . and then , j pray , to whom belong those reproaches , that are so oft in your mouth , as if somebody did affirme , that proportion is a number , an absolute quantity , & c ? is it not your selfe that affirme it so to be ? and doth any body so beside your selfe ? and is not then , that ( by your own law p. , ) in your selfe intolerable , which you cannot tolerate in another ? but you adde farther , that i say , that i make it to consist in the quotient . and is not this abominably false ? j neither say so , nor doe so , nor did j give any ground at all for any man ( that is in his witts ) to believe j did . my words were these , videmus igitur rationis aestimationem esse ( secundum te ) penes residuum , non penes quotum , & subductione , non divisione quaerendam esse . ( and what reason j had to say so , they that consult the place will see . ) now could any man ( who had not a great confidence that his english reader understands no latine ) be so impudent as to say , that in those words , i say , you make proportion to consist in the remainder ; and i , in the quotient ? can any man , that understands , though but a little latine , ( if he be not either out of his witts , or halfe a sleep , ) think that these words rationis aestimatio est penes quotum , ( that is , the proportion is to be estimated according to the quotient , or , to use your own words , the quotient gives us the measure of the proportion , ) could be thus englished , proportion consists in the quotient ? and that then you should raile at us , quite through your book , for saying that proportion is a certain quotient , that it is a number , that it is an absolute quantity , &c. as if we had been so ridiculous as to speak like you . for , that you have so spoken you cannot deny , ( and therefore the absurdity what ever it be , lights upon your selfe : ) but , to say , that i said so , or any thing to that purpose , till you can shew where i said it , j take to be , ( so farre as a word of your mouth can be ) a manifest slander . j neither say so , nor think so . now some men perhaps may wonder , there should be so great a cry and so little wooll ; they would think perhaps , by what you say , that j had somewhere said in expresse termes , that proportion is a quotient , or that it consists in the quotient , or that it is a number , or an absolute quantity , or that the quotient is the proportion , or that a proportion is the double of a number , but not of a proportion , or somewhat that sounds like somewhat of these , when they hear me thus charged , again and again , many a time , and oft ; and not that the whole ground of the accusation had been but this , that i said , the proportion is to be estimated by the quotient . and truly 't is somewhat hard to give a good account of it : yet wee 'l try what may be done . j was told , some years a goe , of a man that had told a lye so often , and with so much confidence , that at length he began to believe it himselfe . and j am almost of opinion , that m. ●obs having now said it so often over , doth , by this time , begin to think , that j had indeed said , somewhere , that the quotient was the proportion . and truly there is some reason why he should : for if he had heard any other man so oft and so confidently affirme it , he would no doubt have believed him : and why should he not as well believe himselfe . but moreover ; it did perhaps runne in his mind , that he had somewhere read some such words as these , consistit autem ratio antecedentis ad consequens , in differentia , hoc est in ea parte majoris qua minus ab eo superatur ; sive in majoris ( dempto minore ) residuo . or such as these , ratio binarii ad quinarium est ternarius . or else this , ratio minoris ad majus , defectus ; ratio majoris ad minus , excessus dicitur . ( and well it might : for they are all his own words , cap . parag . . & . and cap. . parag . . ) and he might think , that to say thus , was all one , as to affirme proportion to be a number , or an absolute quantity : ( and truly i think so too . ) and that therefore the expression was very absurd ; ( for so i had intimated to him in my elenchus , upon this occasion . ) and therefore ( forgetting , perhaps , that they were his own words , and not mine . ) he doth ( like the woman that called her daughter bastard , not minding that in so doing shee called her selfe whore , ) exclaim against his own words , as most ridiculous non-sense . and who might doe it better ? or else , to use his own comparison , like women of poor and evill education , when they scold ; amongst whom the readiest disgracefull word is whore ; because , when they remember themselves , they think that reproach the likeliest to be true ; at least , if they be called whore themselves , though never so truly , they will be sure to call whore again at all adventures , hit or misse . so m. hobbs , finding himselfe to have been so absurd , as to make proportion a number , or absolute quantity , and that i had blamed him for it ; thought , perhaps , it was possible i might , sometime or other , have been as carelesse in my language : and therefore , however , hee 'l say so , ( 't is easy to say it ) and let me disprove it . if any man , notwithstanding all this , be not satisfied that m. hobs had reason to say as he doth ; truly i cannot help it ; he must speak for himselfe : these were the best reasons i could think of ▪ and so wee 'l goe on . in your chap. parag . . you gave us in the latine , ( for in the english there be some things altered , ) this definition of proportion ; proportion is nothing else but the aequality or in equality of the antecedent , compared with the consequent , according to magnitude . with this explication , as for example , the proportion of three to two , is nothing else , but , that three , is greater then two , by one : and the proportion of two to five , is nothing else , but that two , is lesse than five by three : and therefore in the proportion of vnequalls , the proportion of the lesse to the greater is called the defect ; and that of the greater to the lesse , the excesse . and this is your generall definition of proportion , with the explication of it ; and nor a particular definition of arithmeticall proportions , ( nor is it at all by you pretended so to be . ) and therefore should have been so ordered , as at least to take in geometricall proportion ; for geometricall proportion , and simply proportion , are by your selfe made equivalent termes ( less . . p. . l. . ) and this , you say , is onely taken notice of by the name of proportion : and , so the word is constantly used in euclide , and elsewhere : ( and therefore you need not wonder as you doe p. . l. , that j should say , if arithmeticall proportion , ought to be called proportion ; implying that though now that phrase be common , yet that it is a departing from the former use of the word ; and that , according to euclides use of the word proportion , arithmeticall proportion cannot be so called . ) now your definition and explication of proportion , doth wholly leave out geometricall proportion altogether , ( which yet is , if not the only , yet the more principall kind of proportion . ) for it takes no cognizance of the quotient at all , but only of the difference , the excesse or defect . and according to your doctrine the proportion of to , is + , the excesse of ; and of to , is - , the defect of three . from this i inferred , that if the proportion of one quantity to another , be nothing else , but the excesse or defect of this to that , ( as you teach , ) then where ever the excesse or defect is the same , there the proportion is the same ; and so to , must have the same proportion that hath to ; ( you say , p. . true , the same arithmeticall proportion very good : but j added farther , of which you did not think fit to take notice , ) and on the contrary , where there is not the same defect or the same excesse there is not the same proportion , and consequently , there is not the same proportion of to and of to . to this you have nothing to say , and therefore say nothing , ( but recite halfe my sentence , and leave out the other halfe : ) for though , there be not the same arithmeticall proportion ( as you speak ) of to , and of to ; ( that is , not the same excesse , ) yet there is the same geometricall proportion ; and that you cannot deny to be proportion , though it doe not come , within your definition . now it 's true , ( but that 's another fault , not an excuse ) that you do not hold to this sense alwaies , for in the same page art . . ( in the latine , i mean ) you do clearly contradict what you had but now said in art . . the proportion , say you , of the antecedent to the consequent consists in the difference , or remainder , not simply ( yes simply , if that be true which you said before ; for if it be nothing else but the difference , that is it the difference simply : but if not simply ; how then ? ) but as compared with one of the termes related , &c. for though there be the same difference between and , that there is between and , yet not the same proportion . and why not ? as well as the same proportion between and , and between and ? as we heard you reply but now . may not we as well say here , as you there , ( les . . p. . ) is there not the same arithmeticall proportion ? and is not arithmeticall proportion , proportion ? but it seems , by this time , you had forgotten your former exposition , whereby in the same page , your definition of proportion must be so understood , as will agree to none but arithmeticall proportion ; now it must bear such a sense as can agree to none but geometricall . in the english , i confesse , your translator hath a little mended the matter , and but a little , ( 't is but coblers work at the best ; ) but however , 't is good to hear folks mend , though it be but a little : it may come to something in time . but now of those two senses , which you have given , of the definition of proportion , ( opposite enough in conscience one to another , though , i suppose , you did not intend therein to contradict your selfe , ) neither of them will serve your turn . for the proportion here defined , and so explicated as we have heard , is a genus , which is , in the beginning of your chapter , to be distributed into its two species ; proportion arithmeticall , and proportion geometricall . now take your definition of proportion in generall , according to which of your two expositions you please , it cannot be thus distributed . for if propor●●on ( as you say chap. , ●art . . ) be nothing else but the excesse or defect , &c. as is lesse then by ; then it cannot agree to geometricall proportion , for that is somewhat else . if it be such a comparative difference , as you mention cap. . art . . it will not agree to arithmeticall proportion ; for according to that sense , you say , to , and to , are not in the same proportion . i say therefore , that neither of those two expositions , do agree to that generall notion of proportion , which shall be common to both arithmeticall and geometricall . and when i aske , which of the two expositions you are willing to stand to . whether that of cap. . art . . or that of cap , . art . . ( shewing withall that neither of them will serve your turne , for neither of them will take in both arithmeticall and geometricall progression , ) you fall a raving in the beginning of your third lesson , something at euclide , and something at us , but nothing to the purpose . and then tell us , that when you say the difference is the proportion , by difference , we might if we would , have understood , the act of differing . that is , wee might understand , as madly as you speak . your words were these , cap. . art . . consistit autem ratio in differentia , sive residuo , &c. ita ratio binarii ad quinarium est ternarius , &c. would you have us understand residuum , and ternarius , to be the act of differing ? and c. . art . . ratio inaequaliū ( eg , ef ) consistit in differentia gf . would you have us understand that line gf , to be the act of differing ? you say , we might if we would . but you 'ld think us very simple if we should . to as good purpose is it , that you tell your english reader ( for you think you may tell him any thing , ) that ● say , that ( thus much of ) your definition , ch. . art. . [ proportion is the comparison of two magnitudes one to another , ] agrees neither with arithmeticall nor geometricall proportion . for i said nothing of any such words , good or bad . and 't were much if i should : for i can find no such words there . at the second article ( chap. . ) i note , you say , for a fault in method , that after you had used the words , antecedent , and consequent of a proportion , in the precedent chapters , you now define them . 't is true , i did take notice of it , but i said withall , that this was but a small fault in comparison of many others . but what if i did ? you do not believe , you say that i spake this against my knowledge . no ; why should you for you know 't is true . have you not used the words many times before in the precedent chapters ? and doe you not define them here ? and is not this a fault in method ? do mathematicians use , when they have taken a terme for two or three chapters together , to be of a known signification , and sufficiently understood , come at length to define it ? you say , you had before defined it chap. . art . . 't is true you had there defined the antecedent and consequent of correlatives ; ( which definitions might have served well enough for the antecedent and consequent in proportions too , for those are correlatives , and you need not have brought any new ones . ) but where was my oversight ? did i deny this ? i did not blame you for using the words before you had defined them , ( nor would i have blamed you , if they had not been defined at all ; ) but for defining them after you had thus long used them . for , if they had now , ever since the beginning of the chapter , been taken for words of a known signification , and as such frequently used , ( which you do not deny , and your definitions at that place do but aggravate , not extenuate , this charge , ) then , i say , it was immethodicall and superfluous to define them in the chapter . nor was it my oversight to say so . and the like impertinent answer you give p. . where i blamed you ( not for omitting in the chapter , but ) for defining in the chapter , those termes which were of frequent use in the chapter . but wee go on . you tell us , chap. . art . . that the proportion of inequality is quantity , but that of equality is not . which i said was very absurd ; and that the one did no more belong to the praedicament of quantity than the other ; and that it is to bee , of both equally , either denied or affirmed : and that your argument for it , ( that one equality is not greater or lesse then another ; but of proportions of inequality , one may be more or lesse unequall : ) might as well conclude that oblique angles , be quantities , but not right angles , for these be all equall , and equally right ; but not those . for answer to this , you fall a ranting at aristotle , at praedicaments , and the l●gick schooles , &c. and then you tell us the greater and lesser cannot be attributed to right angles , because a right angle is a quantity determined , ( as though the quantity of the proportion of equality were not so too . ) what you alledge out of mersennus , was but his mistake . composition of proportion is a work of multiplication , not of addition , as appears by the definition of it d . and to argue , that proportion of equality is as nothing , because in composition of proportions it doth not increase or diminish another proportion ; is but as to conclude that , , a vnity , is nothing , because in multiplication it doth neither increase nor diminish the quantity multiplyed thereby . but of this mistake of mersennus , i have spoken already in the end of another treatise , already printed , against meibomius ; and vindicated clavius sufficiently from what both mersennus and meibomius allege against him . to the fourth article , where you define greater and lesser proportion ; i said nothing ( because it were endlesse to note all the faults i see ) though those definitions are liable enough to censure . greater proportion , you say , is the proportion of a greater antecedent to the same consequent , or of the same antecedent to a lesse consequent . and lesse proportion , is the proportion of a lesse antecedent to the same consequent , or of the same antecedent to a greater consequent . yet we know , that the proportion of an ell to a yard , is lesse then that of a pottle to a pint , ( and this therefore greater then that , ) though neither the antecedents nor the consequents , be either the same , or equall , or homogeneous . to the and articles , where you define the same proportion . i said first , that , had proportion been well defined before , you might have spared these definitions of the same proportion . for having before defined ( as well as you could ) what is proportion ( both arithmeticall , and geometricall ; ) and withall told us , art . . that by the same proportion was meant equall proportions ; and having also defined before ( after your fashion ) what are equalls chap. . and what is the same chap. . why should you think ( if those definitions were such as they should have been ) that wee needed another definition of the same , or equall proportions ? but , since you were resolved to doe works of supererogation ; i ask why , having defined the same arithmeticall proportion , art : . by the equality of the differences ; you did not also define the same geometricall proportion , art . , by the equality of the quotients ? for by the same , you say , you mean equall , art . . now universally all quantities are equall , that are measured by the same number of the same measures ( less : p : . ) and therefore those are the same or equall proportions , which have the same or equall measures : and you know now ( though perhaps you did not then ) that as the quotient gives us a measure of the proportion in geometricall proportion , so the remainder is the measure of proportion arithmeticall . ( les : . p. . ) and therefore , as , in the one , you define the same or equall proportion , by the equality of the remainder ; so you should in the other , by the equality of the quotient , ( that is , in both places by the equality of its measure : ) and not have brought us such an imbrangled definition as this . viz : one geometricall progression is the same with another , when a cause in equall times troducing equall effects , determining the proportion , may be assigned the same in both , or as your english hath it , when the same cause producing equall effects in equall times , determines both the proportions . so that , to prove , that to , and to , are in the same geometricall proportion , we must call in the help of time , and motion , and velocity , and vniformity , &c. which are wholly extrinsecall to it ; and why , but because , forsooth , there is no effect in nature which is not produced in time by motion , ( as though some motion , in some time or other , had made this to be a true proposition , that is the double of : and therefore if we cannot find what motion did make it so , we must imagine some that might have made it . ) i need not tell you , that , if this be a good reason , you should upon the same account , have found out as bad a definition for the same arithmeticall proportion : ( for that to , and to , are in the same arithmeticall proportion , is , doubtlesse , as much as that other of geometricall proportion , an effect which nature hath at some time or other produced by motion . ) but , since you have waved this consideration of nature in the definition of the same arithmeticall proportion , which you define by the equality of the remainders ; i said , it might have been expected , that you might have done so in the definition of the same geometricall proportion● , and accordingly defined it , by the equality of the quotients . but you are very angry with me , for saying , it might have been expected . and truly i could almost find in my heart to confesse that this was a fault . for though it might have been expected from another man ; yet it was not to be expected from m. hobs ; for his witt is not like the witt of other men , he is the first ( he tells us ) that hath made the grounds of geometry firm and coherent . but why was it not to be exspected ? because , you say , it is impossible to define ( geometricall ) proportion universally by comparing quotients . ( impossible , i confesse , is a hard word ; but yet , i hope , it may be . ) but why is it impossible ? more than it is impossible to define arithmeticall proportion universally by comparing of remainders ? because , forsooth , in quantities incommensurable there may be the same proportion , where neverthelesse there is no quotient : ( very good ! but why no quotient ? ) for quotient there is none but in aliquot parts . ( gooder , and gooder ! ) but , i pray , is not a / b as good a quotient , as a-b is a remainder ? whether the quantities be commensurable , or incommensurable ? no , you say ; for setting their symbols one above another with a line between , doth not make a quotient . but why not ? as well , as setting their symbols one after another , with a line between , makes a remainder ? for , if the quantities be incōmensurable , the remainder is no more explicable in rationall numbers , then is the quotient . if from you subduct √ , the remainder is but − ● . if you divide by √ , the quotient is / √ ; . and is not his as much a quotient , as that a remainder ? and as well designed ? yet this is all you have to say to the businesse : the rest is but ranting , or vapouring . but , however , we are much deceived , you tell us , if we think , with pricking of bladders to let out their vapour ; for we see , you say , we make them swell more then ever . what ? till they bu●st ? i hope not so . ( crepent licet , modo non rumpantur . ) i have heard , i confesse , that a toad would swell the more for being pricked ; but i never knew that a bladder would , till now . the next thing that troubles you , is , that i said , that the corollaries of these two articles taught us nothing new . ( there be as i recon five and nine ; fourteen in all . ) yes , you say , the ninth corollary of the sixth article is new : ( no ; it is not . we are taught the same by the second of the fifth of euclid ; and by the converse of the eleventh prop. of the sixth chapter of m. oughtred's clavis ; ) and the rest were never before exactly demonstrated . what ? none of them ? that 's much . you mean , i suppose not all . and that i am content to believe : for they are not all true . as for example ; the second corollary of the fifth article , is thus delivered universally , if there be never so many magnitudes arithmetically proportional , ( whether in continuall or interrupted proportion ; for you doe not limit it to either , more then you had done that next before it , which you cannot deny to be understood of both ) the summe of them all will be equall to the product of halfe number of terms , multiplied by the summe of the extremes . and then that we may be sure it is not intended only of cōtinual proportion , you give instance in proportion discontinued , for ( say you ) if a. b ∷ c. d ∷ e. f. be arithmetically proportionall ( though but discontinued , for so your symbols import , both in the latine and the english , least we might think it had been the printers fault , and not the authors ; ) the couples a + f , b + e , c + d , ( you say ) will be equall to one an other . this , though it be true of continued arithmeticall proportion , yet of discont●nued proportion , as you here affirme it , it is notoriously false . for how doth it appeare , that c+d , is equall to a + f. for instance , let the termes be these . ∷ . ∷ . . in arithmeticall proportion . is + , equall to + ? or to + ? it 's no marvell then that this was never before exactly demonstrated . but we are taught nothing new by this . for though this be new and be years , yet we cannot learn it . wee 'l go on therefore : and see what you say next of the thirteenth article . wee began , as i said , with slighter skirmishings ; about definitions &c. the skirmish now growes hotter ; when i charge you with false propositions and demonstrations ; and that you be touched to the quick , we may guesse by the loud out-cry ; in objecting against the thirteenth , and sixteenth articles , we doe at once bewray both the greatest ignorance , & the greatest malice , &c ( and so on , for a whole leafe or more ; ) now this ignorance h●wrayd , was your own , viz. that you had given us false demonstrations &c. and then is it not spightfully done of us to discover them ? well ; let 's see what 't is that makes you cry out so fiercely . the proposition is this , of three quantities that have proportion to one another , ( suppose ab , ac , ad ; or , , ; ) the proportion of the first to the second , and of the second to the third taken together , are equall to the proportion of the first to the third . that is , said i , the propertion compounded of that of the first to the second , ( suppose to . which is double , ) and that of the second to the third ( viz. to , which is treble , ) is equall to that of the first to the third , ( viz. to , which is sextuple . ) and was not this your meaning ? ( i am su●e 't is either thus or worse ) this composition , i said , was such as euclide defines d ; which is done by multiplying the quantities of the proportions : viz. / × / = / , ( not by adding them ; for so / + / = / + / = / . ) did i not explaine your meaning right ? i●meant no hurt in saying this was your meaning ; for the meaning was a good meaning ; and the proporsion so meant , is a good proporsion ; ( but , if you mean otherwise , the proposition is false : ) and , doubtlesse , 't was a good meaning too , when you meant to demonstrate it ; ( all the mischiefe was , you could not do what , you meant to doe . ) if this be your meaning ( as j am sure it is or should be , ) what is it that troubles you ? you doe not like the word composition : that 's one thing . well then let it be called addition for once , j told you then , j would not content for the name ; ( but you know 't is such an additon of proportions , as is made by multiplying of the quantities ; as appeares by the very words of the definition d ) then you doe not like that j should say the proportion of to . is double ; and that of to , treble . tell me ( say you ) egregious professors , how is to double proportion ? the answer is easy , ( though perhaps you will not like it ; ) the proportion of to , or to , is that which is commonly called double ; and that of to , is is commonly called treble ; and if you will not believe me , pray believe your own words , corp. pag. . l. , . ratio ad . vocatur dupla ; et ad tripla . you tell us then , we may observe that euclide never distinguisheth between double and duplicate ( no more then other greek writers do between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ) one word ( you say , serves him every where for either . you might as well bid us put out our eyes ; or else believe that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ▪ are the same words . perhaps you thought so when you wrote your booke in latine ; but , since that time you have been better instructed , and have learned at length to distinguish between double and duplicate , as we shall heare anon . but let 's goe on . all this hitherto hath been but scuffling , and little to the purpose , though there you make the greatest out cry , ( like a lapwhing , when shee 's furthest off her nest . ) we are now comming to a close grapple . ( and 't is like to prove as had as a cornish hugge . ) your demonstration , i said , was false ( and that greeves you . ) the strength of it , as i told you , lyes in this , the difference of ab , ac , ( be they lines or times , chuse you whether , for by construction the times and lines are made proportionall , ) together with the difference of ac , ad , taken together , are equall to the difference of ab , ad ; therefore the proportion of ab , to ac , and of ac , to ad , taken together is equall to that of ab to ad. that this is the strength of your demonstration you doe not deny . now that consequence i denyed ; affirming that from that equality of the difference , you could not inferre the equality of geometricall proportion ; ( and , of arithmeticall , the question is not ; nor is pretended to be . ) and j gave this instance to the contrary , to shew the weaknesse of your argument ; taking between a and b , any point at pleasure suppose a ; you may as well conclude the proportion of ab to ad , as of ab to ad. to be compounded of that of ab to ac , and of ac to ad. for , ( in your own words . ) the difference of ab , ac , with that of ac , ad , are equall to the difference ( not only of ab , ad , but even of ) ab , ad ; and therefore the proportions of those , to that of these . now all that you have to say against it , ( for i doe suppose , as you would have me , the motion to be equally swift all the way , ) is this , the difference of ab , ac , ●annot be the same with the difference of ab , ac , except ab and ab are equall . and here we joyne issue . the difference of ab , ac , say i , is bc ; and the difference of ab , ac , is the same bc ; though ab , ab , are not equall . the case is ripe for a verdict . let the jury judge . and now you may , if you will , go on to rant at ignorance and malice , at symbols and gambols , at double and duplicate , at asses and eares , at cla●ius , orontius , and too learned men , or whom you will ; haeret lateri lethalis arundo . but thus 't is , when men will needs have geometricall proportion , to be estimated by differences , and not by quotients . ( i told you moreover that your demonstration was but petitio principii , and shewed wherein , with some other faults which you take no notice of , because you had nothing to say to them . and shewed you how your , , and , articles with all their corollaries , ( which fill up a matter of pages . ) might have been to better purpose delivered in so many lines . but this is no great fault with you , who think the farthest way about , the nearest way home . ) at the article the case is as bad or worse . the cry goes on still . this is all ignorance and malice too . and a huge out cry against quotients , and symbols , and a loud on●ethmus as you call it . but not a word to the purpose of what was objected ; ( except only one clause wherein you tell us how absurd you mean to be by and by . ) the businesse is this , euclide ( d ) defines duplicate , and triplicate proportion , &c. in this manner , if three magnitudes be in continuall proportion , the first to the last hath duplicate proportion of what it hath to the second ; if four , triplicate ; &c. ( and that indifferently whether the first or last be the bigger . ) now you ( that you might shew your selfe wiser then euclide , and be the first that ever made the grounds of geometry firm and coherent , ) thought it was to be limited to this case only , when the first quantity is the greatest . and therefore thus define , the proportion of a greater quantity to a lesse ( very warily ) is said to be multiplied by a number , when other proportions equall to it , be added . and therefore if the quantities ( continued in the same proportion ) be three ; the proportion of the first to the last is double , of what it hath to the second ; if four , treble , &c. ( which most men , you say , call duplicate , triplicate , &c. ) but if the proportion be of the lesse to the greater ( of which euclide , it seems , was not aware ) and there be an addition of more proportions equall to it , it is not properly said to be multiplied , but submultiplied ( that is , divided ; which yet you tell us , by and by , is to be done by taking mean proportionalls . ) so that of three quantities ( so continued ) the proportion of the first to the last , is halfe of what it hath to the second ; if four , a third part , &c. which are commonly called subduplicate , subtriplicate , &c. now this , i told you , was foul great mistake , and such a one as should not have proceeded from a reformer of the mathematicks . and , to use your own distinction ( less . . p. . ) 't is a fault not of negligence , but of ignorance , or want of understanding principles : and therefore an ill favoured fault , and , by your own rule , to be attended with shame . i shewd you there ( and you believe me now ) that in the numbers , , , , &c. the proportion of to , though lesse , was not subduplicate to that of to , but duplicate , as truly as the proportion of to is duplicate to that of to ; and that of to was triplicate , not subtriplicate , of that of to ; of which i gave you this demonstration , ( though it seems , you did not understand it , and therefore say , i bring no argument . ) because / = ⅓ × ⅓ , and / = ⅓ × ⅓ × ⅓ , as well as ● = / × / , add / = / × / × / . and the subduplicate of to , is not , as you suppose , that of to , but of to √ . now this was so unlucky a mistake , or ignorance , in a thing so fundamentall , that ( as i then told you , and you have since found to be true ) an hundred to one , but it would doe you a deal of mischief all along . and it was the touching upon this fore place , that gawled you so much but now , and put you beside your patience . but let 's see now how you behave your selfe . a loud rant we have , as if it were grievous doctrine i had taught , and your own had been much better . but not a word to the purpose save only this 't is absurd to say , that taking the same quantity twice , should make it lesse . but though you say so , you doe not think so . for when you have done your rant , you goe slyly , ( without saying a word of it , or acknowledging any error , ) and put out that whole sixteenth article , which we had in the latine , giving us in the english another instead of it , quite of another tenour , and quite contrary to what you had before . and now a proportion of the lesse to the greater , ( as well as of the greater to the lesse , ) being twice taken , shall be duplicate , ( not subduplicate as before ; ) and thrice taken , ( not subtriplicate , but ) triplicate . now ( because you say it , ) it is not absurd to say , that taking the same quantity twice , should make it lesse ; ( though when i said it , it was absurd . ) now a proportion is said to be multiplyed by number , not submultiplyed , when it is so often taken as there be unities in that number . ( whether it be of the greater to the lesse , or of the lesse to the greater ; ) and if the proportion be the greater to the lesse , then shall also the quantity of the proportion be increased by the multiplication ; but when the proportion is of the lesse to the greater , then as the number increaseth , the quantity of the proportion diminisheth ; for it is no absurdity now , to say that taking the same quantity twice makes it lesse . and truly now , methinks , thou sayst thy lesson pretty well ; i could find in my heart to spit in thy mouth and make much of thee , hadst thou not railed at him that taught thee ; which is but a trick of an ungratefull schollar : but let 's goe on , and see whether this good fit will hold ? as in these numbers , , , . the proportion of to , is not only the duplicate of to , but also twice as great . ( nay that is good againe ; he hath learned that there is a difference between duplicate and twice as great . surely this is not he , ( or else the world 's well amended with him , ) that laughed at the distinction of duplicate and double . well , let 's heare some more of it . ) but , inverting the order of those numbers thus , , , , the proportion of to , is greater than that of to ; and therefore though the proportion of to , be the duplicate of to , yet it is not twice so great as that of to , but contrarily the halfe of it . in good truth ; a prety apt schollar : for one of his inches ; he says just as i bid him . well , well ! the world 's well amended with t. h. the●'s hopes he may come to good . yee see he learnes apace . he may be a mathematician in time ; though i say 't that should not say 't . i confesse he hath his faults still , as well as other men , ( you must not think he can mend all at once , ) the whole article is not so good throughout , at this bit at the beginning . he hath got a naughty trick of saying the proportion of equality is no quantity , ( but he hath been whipt for already ; ) he makes it stand for a cyphar , ( but that 's a thing of nothing : it should have been but , and that 's not much more . ) and he tells us that the proportion of to is not onely duplicate , of to , but also the double , or twice as greate . and again , that the proportion of — to — , is double to the proportion of — to — , &c. which would have deserved whipping at another time ; but because he said the rest so well , i 'le spare him for this once . he doth , it seems , believe there is a difference between double and duplicate , though he doe not yet know what it is ; he will learn against next time . and to the like purpose is that which follows ; if there be more quantities then three ( it 's no matter how many ) as a , b , c , d , in continued proportion , what ever the proportion be , so that a be the least ; it may be made appeare that the proportion of a to b , is triple magnitude , though subtriple in multitude , to the proportion of a to d. but however he shall be spared for this bout ; because i said so ; and i will be as good as my word . sect . ix . concerning his . and chapters . in your chapter , art : . i found fault with your definition of a plain , to be that which is described by a streight line so moved as that every point of it describe a streight line . i told you , it is not necessary , much lesse essentiall , to be so described , ( and you confesse it ; ) and many plains there are which are not so described . the definition therefore is not good . again . you had said in the first article : two streight lines cannot include a superficies . ( right , ) and then art : . two plain superficies cannot include a solid . no , said i , nor yet three . 't was simply done then to name but two . and you confesse it to be a fault ; but not a fault to be ashamed of . again , you had said art : . that a streight line and a crooked , cannot be coincident , no not in the least part . and then art : . you tell us of some crooked lines which have parts that are not crooked . this i noted for a contradiction ; because with those parts not crooked , a streight line may be coincident . and you cannot deny it . therefore in the english , instead of crooked , in the former place , you put perpetually crooked ; which though it be but a botch , helps the matter a little . in the fourth art. in the description of a circle , by carrying round a radius ; you define the center to be that point which is not moved . now a point you had before defined cap. . art . . to be a body moved &c. so that to say , the point which is not moved , is as much as to say , the body moved &c. which is not moved . which seems to me a contradictiction . to this objection , you say only that which i must say to your answer , viz : it is foolish . you said farther , crooked incongruous lines cannot touch each other , save only in one point . yes , said i , a circle may touch a parabola in two points . and you confesse it . but say , you meant that each contact is not in a line , but only in one point . perhaps you meant so , ( though yet i question whether you did then think of more contacts then one : ) but why then did you not say so ? ( i mean , in the latine ? for in the english , upon this notice it is a little mended ) but i reply , yes , if those incongruous curve lines , have but some parts which are not crooked , ( as even now you told us , ) they may touch in a line . yea & incongruous lines continually crooked , may in some pasts of them agree , though not congruous all the way , and therefore touch in a line . and therefore even yet , it is not accurate . but you 'l say ( as pag. . ) such faults as these , are not attended with shame , unlesse they be very frequent . what you mean by very frequent , i cannot tell ; but , mee thinks , 't is very ugly to have them come thus thick . art . you divide a superficiall angle , into an angle simply so called , and an angle of contingence . which you define in this manner ; two streight lines applied to each other , and contiguous in their whole length , being separated or pulled open in such manner , that their concurrence in one point remains ; if it be by way of circular motion , whose center is the point of concurrence , and the lines retain their streightnesse ; the quantity of this divergence is an angle simply so called : if by continuall flexion in every imaginable point ; an angle of contingence ▪ i asked ; to which of these two you referre the angle made by a right line cutting a circle ? or whether you doe 〈◊〉 take that to be a superficiall angle . you say , to an angle 〈◊〉 so called , that is , as we heard but now , to an angle made by two lines which retain their streightnesse , ( though one 〈◊〉 them be crooked . ) and then , you tell us that rectilin●●● and curvilincall hath nothing to doe with the nature of an angle simply so called : when yet your definition requires , that the lines retain their streightnesse . i will ask , you say , ( yes i do ask ; and do you give a wise answer if you can ; ) how can that angle which is generated by the divergence of two streigh lines , [ whose streightnesse remains , ] be other then rectilineall ? you say , a house may remain a house , though the carriage of the timber cease . much to the purpose ! how do you apply the similitude ? even so , the lines retain their streightnesse , though they be crooked , is that it ? or is it thus , even so , the angle remains an angle made by lines retaining their streightnesse , when they be crooked ? perhaps you mean thus , the angle being once made by the divergence of streight lines , remains an angle though one or both of those lines be afterwards made crooked . very good ! but doth it remain the same angle ? the same quantity of divergence ? ( for so you define an angle , ) doth not ( in your account , ) the bowing of one of the lines ( the other remaining as it was ) alter the quantity of divergence , ( measurable by the arch of a circle , as you determine ) from what it was before such bowing ? though yet that very bowing alone , by your doctrine , be enough to make an angle of it selfe ? well , let it be so for once , ( though it should not be so , by your principles . ) but however , though this should be allowed , yet at least , so long as the angle is in making , the lines must be streight . tell me then , j prithee , how a sphericall angle comes to be an angle simply so called . is a sphericall angle made by the divergence of streight lines or of cooked ? can it be made a sphericall angle so long as the lines retain their streightnesse ? it seemes so : for an angle properly so called , that is , an angle made by the divergence of streight lines , whose streightnesse remains , is distributed into plain and others , ( as though all right lined angles , were not plain angles ; ) and then again into rectilineall , curvilineall , and mixt ; as though these were , species of rightlined angles . do you think it possible to make an angle sphericall , curvilineall , or mixed , so long as the lines retain their streightnesse ? do you think these things will ever hold together ? or is this to make the principles of geometry firm and coherent ? you were better say , as the truth is , that when you formed that definition of an angle simply so called , you had your eye only upon a right-lined angle , and fitted your definition thereunto ; but when afterward , under the same name , you took in curvilineall and mixt angles , you should have altered the definition , but neglected it : and then apply your ordinary apology ▪ that it was indeed a fault , but not such an one as you need be ashamed of . but , to goe about to defend it , is more ridiculous then the thing it selfe . at the ninth article , i had shewed how simply you defined the quantity of an angle , your definition as you call it , is this : the quantity of an angle , is an arch of a circle determined by its proportion to the whole perimeter . an angle was before defined to be the quantity of divergence ; that which you define now is the quantity of an angle , that is , the quantity of the quantity of divergence . very handsomely ! then in stead of , the quantity of an angle is measured by an arch ; you say , the quantity of an angle is an arch. again , it is , you say the arch of a circle : but what arch ? and of what circle ? for you determine neither . you mean , i suppose , that circle whose center is the angular point ; but you doe not say so : and , you mean also , the arch of that circle intercepted between the two streight lines containing the angle ; but then you should have said so , as well as meant so . for , as the definition now runs , neither arch , nor circle , is determined . next you say , that this quantity is to be determined ( for so the words must be construed to make sense of them ) by the proportion of that arch to the whole perimeter : that is , what proportion that intercepted arch hath to the whole perimeter ; such proportion hath that angle to — what ? you do not tell us , to what . as for instance , suppose the arch be a quadrant or quarter of the whole perimeter ; the angle is then a quarter of — somewhat no doubt ; but you doe not tell us of what , is it a quarter of an angle ? or a quarter of an arch ? or a quarter of a circle ? no ; 't is a quarter of four right angles . 't is that , you should have said . now are not these faults enough for one poor definition ? they are but negligences , you 'l say : but they be scurvy ones ; and there be enough of them , for lesse then two lines . but whether to commit so many negligences , in lesse then two lines , be so very frequent , as that they be attended with shame , i leave for others to judge . you should have said thus , as i then told you , ( but i see you are not alwaies willing to learne ; ) the quantity of a rectilineall angle , in proportion to four right angles , is determined by the proportion of an arch of a circle ( whose center is the angular point ) intercepted between the two streight lines containing that angle , to the whole circumference . but , it seems , you had rather keep your own definition , with all its faults , then seem to be taught by mee : though yet you have nothing to say in defence of any one of them ; and therefore ( as you use to doe in such cases ) take no notice of them in your answer at all ; as if no such exceptions had been made . the like exceptions , i said , ly against the article . and you take the like care neither to mend them , nor to take notice of them . at the art. i shewed , what a pittifull definition you had brought of parallells ; and that the consectary from it was false , and the demonstration thereof a sad one . you confesse all : but are not pleased that i should triumph . your emendation which you intimate , by inserting the same way ; will do some good in the consectary , but will not make good the definition . your new definition in the english , is little better then that of the latine . the consectary , as it is now mended in the english , is true ; but the demōstration of it hath many of the same faults , though not all , that i noted in the latine : and doth not at all conclude the truth of the consectary , from that definition . as appears by what i objected formerly . what you attempt to prove of two lines , you should have proved universally of any two ; for so much your definition requires . at the art. you bring a sorry argument to prove the perimeters of circles to be proportionable to their semidiameters . the strength of the argument lies in this , the bignesse of the perimeter is determined by its distance from the center ; and the length of the semidiameter is determined likewise by the same distance ; therefore , since the same cause determines both effects , the perimeters are proportionall to their semidiameters . this consequence i deny ; because , not only the bignesse of the perimeter , but of the circle also is determined by the same cause ; as also the superficies and the solid content of a spheare . for that distance of the circumference and center , determines the greatnesse of all these . and therefore , by your argument , circles , and spheares , &c. must be proportionall to their semidiameters : which is absurd . to which retort , because you can answer nothing ; you d●e , according to your usuall rhetorick , fall to ranting . at the article , i said , that your argument was but petitio principii . you say , there was a fault in the figure , ( that it was not exactly drawn ) which is now amended . true ; but there is a worse fault in the demonstration , which is not amended yet . for though you have altered your figure , and your demonstration too ; yet the fault remaines . and 't was this , not the figure , which i found fault with . for you do not prove that bh , bi , bc , ( fig. . ) are proportionall to af , ad , ab , but upon supposition that fg , de , bc , were so : which was the thing at first to be proved . you say , that af , fd , de , are equall by construction . ( true. ) and , that fg , dk , bh , ke , hi , ic , are equall by parallelism . but this is not true . the parallelism proves that fg , dk , bh , are equall ; and that ke , hi , are also equall ; but not that either of these two , are equall to either of those three , ( or to ic : ) unlesse you first suppose that de , is the double of dk , or fg , as ad is the double of af , which is the very thing to be proved . you tell me ; there was another fault ( yes , three or four for failing ) which i might have excepted against . but the weight of the demonstration did not ly there ; and i did not intend to trouble the reader with every petty fault ; ( for then i should never have done : ) especially in this and the next article ; where i did not then repeat your figure at all ; and therefore did briefly intimate where the fault lay : which had been direction enough for an intelligent man to have ●ound it out : but because j did not point with a festcue to every letter , you had not the wit to understand it . in like manner art. . when i told you the third corollary was false , and shewed you briefly the ground of your mistake ; because j did not , with a festcue point from letter to letter , you were not able to spell out the meaning ; but , as being lesse awake , thought it had been a dream . you had told us , that ( in your figure ) the angles kbc , gcd , hde , &c. were as , , , &c. and 't is true . thence you undertake in your third corollary to give account of the bending of a streight line into the circumference of a circle ; namely , by its fraction continually increasing according to the sayd numbers , , , &c. but how so ? for , say you , the streight line kb being broken at b according to any angle , as that of kbc , and again at c according to the double of that angle , and at d according to the treble &c. 't will containe a rectilineall figure ; but if the parts so broken be considered as the least that can be , that is , as so many points , 't will be a circumference . this , i said was false , and that the ground of your mistake was , that for the angle bde and its remainder hde , you took cde and its remainder . and j need not say more ; verbum sapienti a word for a wise man , had been enough ; but , for you it seemes , it was not . you , like a man halfe a sleep , took it to be a dreame . therefore , if you please to rub up your eyes a little , and take a festcue i will , for your better noddification , point to the letters as we goe along , and teach you to spell it out . the tangent line bk , continued indefinitely both ways , being broken at b , according to the angle kbc , will lye in bcg : now this line bcg being broken at c , according to the angle gcd which is the double of kbc , its part cg , will lye in cd continued , cdδ and hitherto you be right . but this continuation of cd , is not dh , as you seem to suppose , but dδ which will fall between dh , de. when therefore this line cdδ comes to be broken againe at d , that its continuation may lye in de , the faction will not be according to the angle hde ( which indeed is the triple of kbc ) but according to the angle δde : which will be lesse then hde , because it is evident that cd cuts bh , and indeed the very same angle of fraction with that at c ; for seeing the angle cde , is equal to bcd , by construction , the subtenses being taken equall ; the adjacent angles ( anguli 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) must be equall also , that is δde = gcd and therefore the angle of fraction at d , precisely equall with that at c ; not as to , as you suppose . and by the same reason the angle of fraction at e must be equall to that at d ; not as to , as you suppose . and so the angles of fraction at c , d , e &c are not as , , , &c. but are all equall . you see therefore , if you be yet awake , that it was not a dreame of mine , but a reall mistake of yours , to take hde for the angle of fraction of cd . and consequently that your proposition was false . and this fas●ho●d was the occasion of another falsehood in the . article of the . chapter . ( which since you have blotted out . ) for there you cite this proposition as the foundation of that : and whereas you say , you cannot guesse what that proposition was , ( and yet are very sure that it was true , ) for that you have no coppy of that article either printed or written . if you have not , j am sure you may have , for there be enough that have . for your book sold in sheets unbound , had commonly that article amongst the rest , and by that meanes it came to me . and , rather then you should be farre to seek for it , i have recited that whole article verbatim , yea to a letter , in its due place in my elenchus ; and proved it to be false . against your opinion concerning the angle of contact , ( in the . article , ) j said little ; because j think it needs no refutation . your opinion is this , that the angle pad , ( fig. . sect. ) is bigger then the angle pae , as being divided by the line ae . but the angle eac , is not bigger then the angle dac , nor is divided by the line da , but both of them equall as well to each other , as to the angle pac , and also to the angle gac . that this is your opinion , is evident . they that like it may imbrace it , for all me : and i hope , they that like it not may leave it . the rest of what concernes this businesse , is considered before in its proper place . at the . art beside what is common to this and the seventh , j noted for a fault , and you doe not deny it so to be , that you deliver it as euclide's opinion , that a solid angle is but an aggregate of plain angles . jt may be your opinion ; but surely 't was none of euclide's . if you had thought it had ; you should have here if you could , produced somewhat out of euclide where he declares such an opinion . at the . article all the ways by which two lines respect one an other , or all the variety of their position , seem , you sayd , to be comprised under four kinds ; for they are etiher parallells ; or ( if produced at least ) make an angle ; or ( if bigge enough ) be contingents ; or lastly are asymptotes . by asymptots you mean ( not all such as never meet , for then prallells would fall under this kind ; but ) such as will come always nearer and nearer together , but never touch one another ( you might have added this other character ; that they doe so approach each other , as that at length their distance will be lesse than any assignable quantity . but it seems you allow your asymptotes a greater latitude : and doe in your english , determine your meaning so to be : and that , i suppose , because you had neglected to put in , that limitation , in the latine ; and therefore were not willing upon my intimation to mend it in the english . for none else that i knew , speak of any other lines under the name of asymptotes , but such as doe not only eternally approach , but do approach also infinitely neare , and , i have reason to believe , from your simple objection less . . p. . l. . that you thought those two must needs go together , viz. that whatsoever quantities doe eternally approach , must needs at last come infinitely neare . but however wee 'l be content , if you would have it so , to take asymptotes at what latitude you will give it them . ) you say now , that i am offended at the word it seems . no , sir , no offence at all . i am not at all angry , that , to you , it should seem so . i said but , that to mee , it seemed otherwise ; ( and , i hope you are not offended that all things did not seem to me , as they did to you : for i perceive , that by this time , it seems otherwise to you also . which hath made you in the english , to give us this article new moulded . ) i shewed you then , many other positions of lines , which doe not agree to any of your four kinds . and you confesse it . and some of them such , as will not be salved with your new botch . as they that please to compare them will soon find . j touched at some other faults ; as , that the definition of points alike situate , ( art . . ) seemed very uncouth . that the word figure , which is defined art . . had been oft used long before it was defined ; ( which though it be , with you a small fault , yet a fault it is . ) and you confesse it . that by your definition a solid spheare , and a spheare made hollow within , is the same figure . ( for your definition takes notice of no superficies , but that within which they are included : your words are , intra quam solidum includitur . you say , it is my shall●wnesse , to think , those points which are in the concave superficies of a hallowed sphear not to be contiguous to any thing without it , because that whole concave superficies is within the whole spheare . it may be my shallownesse perhaps ; but it is i confesse , my opinion , that this concave superficies being , as you say all within a spheare , ( and therefore may be contiguous to somewhat within the spheare , ) is not contiguous to any thing without it , ( if it be , tell me to what ? and how it can be contiguous when the whole thicknesse of the spheare is between ? unlesse you think it can touch at a distance : ) nor , is that superficies intra quam sphaera includitur : for if , as you say , that whole superficies be within the whole sphear , how can the spheare be within that superficies ? you should rather have confest , as the truth is , that you did not think of a solides being contained by two or more superficies , not contiguous to one an another : and 〈◊〉 , had not provided for that case . i excepted likewise against your definition of like t●●ngs , cited here out of cap. . art . . those things , you de●ine to be like , which differ only in magitude . they do not , i say , alwaies differ in this ; for it is possible like things may be equall ( and therefore if they differ in nothing else , they differ not ut all . ) and sometimes again they may differ in somewhat else ; at least in position . else what needs your next definion , of similia similiter posita ? if it were not possible for similia to be dissimiliter posita ? to which exception ( because you had nothing to say ) you say nothing so your definition of like figures alike placed , i said was false : you confesse it is so , ( and therefore amend it in the english . ) you confesse you say , there wants something which should have been added ; but call we foole for taking notice of it : or else , you call your selfe foole , for not supplying it ; for you say , that it might easily be supplyed by any student in geometry , that is not otherwise a foole. but , rather then fall out for it , wee 'l divide the foole between us ; and cry ambo. 't was i , like a foole , took notice of that to be wanting , which you like a foole , omitted , when you should have supplyed it . the . chapter , because it contained but little mathematicall , i did but touch at ; leaving that for my worthy collegue to take to taske , with the rest of your philosophy . which he hath done to purpose . yet some few things j noted as a rast of the rest . j noted that ( contrary to others who define time to be the measure of motion ) you determine motion to be the measure of time ; and yet ( contrary to your own determination ) you do frequently make time the measure of motion ; measuring both motion , and its affections ( swiftnesse , slownesse , uniformity , &c. ) by time. you confesse it to be so : but raile at us for minding books , more than clocks and hour-glasses . and then ( contrary to both ) you tell us , that time and motion have but one dimension which is a line . and at last would perswade your english reader , that i would have you measure swiftnesse and slownesse , by longer and shorter motion : but they that understand latine , can find nothing to that purpose : i only told you what you did , ( and how absurd that was , ) not , what i would have you do ▪ then , because it still runnes into you mind , that i had some where said , that a point is nothing ( though no body can tell where ; ) you fall againe upon that . for my part , though i oft affirm that a mathematicall point , hath no parts ▪ yet j never denyed it to stand for as much at least , as a cyphar doth in numbers ; and you allow it noe more , ( c. ; art . . ) your words are these punctum inter quantitates nihil est , ut inter numeros cyphra . is it then j , or you ? that say a point is nothing ? you told us soon after , that all endeavour ( for even that is motion ) whether strong or weak , is propogated to infinite distance . as if ( said j ) the sk●pping of a flea did propagate a motion as farre as the indies . you ask , how we know it ? if you meane , how we know that it is so ; truely , j doe not know that at all . if you meane , how we know that it follows from what you affirme ; it is so evident a consequence from the words alleadged , that you need not aske ; or , if those words be not enough those that follow be yet fuller , procedit ergo omnis conatus , sive in va●uo , sive in plano , non modo ad distantiam quantamvis , sed etiam in tempore quantulocunque , id●est , in instanti . that ●s , all endeavour of motion whether the space be full or emty , is continued , not only to as great a distance as is imaginable , but in as little a time , that is , in an instant . but if your meaning be , what do i say to the contrary ? truely i say nothing to the contrary . they that have a minde to believe it , may . then you goe on to catechise us ; what is your name ? are you philosophers ? or geometricians ? or logicians ? &c. ( nay , never aske that question , we know you are good at giving names , without asking ) i hope , the next question will be , who gave you that name ? and truely as to many of the names you give us , a man might easily believe , yourself were the godfather , you call us so often by your own names . lastly , of two things moving with equall swiftnesse , that , say you , strikes hardest which is bignesse . no , say i , but that which is heaviest . a bullet of lead , though but with equall speed , strikes harder then a blown bladder . if any man think otherwise let him try . sect . x. concerning his chapter . in the chapter , i said , there were articles ; you say , but . 't is easily reconciled . there be twenty in my book ; and there were in yours too , before the last was cut or torne out : now , it seems , in yours there are but nineteen . well ; but , be they twenty , or be they nineteen ; twenty to one but the greatest number of them be naught . i do confidently affirme , you say , that all but three are false . nay , that 's false , to begin with . i said , that , all but three were unsound . some of them be non-sense , or absurd ; some be false ; some undemonstrated ; all unsound ; at least , within three : and i have already proved them so to be . but you ( you say ) do affirme , that they are all true , and truly demonstrated . and that 's answer enough to all my arguments . what need you say any more ? if that be true , doubtlesse you have the better on 't . but let 's trie a little , if we cannot find one unsound amongst them . your first proposition as it stands yet in the latine , you say , is this , the velocity of any body moved , during any time , is so much , as is the product of the impetus in one point of time , multiplied into the whole time. well , i hope at least the first is sound , is it not ? in one point , you say ; but which one ? is it any one ? or some one ? nay 't is but some one , not any one ; but , which one , you tell us not . what say you to this ? is it sound ? this , you confesse , without supplying what is wanting , is not intelligible . very good ! habemus confitentem rerum . to the first● article as it is uncorrected in the latine , ● object , you say , that meaning by impetus , some middle impetus , and assigning none , you determine nothing ▪ well what say you to that ? you say , 't is true . and then you rant at us for not mending it , ( as though we were bound to mend your faults ) yet look again , and you 'l find j did . j told you what you should have said ; as well as what you said amisse . but enough of this . here 's one fault confessed . in the same article ; you would have the impetus applied ordinately to any streight line , making an angle with it . j asked , how an impetus can be ordinately applied to a line ? or make an angle with it ? absurdly , you say ; and that 's the answer . and j told you how this should have been mended too . you tell me that archimedes and others say , let such a line be the time , and again p. . l. . let the line ab be the time. very likely ! just as when we say , let the time be a. that is , let it be so designed ; or , let the line ab , or the letter a , be the symbole of the time. what then ? doth it therefore follow , that either lines or letters be homogeneous to time ? no such matter . their symbols may be homogeneous though the things be not . you say farther , in the same article : if the impetus increase uniformely , the whole velocity of the motion shall be represented by a triangle , one side whereof is the whole time , and the other the greatest impetus , ( well! & what shall be the third side ? or what angle shall these contain ? do you think that the assigning of two sides , without an angle , will sufficiently determine the bignesse of a triangle ? but le ts go on . ) or else &c. or lastly by a parallelogramme having for one side a mean proportionall between the greatest impetus and the halfe thereof . well , but what for the other side ? and , what angle ? is a parallelogramme , said j , sufficiently determined , be the assignement of but one side , and never an angle ? what think you ? is this sound ? it was indeed a very great oversight , you confesse , to designe a parallelogram by one only side . and is not all this sufficient to prove the first article unsound ? if it be not , wee 'l go on , for there be more faults yet . for , say you , these two parallelograms are equall both each to other , and to the ( fore mentioned ) triangle ( without having any consideration of angles at all ) as is demonstrated in the elements of geometry . this , i say , is notoriously false : for a triangle of which nothing is determined but two sides : and a parallelogramme , of which the sides only are determined , but nothing concerning the angles : can never by any geometry , be demonstrated to be equall . this therfore is not only unsound , but false . and all this j told you before . what an impudence then is it , when you knew all this , to affirm , that they be , all true and all truly demonstrated , when the very first of them is thus notoriously faulty ! but we have not done yet . it might be hoped , that this confessed oversight is , at lest mended in the english : ( especially since you tell us that one from beyond sea hath taught you how to mend it ) no such matter . for the amendment is as bad or worse then what we had before . for now it runs thus . the whole velocity shall be represented by a triangle &c. ( as before ) or else by a parallelogram , one of whose sides is the whole time of motion ; and the other , half the greatest impetus : or lastly , by a parallelogram , having for one si●e a mean proportionall between the whole time and the halfe of that time ; and for the other side the halfe of the greatest impetus . for both these parallelograms are equall to one another , and severally equall to the triangle which is made of the whole line of time , and the greatest acquired impetus . as is demonstrated in the elements of geometry . now this , you shall see , is pittifully faise . let the time be t ; and the greatest impetus , i : and let the angles be supposed all right angles ( for such your figures represent , though your text says nothing of them . ) the altitude therefore of the triangle , is t , ( the whole time : ) the basis i , ( the greatest impet●s : ) and consequently the area thereof is one halfe of t × i : that is ½ it . again the altitude of the former parallelogram , t , ( the whole time , ) its basis , ½ ● , ( half the greatest impetus , ) and therefore the area t × ½ i , or ½ it ; equall to that of the triangle le ts see now whether the last parallelogram be equall to either of these , as you affirm . the altitude you will have to be a mean proportionall between the whole time and its halfe : that is , between t&½ t ; it is therefore the root of t × ½ t , that is the root of ½ tq , that is √ ½ tq , or t √ ½ : the basis you will have to be one half of the greatest impetus , that is ½ i : and consequently , the area must be ½ i × √ ½ tq , or ½ i × t √ ½ , or ½ it √ ½ . but ½ it √ ½ is not equall to ½ it : therefore this parallelogram is not equall either to the former , or to the triangle . 't is false therefore which you affirmed . quod erat demonstrandum . now what do you think of the businesse ? is not the matter well amended ? 't was bad before , now 't is worse . when you told us but of one side , and left us to guesse the other , 't was at our perill if we did not guesse right , and 't was to be hoped , you meant well , though you forgot to set it down . but , now you tell us , what you meant , we find that you neither said well , nor meant well : for what you now say is clearly false . the two parallelograms which you affirm to be equall , are no more equall then the side and the diagonall of a square ; but just in the same proportion ; viz. as √ ½ to . nay was it not a pure piece of wisdome in you , that , when you had been taught from beyond sea , as you tell us , how it should have been mended , you had not yet the wisdome to take good counsell ; but , trusting to your own little wit , have made it worse than it was ? it falls out very unluckily , you see , that when you affirmed so confidently , that they are all true , and all truly demonstrated , the very first of them should be so wretchedly faulty . but enough of this . wee 'l try whether the next will prove better . in the second article you give us this proposition . in every uniform motion , the lengths passed over are to one another , as the product of the ones impetus multiplied into its time , to the product of the others impetus multiplied into its time . and why not , said j , ( without any more adoe ) as the time to the time ? which needed no other demonstration than to cite the definition of vniform motion , ( viz. which doth in equall or proportionall times , dispatch equall or proportionall lengths . ) what need had you to cumber the proposition with impetus and multiplication , and products , when they might as well be spared ? and then put your selfe to the trouble of a long and needlesse demonstration , when the bare citing of a definition would have served the turne ? you answer , that the product of the time and ●mpetus , to the product of the time and impetus , is also as the time to the time. and therefore the proposition is true . yes doubtlesse ; and therefore i did not find fault with it , as false ; but as foolish , to make such a busle to no purpose . for , by your own confession , the proportion of the lengths dispatched , is as well designed by the termes alone , as by those multiplications and products . but there is another fault which j f●●● with your proposition ; ● told you that , instead of , in every uniforme motion , you should have said , ( and , that you might have said it safely , as the rest of the wordsly , ) in all uniform motions ; for you make use of this proposition afterwards , not only in comparing divers parts of any the same uniforme motion , but in comparing divers motions one with another . but at this you are highly offended , that j should understand to what purpose this proposition is brought , better than your selfe ; and that j should presume to tell you , what you ought to have said . ( and , on the other hand , when j do not do so , you blame mee , that j do not to my reprehension adde a correction : so that , it seems , you are neither well , full nor fasting : j must neither do it , nor let it alone . ) and then you go on to rant , after your fashion , at wit and mystery , and times and wayes , and steddy brains , at reading thoughts , and noise of words , at step and stumble , &c. and yet , for all the anger , ( when the heats over ) you think best to take my counsell ; and therefore say in the english , just as j said it should have been in the latine . the proposition then being thus to be understood , ( though at first , ill worded , ) the demonstration , i said , would not hold . for though it will doe well enough ( yea more then enough ; for you might have spared halfe of it ; ) in comparing severall parts of the same motion , and in comparing severall motions of the same swiftnesse ; yet for the comparing of uniforme motions in generall , it will not serve by no meanes ; for you do assume at the first dash , that the motions compared have the same impetus . now this must not be allowed . for it 's very possible ( as you now know , since , j told you , though before you seemed to be ignorant of it , as j then convinced you ; ) that two motions may be both uniforme ; and yet not have both the same impetus . your proposition therefore ( as it was to be understood ) was not truly demonstrated . now , because this was very evident , and not to be denied ; therefore you thought it best to make no words of it , but mend it as well as you could . and so , in the english , you have mended the proposition , as j bid you ; and given us a new demonstration , which is pretty good ; but not yet without fault . for in stead of the length af ( fig. . ) you should have said , the length dg : for the length should have been taken in the line de , which , according to your construction , is the line of lengths ; not in the line ab , which is , by construction , the line of times . so impossible a thing is it , for you to mend one fault and not to make another . but if all these faults be not enough to make this article unsound , there is yet another , before we leave . since therefore you say , in uniforme motion , the lengths dispatched are to one another , as the times in which they are dispatched ; it will also be , by permutation , as time to length , so time to length . this consequence i denied ; because permutation of proportion hath place only in homogenealls , no● in heterogenealls ; ( and referred you for farther instruction concerning it , to what clavious hath on the . prop. of the . of euclide . ) you tell me , that i think , line and time are heterogeneous . yes , and you think so to if you be not a foole . if not , pray tell me how many yards long is an hour ? or , how much line will make a day ? well , le ts try a third article . ( for the two first you see be nought , that 's a bad begining . ) art. . in motion uniformely accelerated from rest , ( that is , when the impetus increaseth in proportion to the times ) the length run over in one time , is to the length run over in an other time . ( in the english for impetus , you have put mean impetus , and so in some other propositions ; but that neither mends nor mars the businesse . ) to this , first you dream of an objection , and then think of an answer to it . i object you say , that the lengths run over , are in that proportion which the impetus hath to the impetus . prithee tell me , where i made that objection to this article ; and i 'le confesse 't was simply done . but 'till then , i 'le say 't is done like your selfe , to say so however . ( for 't is lawfull with you to say any thing , true or false ) your english reader , perhaps , may think 't is true . next , you aske , you say , where it is that you say or dreame , that the lengths run over are in proportion of the impetus to the times ? but prithee , why dost thou aske me such a question ? am i bound to give an account of all thy dreames ? perhaps you dreamed that i had charged you with such a saying ; but , look again , and you 'l find that 's but a dreame as well as the rest . that which i said was this , the parallell line fh , bi , ( fig. . ) do shew what proportion the impetus at f hath to the impetus at b ; to wit , the same with the time af , to the time ab : ( and is not this your meaning , when you say the impetus increaseth in proportion to the times ? ) but , though those ( and other parallell lines ) do define what proportion the severall impetus have to each other ; yet they do not designe ( by permutation of proportion , as you fancied in the corollary of the precedent article ) what proportion the severall impetus have to the times ; because they be heterogeneous , and do not admit of that permutation . and these are the words , which gave occasion to those your two dreames . and then ( as if between sleeping and waking ) you ask , if it be you or ● that dream ? had you been well awake , you needed not have asked the question . the objections that i made to it , were these . first , that in stead of motu accelerato , ( accelerate motion , ) you should have said , motibus acceleratis ( accelerate motions , ) because you speake of more than one . you say , there is no such matter : and bid mee give an instance . j will so , and that without going farther then your present 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . let ab ( say you ) represent a time &c. againe , let af represent another time &c. and in each of these times you suppose a motion , which motions this proposition compares . therefore , say i , there must be at least two motions , because two times ; unlesse you will say , that one and the same motion may be now , and anon too . i objected farther , that the demonstration doth nor prove the proportion ; except only in one case , to which you do not restraine it . for the whose stresse of your demonstration , ( in the latine ) lyes upon this , that the triangles abi , afk , be like triangles ( where you inferre , that the space dispatched in the latter time ak , is to that of the former time ab , as the triangle abi , to the triangle afk , that is in the duplicate proportion of the times ab , af. ) which supposeth that the second motion in the time af , doth acquire the same impetus which the first motion had acquired in equall time . whereas it is possible , that , of two motions , each of them uniformly accelerated , the one of them may in half the time acquire as great a swiftnesse , as the other doth in the whole time ; if therefore the latter motion in the same af , do acquire a swiftnesse equall to that of the former in the time ab , ( which may very well be , for the words uniformly accelerated , doe imply only the manner of acceleration , not the degree of celerity ; as your selfe now discern , though then you did not , ) the triangles will be , not abi , afk , but abi , afh ; which are not like triangles , but unlike ; and so the demonstration falls . you should have provided in your proposition , not only that the two motions , ( the one in the time ab , the other in the time af , ) be each of them uniformly accelerated , but that they be both equally swift . which when you have neglected to take care of , you affirm that universally , which will hold only in one case . but the truth is , 't is evident enough , by this and divers other articles , that you took the manner of acceleration , ( viz. if in the same , in the duplicate , or triplicate , &c. proportion to the times , ) had sufficiently determined the speed also . and therefore took it for granted , that the motion in the time af , if uniformly accelerated , must needs attain precisely the same degree of the celerity , that the other motion in the time ab , uniformly also accelerated , had attained in equall time . ( which to be a very great mistake , you now doe apprehend . ) otherwise you would not have let these articles ly so naked without such provision ; nor would you , ( as in the article , and those that follow , ) undertake , by the manner of acceleration , and the last acquired impetus , to determine the time of motion . whereas , in the same manner of acceleration ( whether uniformly , or in the duplicate , or triplicate , or quadruplicate proportion ; ) any assignable impetus or degree of celerity , may be attained in any assignable time whatever . i objected farther , that because , as hath been shewed , the triangle afk , or afh , is not necessarily like to the triangle abi , therefore it doth not follow that the length passed over , will be in duplicate proportion to the time . for unlesse the triangles be alike , the proportion of them will not be duplicate to that of their homologous sides . now these two objections were clear and full , ( and did destroy your whole demonstration ; ) and this you discerned well enough , though you did not think fit to make any reply or confession ; ( but invent some other objections , which i never made , that you might seem to answer to somewhat . ) and therefore in the english , without making any words of it , you mend it . and instead of those words in the latine , as the triangle abi , to the triangle afk , that is , in duplicate proportion of the time ab to af : you say in the english . as the triangle abi , to the triangle afk , that is , if the triangles be like in the duplicate proportion of the time ab , to the time af ; but , if unlike in the proportion compounded &c. ( which is a clear confession of all those objections . but let 's go on . compounded of what ? ) of ab , to bi , and of ak , to af. no such matter ; of af to fk , ( that 's it you would have said : ) not , of ak to af. there 's one fault therefore ; but that 's not all . of ab to af , and of bi to fk ; that 's it you should have said : for ab to bi , the time to the impetus , hath no proportion at all ; but are heterogeneous , as i have often told you . there 's a second fault therefore in your emendation . and is not this tinker-like , to mend one hole and make two ? nay there is a third yet , which is the worst of all . in the mending of this fault , ( though you had not missed in it , ) you have discovered another , which you did your endeavour , but now , to hide . i said in the proposition for motion , you should have said motions ; because it was intended of more than one compared . you tell me , there 's no such matter ; meaning , i suppose , the latter motion in the time af , was but part of that former motion in the time ab : but if , as you now confesse , the triangle afk , be not necessarily alike triangle to abi , ( but that the point k may fall either within or without the line ai , ) then must this be not only another , but an unlike motion to the former : viz. either faster or slower , though uniformly accelerated as that was . do not you know that old rule ; oportet esse memorem . but this 't is , when men will commit faults , and then deny them . and yet presently after , by going about to mend them , betray themselves . much such luck you have in mending the corollary . you had said in the latine , in motion uniformly accelerated , the lengths transmitted are in the duplicate proportion of their times . this , i said , was true in one case , ( viz. in equall celerities , ) but not universally . therefore you , to mend the matter , in the english make it worse ; in motion uniformly accelerated , say you , the proportion of the lengths transmitted , to that of their times , ( no , but the proportion of the length transmitted , one to the other , ) is compounded of the proportions of the times to the times , and impetus to impetus . there be more faults in this article ; but i am weary of the businesse ; let 's go to the next . the fourth article hath all the faults that the third hath , ( which are enough as wee have seen already , ) and some more . first , for motu accelerato , you should have said motibus acceleratis ; because you compare more motions then one . secondly , the motion performed in the time af , ( fig. . ) though accelerate according to the duplicate proportion of the times , as well as that in the time ab ; yet may that be either swifter or slower than this ; ( because as we have often said , the manner of acceleration doth not determine the degree of celerity ; ) and therefore the point k which determines its greatest impetus , doth not necessarily fall in the parabolicall line , but may fall either within or without it : according as the celerity is lesse or more . thirdly , and therefore it doth not follow , that the lengths dispatched by such motion , are in triplicate proportion to their times . for this only depends upon supposition that the point k in the second motion , must needs fall in the parabola ai , designed by the first motion . now these two latter faults , in the former article , you did endeavour to amend in the english : but because , it seems , here it was harder to doe , you have left them as they were before . that these were faults , you were clearly convinced of ; and do as good as confesse , by your attempt to mend them in the third article . but because you saw it was impossible for one of your capacity to think of mending all ; you resolve to give over mending , and ( which is the easier of the two ) resolve to try the strength of your brow . but , as if there were a necessity of growing worse and worse ; beside those , common to this and the third article , here is an addition of more faults , as foul as any of them . in your demonstration ; your stresse lyes upon this argument , seeing the proportion of fk to bi , is supposed duplicate to that of ae to ab , ( which yet is a false supposition ; for the ordinate lines in a parabola are not in duplicate , but in subduplicate proportion to the diameters : but , suppose it true , what then ? ) that of ab to af , will be duplicate to that of bi to fk . that is , because the ordinate lines in a parabola , are in duplicate proportion to the diameters ; therefore those diameters are in duplicate proportion to those ordinate lines . which if it be not absurd enough , i would it were . first , the proportion of the ordinates , must be duplicate to that of the diameters , ( because m. hobs will have it so ; ) and then ( by the virtue of hocus pocus ) this must be duplicate to that . to this you make no reply : but inslead thereof , disguise the matter in your lesson , by putting double for duplicate , as if they were all one ; ( though yet chap. . art . . wee have , in the english , a long harangue of your own to shew the difference between them ; ) and then raile at those that first brought up the distinction ; and tell us , ( which is notoriously false ) that euclide never used but one word for double and duplicate ; ( that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , are with m. hobs but one and the same word . ) but what is all this to the raking off that absurdity with which you are here charged ? next i shewed you , that your whole argument was grounded upon a false supposition ; viz. that the velocity of the motion in hand , was to be designed by the semiparabola akb ; and that the ordinate lines in that semiparabola , ( by which you would have the increasing impetus to be designed ) did increase in duplicate proportion to their diameters ( by which you designe the times ▪ ) both which are false . for , these ordinate lines , are well known ( to all but m. hobs ) to increase in the subduplicate ( not the duplicate ) proportion of the diameters : and consequently that semiparabola can never expresse the aggregate of the impetus thus increasing . i did farther demonstrate , that the point k , ought to fall within the triangle abi , not without it ; and therefore not in the parabolicall line by you designed . the demonstration was easy . for if the time af be one halfe of ab , that is , as to : the impetus increasing in duplicate proportion to the times , must be as to ; and therefore fk will be but a quarter of bi . but because af is halfe of ab , therefore fn will be halfe of bi . and consequently fk ( a quarter ) will be lesse then fn , which is the halfe of bi . which because you saw too evident to be contradicted ▪ you thought it best ( as your usuall custome is in such cases , ) to raise at it in stead of answering it . i shewed you farther , that the aggregate of all the impetus in a motion thus accelerated , or the whole velocity , was not ⅔ of the parallelogram ai , but only ⅓ of it . for this aggregate is not to be designed by a semiparabola , but by the complement of a semiparabola . and many other mistakes ▪ consequent thereunto . and indeed so many , as that dispairing of mending them all , you resolved to let them stand as they were . yet i shewed you withall the chiefe ground of all these mistakes , and how they might have been mended . but it appeares you had not the wit to understand it , and therefore durst not venture upon it . but have left this whole article such an hodge podge of errors , as would turne a quea●ie stomach , but to examine it . and your corollarys are false also . in the first corollary , 't is false which you affirme , that the proportion of the parabola abi to the parabola afk , is triplicate to the proportion of the times , ab to af , ( as it is in the english . ) or of the impetus bi to fk , ( as it is in the latine . ) this exception you confesse to be just , yet leave it uncorrected in the english ; because you know not how to mend it ; without giving your selfe the ly in the rest . for as badde as it is , it follows , with the rest of your doctrine . it must all stand or fall together . the second corollary , ( at least , if understood of the parabola , ) is also false ; for the segments of a parabola ( of equall height ) successively from the vertex , are not as the numbers , , , &c. the difference of the cubes . , , , &c. but us the differences of these surd nūbers , √ , √ , √ . &c. that which you alledge to justify your selfe ; that the parts of the parabola cut off are as the cubes of their bases ; is but a repetition of the same error . they are not as the cubes of their bases , but as the square roots of such cubes . the third corrollary is wholly false , a motion so accelerated doth not dispach two thirds ; but one third , of what a uniform motion would have done , with an impetus equall to the greatest of those so increasing . you say , i give no demonstration of it . ( it may be so ; and it 's all one to me , whether you believe it to be true or no. you may think , if you please , that the corollary is true still ; it will not hurt me . ) yet if you considered what had been said before , you should have seen the reason : viz. because the aggregate of the impetus did not constitute a semiparabole , but the complement of a semiparabola , which is not ⅔ but ⅓ of the parallelogram . the fift article hath the same faults with the fourth ; and runnes all upon the same mistakes . the main foundation of all these continued errors , was , i told you , the ignorance of what is proportion duplicate , triplicate , subduplicate , subtriplicate , &c. of three numbers in continuall proportion , if the first be the lest , the proportion of the first to the second is duplicate , of what it hath to the third , not subduplicate : that was your opinion cap. . § . of the latine . in the english , you have retracted that error in part ; yet retaine all the ill consequences that followed from it . next , you suppose the aggregates of the impetus increasing in the duplicate , triplicate &c. proportion of the times , to be designed by the parabola , and parabolasters , ( as if their ordinates did increase in the duplicate , triplicate , &c. proportion of their diameters ; cujus contrarium verum est ; ) whereas you should have designed them by the complements of those figures , but you aske me what line that ( complement ) is ? no line , good sir , but a figure , which with the figure of the semiparabola &c. doth compleare the parallelogram . you ought therefore ( as i then told you , but you understood it not , ) to have described your parabola the other way ; that the convex ( not the concave ) of the parabolicall line should haue been towards the line of times ab . so should the point k have fallen between n and f ; and the convex of the parabola with at ( the tangent ) and bi ( a parallel of the diameter , ) have contained the complement of that parabola , whose diameter therefore must have been ac , and its ordinate ci. next , in pursuance of this error , you make the whole velocity , in these accelerations ( in duplicate , triplicate &c. proportion of the times ) to be ⅔ , ¾ , &c. of the velocity of an uniforme motion with the greatest acquired impetus , ( because the parabola and parabolasters , have such proportion to their para ●lelograms ) whereas they are indeed but ⅓ , ¼ , &c. thereof ; for such is the proportion of the complements of those figures , to their parallelograms . now upon these false principles , with many more consonant hereunto , you ground not only the doctrine of the fourth and fifth articles , but also most of those that follow ; especially the thirteenth and thenceforth to the end of the chapter : which are all therefore of as little worth as these . but enough of this . the first five articles therefore are found to be unsound ; and many ways faulty . the sixth , seventh and eighth articles , i did let passe for sound : and you quarrell with me for so doing . but i said withall , you might have delivered as much to better purpose in three lines , as there you did in five pages . ( beside such petty errors all along as it were endlesse every where to take notice of ) which gives you a new occasion to raile at symbols . after these three , there is not one sound article to the end of the chapter , and what those were before , we have heard already . the ninth article is this , if a thing be moved by two movents at once , concurring in what angle soever , of which the one is moved uniformely , the other with motion uniformely acceleeated from rest , till it acqu●e an impetus equall to that of the vniforme motion ; the line in which the thing moved is carried , will be the crooked line of a semiparabola . very good ! but of what semiparabola ? ( for hitherto , we have nothing but a proporsion of galilaeo's transcribed . ) you tell us , ●t shall be that semiparabola , whose busis is the impetus last acquired ; and this is the whole designation of your parabola . to this designation i objected many things . first , that the basis of a semiparabala is not an impetus but a line : and therefore 't is absurd to talke of a semiparabola whose basis is an impetus . secondly , if it be said that an impetus may be designed by a line ; i grant it ; ( a line may be the symbol of an impetus , as well as a letter ▪ ) but this line , is what line you please ; ( for any impetus may be designed by any line at pleasure : ) & so , to say that it is a semiparabola , whose basis is that line which designes the impetus : is all one as to say , it is a semiparabola , whose basis is what line you please . so that we have not so much as the basis of this semiparabola determined . thirdly , suppose that the base had been determined , ( as it is not ) yet it is a simple thing to think that determining the basis , doth determine the parabola . for there may be infinite parabola's described upon the same base . you doe not tell us what altitude , what diameter , nor what inclination this parabola is to have . now to this you keep a bawling ; but say nothing to the businesse . you tell us , that you had said , what angle soever . that is , you supposed your mevents to concurre in what angle ●soever ; but you sayd nothing of what was to be the angle of inclination in the parabola . you might have said indeed , it was to be the same with that of the movents : but you did not ; and therefore i blam'd you for omitting it . then , as to the diameter , you might have said ( but you did not ) that the line of the acccelerate motion , would be the diameter . 't was another fault therefore not to say so ; for that had been requisite , to the determining of the parabola . but when you had so said ; this had but determined the position of the diameter , not its magnitude : it may be long or short , at pleasure notwithstanding this . then as to the altitude of it ; this remaines as much undetermined as the rest . you tell us neither where the vertex is , nor how farre it is supposed to be distant from the base . you might have said , ( but you did not , ) that the point of rest , where the two motions begunne , was the vertex . ( and t was your fault you did not say so in the latine , as you have now done in the english . ) but had you so said , you had not thereby determined either the altitude , or the diameters length . you say , the vertex and base being given , i had not the wit to see that the altitude of the parabola is determined . no truely ; nor have i yet . but it seems you had so little wit , as to think it was . had the vertex and base been , positione data : i confesse , it had been determined : ( for then i had been told how farre off from the base , the vertex had been . ) but when the base is only magnitudine data , there , is no such thing determined . for a base of such a bignesse , may be within an inch , and it may be above an e●l from the vertex , according as the parameter is greater or lesse . now you doe not pretend any other designation of the base , then that it be equall to such an impetus ; which determines only the bignesse of it , not the distance from the vertex . so that the altit●de , notwithstanding this flamme , remaines undetermined . ( and must do so , whatever you think , till you do determine the degree of celerity , which answers to the parameter of the parabola ; as well as the manner of acceleration , which only determines that it is a parabola , but not what parabola . the proposition therefore is extreamly imperfect ; nor doth determine that which it did undertake to determine . the figure is yet worse . you suppose the line ab , ( fig. . ) by uniforme motion , to have dispatched the length ac , or bd , and so ly in cd ; in the same time that the line ac , by motion uniformely accelerated , dispatcheth , the length ab , or cd , to come and lye on cd . that is , ( because ab , according to your figure , it about twise the length of ac , ) the motion accelerated doth , in the same time , dispatch about twise the length of what is dispatched by the uniforme motion . but it is evident , the accelerate motion is all the way , to the very last point , slower than the uniforme , ( for by supposition , it doth not till the last point , attain to that impetus or swiftnesse , with which the uniform motion was carryed all the way . ) therefore according to you , a slower motion doth , in the same time , dispatch a a greater length then the swifter , which is absurd enough : and to which you make no reply . the demonstration also ( saving what you have from galileo ) i then shewed you to be faulty ; and you reply nothing in its vindication and therefore i need not repeat it . you have in the english a little disguised the proposition , but to little purpose . the parabola which you undertake to determine , remaines as undetermined as it was before . and the figure the same with all its faults : and the demonstration no whit mended . so much of this article as yo● tooke out of galileo was good , before you spoild it ; but the next is all naught . your tenth article doth but repeat all the faults of the ninth , and you have nothing more to say in the vindication of this then of that . the parabolaster here , remaines as undetermined as the porabola there ; your figure ( fig. . ) makes the flower motion in the same time to dispatch the greater length ; your demonstration is faulty as that was . nay you have not here , so much as disguised it in your english , as you did the former ; but left it as it was in the latine . so that this falls under the same condemnation with the former . i hinted also , that we have here a great talke of parabolasters which are not to be defined till the next chapter . but that 's a small fault . your english helps it , by sending us thither for the definiton . your eleventh article undertakes to give us a generall rule , to find what kind of line shall be made by the motion of a body carryed by the concurse of any two movents , the one of them vniformely , the other with acccleration , but in such proportion of spaces and times as are explicable by numbers , as duplicate , triplicate &c. or such as may be designed by any broken number whatsoever . your rule for this , sends us to the table of chap , ▪ art . . to seek there a fraction whose denominator is to be the summe of the exponents of length and time ; and its numerator , the exponent of the length . upon this i proposed you a case which falls within your proposition , but not within your rule : ( to shew that your rule did not performe what you undertook to performe by it . ) let the motions , sayd i , be , the one , uniforme ; the other accelerate , so as that the spaces be in subduplicate proportion to the times ; or , in your language , as to . we are therefore , by your rule , to seeek in the table the fraction ⅓ . but there 's no such fraction to be found ( nor any lesse then ½ . ) your rule therefore doth not serve the turne . well ▪ let 's heare what you have to say for your selfe . did i not see ( you aske ) that the table is only of those figures which are described by the concourse of a motion vniforme , with a motion accelerated . yes i did , see that the table is only of such : nay more , i saw ( which is more to your purpose ) that the proposition is only of such ; ( though yet if need be , i could shew you how the same figures might be described by motion retarded as well as motion accelerated , ) & therefore i proposed such a case ; viz. an acceleration in the subduplicate proportion of the times , that is after the rate √ ▪ √ . √ . √ . &c. which is the subduplicate rate of , , , , &c. i had no reason therefore , say you , to look for ⅓ in thae takle . that is , i had no reason to expect , that your rule should performe what you undertake . but why no reason to expect it ? for my case is of motion uniforme concurring with motion retarded . no ▪ such matter , ( nor be you so simple to think so , whatever you here pretend ; ) for √ . √ . √ . √ . &c. is no decreasing progression , but increasing : for √ , is more then √ & √ , & more then √ . & so on . but why should you think it is not so ? because forsooth . i do not make the proportion of the spaces to that of the times duplicate , but subduplicate . very good 〈◊〉 but if times be proposed in a series increasing as , , , , &c. will not the subduplicate rate be increasing also , as well as the duplicate ? that is , doe not the rootes of these numbers continually increase , as well as their squares ? think againe and you 'l see they doe . well , but however , though this table will not serve the turne , yet the ●ase may be solved , you tell us , another way . no doubt of it . i could have told you so before . ( for though you knew not how to resolve it ; i did ; and therefore directed ▪ you to the . prop of my arithmetica infinitorum ; where you have the case resolved more universally then it is by you proposed ; viz. where the exponent of the rate of acceleration is not explicable by numbers ; but even by surd ro●tes , or other irrationall quantities . ) but what becomes of your rule in the mean while , which sent us to that table for solution ? where , you now tell us , ( for i had told you so before ) it is not to be hard ? this eleventh article therefore , is like the rest . nor is it at all amended in the english . your twelfth proposition , i said , was wretchedly false ; and i say so , still . but , you say , you have left it standing unaltered ; ( & yet that 's false too ; for your english hath a considerable alteration from what was in the latine , though not much for the better ) your words were these ▪ if motion be made by the concourse of two movents , whereof one is moved uniformely , the other with any acceleration whatever ( for which you say in the english , the other beginning with rest in the angle of concurse , with any acceleration whatsoever ) the movent which is moved uniformely shall put forward the thing so moved , in the severall parallel spaces , lesse , than if both motions had been vniforme . i gave instance to the contrary , ( in fig. . ) the streight line and , may be described by a compound of two uniforme motions ; and the parabolick line agd , by a motion compounded of two , the one uniforme and the other accelerated , ( neither of which you can deny , for you affirme both , at art . , and . ) but within the paralells ac , ef , the thing moved ( contrary to your assertion ) is more put forward by this , than by that motion ( for eg , is greater then en , ) the p●oposition therefore , in this case is false . yonr answer is , that other geometricians find no fault with it . it may be so . but is there any geometrician ( who hath well examined it ) will say 't is true ? and that , in all cases ? in some cases i told you , it may happen to be true ; and in in other cases it will be certainely false : ( and i told you also , when , and where . ) and i did in the case proposed prove it so to be ; and you can say nothing to the demonstration . you would indeed tell me of another case wherein , you think it is true . but what 's that to the purpose ? when i give instance to the contrary of a universall proposition , you must allow me to lay the case as i think good ( so as it be within the limites of that universall ) and not as you would have me . the proposition therefore is demonstrated to be false . and you have nothing to say in vindication of it . the thirteenth article doth propose a problem as ridiculous as a man would desire to read . 't is this let ab ( fig. . ) be a length transmitted with uniforme motion in the time ac : and let it be required to find another length which shall be transmitted in the same time with motion uniformly accelerated , so as the impetus ( or , as in the english , the line of the impetus ) last acquired be equall to the streight line ac . the answer say j to this probleme , is what length you please . ( and you might as well have propounded , a quantity being assigned which is equall to its foure quarters ; let it be required to find another quantity which is equall to its two halves . or thus a parallelogram being proposed of a known base and altitude ; let it be required to find what may be the altitude of a triangle on the same base . where , what quantity you will , doth serve for answer to the former : and , what altitude you will for the latter . and , what length you will , is the answer to your problem . ) for there is no length assignable , which may not , in any assignable time , be dispatched by a motion uniformly accelerated , whose last impetus shall be what you please . and 't is but as if you should have asked ; what may be the height of that parabola , or triangle , whose basis is equall to ac ? the problem being thus ridiculous , it cannot be expected that the construction or demonstration should be better . and truly 't is pittifull stuffe all of it : as j then shewed . and you do not so much as attempt any thing by way of answer , to justify either your construction or demonstration . you ask here , ( for you have no more witt then to propose such a question , ) granting that a parabola may be described upon a base given ; and yet have any altitude , or any diameter one will : ( which you say who doubts ? ) how it will hence follow , that when a parabolicall line is described ( is to be described , you should have said ; for the problem is of somewhat to be done , not , of somewhat done already , ) by two motions , the one uniform , the other uniformly accelerated from rest ; that the determining the base , doth not also determine the whole parabola ? j answer . because every parabola may be so described ; ( which if you did not know before , you may now learn of me : ) and therefore , since that , upon a base given , a parabola may be described of any altitude ( as you grant ; ) and that every parabola may be so described : the determining of the base , doth not determine the altitude of a parabola so to be described ; more then the altitude of a parabola simpliciter . but if you would have done any thing to acquit your selfe of the charge in this article , ( of proposing a ridiculous , nugatorious problem : ) you should have assigned some length , which by a motion so accelerated , and acquiring such an impetus , could not have been dispatched in a time assigned . till then ; i say , it may dispatch what length you please : and therefore your problem is as ridiculous as a man could wish . there be divers other petty faults , that j took notice of by the way ; as that those words , so as the impetus acquired be equall to a time ( as if heterogeneous things could be equall . ) and , those words , as duplicate proportion is to single proportion , so let the line ah be to the line ai. ( which is as pure nonsense as need to be : ) as if there were one certain proportion of the duplicate proportion , to the single proportion . you tell us , upon second thoughts , in your english , cap. . art . . that duplicate proportion is sometime greater then the single ; and that it is sometimes lesse : and yet you would here have us think that it is alwaies as to . the proportion of to , is duplicate of that of to : and the proportion of to , is duplicate of that of to . but there is not the same proportion of the proportion / to the propor●ion ● / , that there is of the proportion / to the proportion / ▪ but that is triple this double : ( for nine times as many , is the triple of three times as many ; and four times as many , is but the double of twice as many . ) but this you cannot understand , and therefore call for help from somebody that is more ready in symbols . it seems a man must speak to you in words at length , and not in figures . and truly , all 's little enough to make you understand it . the , , and articles are just like the : and as ridiculous as it . what was there objected , you confesse , may as well be objected to these . but that hath been proved to be ridiculous : and therefore so are these . any length being given , which , in a time given , is dispatched with uniform motion ; to find out what length will be dispatched in the same time with motion so accelerated , as that the lengths dispatched be continually in triplicate proportion to that of their times . ( so art. . ) or quadruplicate , quintuplicate , &c. ( ibidem . ) or as any number to any number . ( so art. . . ) and the impetus last acquired equall to the time given . that 's the problem . the solution should have been ; what length you please . take where you will you cannot take amisse . if you say , 't is an inch , you say true : if you say , 't is an ell , you say true : and if you say 't is a thousand miles , no body can contradict you . for it may be what you please . and is it not a wise thing of you then , for the designing of an arbitrary quantity , a what-you-will , to bring a parcell of constructions , and demonstrations , with finding of mean proportionalls , as many as one please ; for a matter of two leaves together ? and , when you have done all , 't is but , ( as you were , ) what you will. j noted farther that in all these articles , , , , as in those before art. , , . & those following , , . you doe every where make the slower motion , in the same time , dispatch the greater length . which i did clearly demonstrate . to this you reply nothing to the purpose : but cavill , that you might seem to say something . you say , i corrupt your article by putting movens for mobile . but there 's no such matter ; for in the place alleadged ( art. . ) movens is your own word , not mine . you say , 't is no matter whether ab or ac ( in the fifth figure ) be the greater . yes it is ; it 's impossible that ab , according to your supposition , should be so bigge as ac ; and yet , you have made it almost twice as big . you say , you speak of the concurse of two movents ; very true . but each of those movents have their severall pace assigned them ; & therefore you should not have made the slower movent to rid more ground . and then you would tell mee , what i think ; and then talk of hard speculations , of edge and wit and malice &c. but nothing to the purpose . for when you have all done , its evident , and you cannot deny , that in your and and figures , ab is made welnigh twice as long as ac ; and so again in your , , and , figures ah much longer then ab ; and yet these longer lines designe the length , dispatched by the slower motions in the same time . for the motion accelerate , which doth not till its last moment attain the swiftnesse , with which the uniform motion proceeds all the way , must needs be slower then that uniform motion . but this was a fault which i might safely have let passe ; for these articles were ridiculous enough before . in the article , i shewed first , that the proposition , as it was proposed , was not perfect sense . then , that , the sense being supplied , the proposition was false . and lastly , that your demonstration had at lest fourteen faults , and most of them such , as that any one was sufficient to overthrow the demonstration . the proposition was this , if in a time given , a body run over two lengths , one with vniform , the other with accelerated motion , in any proportion of the length to the time , and again in a part of that time , it run over parts of those lengths with the same motions ; the excesse of the whole longitude above the whole ( to what ? ) is the same proportion with the excesse of the part above the part , to what ? is this good sense ? no ; you confesse there was somewhat left out in that proposition , but say , it was absurdly done to reprehend it . very good ! it seems you must have the liberty to speak non-sense without controll . well ; but how is the sense to be supplied ? we made two or three essays the last time , and found never a one would hold water , but which way soever we turned it , the proposition was false . we have two proportions designed only by their antecedents , and we are to guesse at the consequents . the best conjecture i could make was this ; as the excesse of the whole above the whole , is to one of those wholes ; so is the ex●esse● of the part above the part , to one of those parts , ( respectively . ) that is ( calling the greatest whole g , and its part g : and the lesser whole l , and its part l. ) as g − l , to g ; so g − l , to g. or secondly thus ; as g − l , to l ; so g − l , to l. but both these are found false . my next conjecture was from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( but there i was fain to leave my proposition quite , and take up new antecedents , as well as seek new consequents , ) and that directs me to such an analogisme ( p. . l. . ) i say that as ah to ab , so ab , to ai ; but this is ambiguous , because , ab comming twice , once as a whole , and another time as a part , sit doth not appear which is which ; therefore here be two conjectures more ; viz. a third thus , as the whole to the whole , so the part to the part ; ( that is g. l ∷ g. l. ) or fourthly thus , as the whole to its part , so the whole to its part . ( that is g. g ∷ l. l. ) but these two are both false also . my next attempt was from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( but here also i must desert the proposition too , and seek new antecedents as well as consequents , ) where i find it thus ( p. . l. , . ) as ah to ab , so is the excesse of ah above ab , to the excesse of ab above ai : which was to be demonstrated . that sends me to a fifth , sixth , seventh and eighth analogisme ( because it doth not appear which ab is the whole , and which the part ; ) the fifth thus , as the whole to the whole , so the excesse of the whole above the whole , to the excesse of the part above the part , ( taking ab in the two first places for the whole ) that is g. l ∷ g − l. g − l. the sixth thus , as the whole to the whole , so the excesse of the whole above its part , to the excesse of the whole above its part ( taking ab in the first and last place , for the whole , ) that is g. l ∷ g − g. l − l. the seventh thus , as the whole to its part , so the excesse of the whole above the whole , to the excesse of the part above the part , ( taking ab in the first and last place for a part , ) that is g. g ∷ g − l. g − l. the eighth thus , as the whole is to its part , so the excesse of the whole above its part , to the excesse of the other whole above its part , ( taking ab in the two first places , for the part , ) that is g. g ∷ g − g. l − l. but these four be all false likewise , as well as those before . now all these eight conjectures are of equall probability ( though all false ) it cannot be said which of them is more like to be the sense intended than the other . and yet , forsooth , when , by talking non-sense , you leave us at this uncertainty of conjecture , it is ( you say ) absurdly done to reprehend it . i confesse , if any one of these analogismes had been true , we might have guessed that to be your meaning : but when they be all equally probable , and equally false , which should we take ? well , but 't is to be hoped , that now you will tell us . you tell us therefore ( less . p. . ) it should be thus , as the excesse of the whole above its part , to the excesse of the other wh●le above its part , so that whole , to this whole : which affords us a ninth analogisme , g − g. l − l ∷ g. l. which is coincident with my sixth conjecture . and yet again ( less . p. . ) you tell us , that the proposition is now made ( in the english ) according to the demonstration ( that is ; both false , ) and there we find it thus , the whole to the whole , as the part to the part ; that is g. l ∷ g. l. which allso is coincident with our third conjecture . but which soever of all these analogismes you take , the proposition is false , and therefore the demonstration must needs be so too . now to prove that this proposition is false , which way soever you turne it , ( either as it was before , or as it is now , ) i made use of the figure of your first article , and proceeded to this purpose . let the whole time ( fig. . ) be ab , an hour , ( that is , because i would not have you mistake mee , as you doe archimedes , let the line ab represent an hour , or , be the symboll of an hour ; for i would not have you think that i take a line to be an hour ; but to represent an houre ; and the letters ab to represent that line , not to be that line ; like as at another time we take a letter , without a line , to represent an houre : ) and part of that time af , halfe an houre . let also the continued impetus of the uniform motion ( i mean the symboll of it ) be ac , or bi : which bi also is to be ( the symbol of ) the last acquired impetus of the motion accelerated . and this acceleration we will suppose at present ( as your selfe do in your 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) to be uniform acceleration . the velocity therefore of the whole uniform motion , will be represented by the parallelogram acib ; ( by the first article ; ) and of it's part , achf ; ( by the same article ; ) the velocity of the whole uniformly accelerated motion , will be the triangle aib ; and of its part , akf ; ( by the same article . ) since therefore the lengths dispatched be proportionall to those velocities ; the whole length of uniform motion , to the whole of the accelerate , will be as the parallelogram acib , to the triangle aib , that is , as to . ( viz. the length of the uniform motion , bigger than that of the accelerate ; whereas your figure and demonstration , do all the way suppose the contrary ; ) so that if the uniform motion do in an houre dispatch yards , the accelerate will in the same time dispatch yards , ( that is g = , & l = . ) again , the length dispatched by the uniform motion in the whole time ; to that in half the time , is as the parallelogram acib , to the parallelogram achf ; that is , as to ; so that if g ( as before ) be , then is g = . lastly ; the length dispatched by the accelerate motion in the whole time , to that in halfe the time , is as the triangle aib , to the triangle akf ; that is as to , ( for the sides ab , to af , being as to , and the triangles in duplicate proportion to their sides , the triangles will be as to : ) so that if l ( as before ) be , then is l = . now having thus found the measures of these four lengths ; ( viz. g = . l = . g = . l = . ) you shall see that those analogismes are all false ; not one true amongst them . the first is this , g − l. g ∷ g − l. g. that is − = . ∷ − = . . or . ∷ . . but this is false . the second this , g − l. l ∷ g − l. l. that is − . ∷ − . . or . ∷ . . but this is false also the third this , g. l ∷ g. l. that is . ∷ . . and this also is false . the fourth this , g. g ∷ l. l. that is . ∷ . . and this is also as false as the other . the fifth is this , g. l ∷ g − l. g − l. that is . ∷ − . − . or . ∷ . . which is also false . the sixth this , g. l ∷ g − g. l − l. that is . ∷ − . − , or . ∷ . . which is like the rest . the seventh is this g. g ∷ g − l. g − l. that is , . ∷ − . − or . ∷ . . false also . the eighth is this . g. g ∷ g − g. l − l. that is . ∷ − . − . or . ∷ . . which is also false . the ninth is this , g − g. l − l ∷ g. l. that is − . − ∷ . . or . ∷ . . the tenth is like the third , g. l ∷ g. l , that is . ∷ . . all false . the proposition therefore , turne it which way you will , is a false proposition . and yet you have the impudence to tell us ( though you knew this before , for i told it you last time , and brought the same demonstration , to which you have not replied one word ) that 't is all true , and truly demonstrated . do you think 't is worth while after all this , to examine your demonstration ? 't is a sad one , i confesse ; but t is yours , and therefore it may perhaps be beautifull in your eye . the last time we looked upon it , we found it had at least fourteen grosse faults : ( and most of them such , as were singly enough to destroy it : ) enough in conscience for one poor demonstration . ( and had you not been good at it , a man would have wondred how you could have made so many ex tempore . ) since that time , 't is quite defunct . and there is a young one start up in stead of it . but 't is of the same breed , and t is not two pence to choose , whether this or that . your new demonstration runs it self out of breath at the first dash . you had told us ( art. . coroll . ) in motion vniformly accelerated from rest , ( such as is one of these ) the length transmitted ( as here ah , fig . ) is to another length ( viz. ab , ) transmitted uniformly in the same time , but with such impetus as was acquired by the accclerated motion in the last point of that time ( just the case in hand ) as a triangle to a parallelogram which have their altitude and base common , that is , as to , for the parallelogram is double of the triangle . so that ah , in your figure , should be but just half as bigge as ab ; and you have made it allmost twise as big . and upon this foundation depends the whole demonstration . for if that fault were mended , your whole construction comes to nothing . and is not this demonstration then well amended ? especially when you had faire warning of it the last time . and then you send us to the demonstration of the article for confirmation of this , whereas that article hath been cashiered long agoe , and the demonstration with it . but thus 't is when men will not take warning . at length you fall to raating , ( as you use to do when you be vexed ; ) about skill , and diligence , and too much trusting ; about discretion , hyperbole's , and sir h. savile , &c. and tell us that when a beast ( joseph scaliger ) is slain by a lion ( clavius ) 't is easy for any of the fowles of the aire ( sir h. s. ) to settle upon , and peck him . and vespasian's law , no doubt , will bear you out in all this . only this i must tell you , that sir h. savile , had confuted joseph scaliger's cyclometry , as well as clavius ; and , i suppose , before him . which if you have not seen , i have . in the article , we have this proposition . if , in any parallelogram , ( suppose acdb , fig. . ) two sides containing an angle be moved to the sides opposite to them , ( as ab to cd , and ac to bd , ) one of them ( ab ) with uniform motion , the other ( ac ) with motion uniformly accelerated : that side which is moved uniformly ( ab ) will effect as much , with its concurse through the whole length , as it would do if the other motion were also uniform , ( or were not at all . for what ever the other motion be , the motion of ab to cd , carrieth the thing moved with it from side to side , and that 's all . what point of the opposite side it shall come to , depends upon the other transverse motion , not upon this at all . and this is so easy that no body would deny it . if you mean any thing more then this , that it shall carry it just to the opposite side & no farther , your demonstration doth not at all reach it ▪ but you go on ) and the length transmitted by it in the same time , a mean proportionall between the whole and the halfe , of what ? till you tell us of what ? i say , as i said before , that these words have no sense . the construction and demonstration of this proposition , i remember , we made sad work with , the last time we had to doe with them , as well as with those of the former article ; which will be now too long to repeat . the whole weight of the demonstration lies , severally , upon at lest these three pillars , of which if any one do but fail , the whole demonstration falls . first , upon the strength of the article , which we have destroyed long agoe . secondly upon the article , which we have also long since proved to be false . thirdly , upon this learned assertion , the streight line fb will be the excesse by which the ( lesser ) length transmitted by ac with motion uniformly accelerated , till it acquire the impetus bd , will exceed the ( greater ) length transmitted by the same ac in the same time with uniform motion , and with the impetus every where equall to bd. which destroys it selfe . for if the accelerated motion , as is supposed , do not till its last moment acquire that speed with which the uniforme motion is moved all the way ; then that must needs be slower than this ; and consequently dispatch a lesser length in the same time : whereas you according to your discretion , make the length dispatched by that slower motion , to be more then that of the swifter in the same time , and tell us the excesse is fb . and then to helpe the matter , when i presse you with this absurdity , you tell us you speak of motions in concurse : as though in concurse , the slower motion did in the same time , caeteris paribus , dispatch a greater length than the swifter , though out of concurse the swifter motion did dispatch a greater length than the slower ▪ now either of these three , much more all of them , doth wholly destroy the strength of your demonstration . yet they that desire to see more may consult what i sayd before . the ninteenth article doth not pretend to any other strength than that of the eighteenth . and therefore falls with it . the twentieth article i did before prove to be false and frivolous . ( it depended upon chap. . art. . corol. . which corrollary i have there consuted . ) you say nothing by way of vindication of what i excepted against ; only passe your word for it , that it is true . yet withall confesse , there is a great error ; and that error say i , though there were nothing else , would make that article unsound . but this article you say , was never published ( yet 't is as good as most of those that were in this chapter ; for i 'le undertake for it , there he above a dozen worse ; ) and therefore it was inhumanly done , you say , to take notice of it . truly , if the proposition were a good proposition , as you say it was . j think j did you a courtesy to publish it for you , that you may have the credit of it ; yet j should not have done it , had it not been publike before . if you would not have it taken notice of , you should have taken care not to send it abroad . for it hath been commonly sold with the rest of your book ( to many more persons beside my selfe ; ) they that would , might teare it out ( as some did ) and they that would , might keep it in , as j did . well , ( be the number of articles , or be they , ) before the sixth there was none sound , ( but either in whole or in part unsound , ) and from the eighth there hath been none sound ; therefore there have not been above three sound at the most . quod erat demonstrandum . sect . xi . concerning his . chapter . the reader by this time may perhaps be weary , as well as j ; and think it but dull work to busy himselfe upon such an inquiry , where the result is but this , that m. hobbs his geometry is nothing worth ; which ( if he had any himselfe ) he knew before . to save him therefore , and myselfe the labour , wee 'l make quicker work in what 's behind . in the . chapter , some of the propositions are true and good ; ( and truely i wondred at first where you had them , but since i know : ) but the demonstrations are foolish and ridiculous . the propositions therefore are your own ( you know where you stole them ; ) and the demonstrations are of your own making ; ( for there be scarce such to be found any where else . ) what you say to the first article comes to this result ; that i should say , it is well known , that , in proportion , double is one thing , and duplicate another . and you aske , to whom it is known ? ( it seems it was not known to you : ) and tell us , that they are words that signify the same thing ; and , that they differ ( in what subject soever ) you never heard till now . it 's very possible that this may be true ; that you did never know the difference between those two words till i taught you . ( but this was your ignorance not my fault . ) but now , you know there is a difference . and therefore ( contrary to what you had affirmed in the latin ) you tell us in your english , chap. . art . . p. . l. . &c. and p. . l. . &c. that the proportion of to , to that to &c. is not only duplicate , but also double or twise as great . but on the contrary , the proportion of to , to that of to , &c. though it be duplicate , it is not the double , or twise as great , but contrarily the halfe of it ; and that of to , to that of to , &c. is double you say , and yet not duplicate but subduplicate . now if you never heard of such a difference till you heard it from me , then you are indebted to me for that peece of knowledge : and have no reason to quarrell with me , as you use to doe , for saying you did not understand what was duplicate and subduplicate proportion ; for you confesse you did not , but tooke it to be the same with double and subduple , and never heard that they did differ till now . in the second article , because it is fundamentall to those that follow , i took the paines first to shew how unhandsomely the proposition and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were contrived ; and then to shatter your demonstration all to pieces ; and shewed it to be as simple a thing as ever was put together , ( unlesse by you , or some such like your selfe . ) as to the first , you tell us , that , to proceed which way you pleased was in your own choice . and i take that for a sufficient answer . you did it , as well as you could ; and they that can do better may . as to the demonstration , you keep a vapouring ( nothing to the purpose , ) as if it were a good demonstration . and not confuted . yet , when you have done , ( because you knew it to be naught ) you leave it quite out in the english , and give us another ( as bad ) in stead of it . that is , you confesse the charge . your fundamentall proposition was not demonstrated ; and so this whole chapter comes to nothing . but however , 't is to be hoped , that your new demonstration is a good one ; is it not ? no , 't is as bad as the other . only 't is not so long : and of a bad thing , ( you know , ) the lesse the better . it begins thus , the proportion of the complement befcd , ( fig. . ) to the deficient figure abefc , is all the proportions of db to oe , and db to qf , and of all the lines parallell to db , terminated in the line befc , to all the parallells to ab terminated in the same points of the line befc . now for this ( besides that it is a piece of non-sense ) you send us for proof to the second article of the . chapter , where there is nothing at all to that purpose . then you go on . and seeing the proportion of db to oe , and of db to qf , &c , are every where triplicate to the proportion of ab to ge , and of ab to hf &c. the proportions of hf to ab , and of ge to ab , &c. are triplicate ( no , but subtriplicate ) of the proportions of qf to db , and of oe to db &c. now this is but the same bull that hath been baited fo often . viz. because the diameters ( db , oe , qf , &c. that is ca , cg , ch , ) are in the triplicate proportion of the ordinates ( ab , ge , hf , ) therefore these ordinates are in the triplicate proportion of those diameters . you might as well have sayd , seeing that is the triple of two therefore is the triple of . but let 's hear the rest , for there is not much behind . ) and therefore the deficient fig. abefc , which is the aggregate of all the lines hf , ge , ab , &c. is triple to the complement befcd , made of all the lines qf , oe , db , &c. a very good consequence ! because the ordinates are in triplicate proportion to the diameters ( yet that is false too , for they are in subtriplicate ) therefore the figure is triple to its complement ? but how doe you prove this consequence ? nay , not a word of proof . we must take your word for it . well then , of this last enthymem , ( which was directly to have concluded the question , ) the antecedent is false ▪ and the consequence at lest not proved ( i might have said false also , for so it is . ) and this is your new demonstration . the third article , i sayd , falls with the second ; for having no other foundation but that , ( nor do you pretend to other ) that being undemonstrated ( for your former demonstration your selfe have thrown away , and your new one we have now shewen to be nothing worth , ) this must be undemonstrated too . in the fourth article , you attempt the drawing of these curve lines , by point ; and to that purpose require the finding of as many mean proportionalls as one will , ( like as you had before done cap. . . . for the finding out an arbitrary line to be taken at pleasure : which i told you was simply done , because that without such mean proportionalls , ( that is , without the effection of solid & lineary problems , ) it might have been done by the geometry of plains , that is with rule and compasse . and i shewed you how . to which you have nothing to reply , but , that i made use of one of your figures ( to save my selfe the labour of cutting a new one , ) that is , i made better use of your figure then you could doe . the fifth proposition ( beside that it is built upon the second , and therefore falls with it , ) is inferred only from the corrollary of the . article of the . chapter , ( nor doth your english produce any other proof , ) where , sayd i , there is not a word to that purpose . and you confesse it . the , , , & . art. do not pretend to other foundation than the second ; & therefore till that be proved , fall with it . the . article is a sad one , as may be seen by what i did object against it , as you say , for almost three leaves together . one fault amongst the rest you take notice of , and you would have your reader think that 's all ; though there be above twenty more . 't is this , because ( in fig. . ) b c is to bf for so your words are , though your lesson mis-recite them , in triplicate proportion of cd , to fe ; therefore , inverting , fe , to cd is in triplicate proportion of bf to cb. and doe you not take this to be a fault ? no , you say , this i did object then ( yes and doe so still , as absurd enough : ) but now , you say , you have taught me ; ( what a hard hap have i , that i cannot learn ; ) that of three quantities , ( you should rather have taken foure ; but however three shall serve for this turne , ) beginning at the lest , ( suppose , , , ) if the third to the first ( to ) be in triplicate proportion of the second to the first ( of to ) also , by conversion , the first to the second ( to ) shall be in triplicate proportion of the first to the third , of to . this is that you would have had me learne . but , good sir , you have forgotten that , since that time , you have unlearned it your selfe . for your . artic . of chap. . as it now stands corrected in the english , teacheth us another doctrine ; viz. that if , , , , bee continually proportionall , to shall be as well triplicate ( though not bigger ) of to , ( not this triplicate of that , ) as to is of to . the case is now altered from what it was in the latine . and therefore you are quite in a wrong box , when , in your english , you cite chapt. . art. , to patronize this absurdity . for in so doing you doe but cut your own throat . you must now learne to sing another song ; called palinodia . well , this is one of the faults of this article . they that have a minde to see the rest of them , may consult what i said before ; where i have noted a parcell of two dozen . in the . article , you doe but undertake to demonstrate a proposition of archimedes . your demonstration ( besides that it depends upon the second article which is yet undemonstrated ) is otherwise also faulty , as i then told you . and therefore to say , that i allow this to be demonstrated , if your second bad been demonstrated ; is an untruth . for i told you then , that your manner of inferring this from that , is very absurd . the article ( like all the rest , since the second , beside their other faults , ) depends upon the second ; and therefore , till that be demonstrated , this must fall with it . in the . art. you undertake to demonstrate this proposition of archimedes ; that the superficies of any portion of a sphere , is equall to that circle , whose radius is a streight line drawn from the pole of the portion to the circumference of its base . your demonstration , i said , was of no force ; but might as well be applyed to a portion of any conoeid , parabolicall , hyperbolicall , ellipticall , or any other , as to the portion of a sphere . by the truth of this , say you , let any man judg of your and my geometry . content , 't is but transcribing your demonstration ; & inserting the words conoeid , vertex , section by the axis , &c. where you have sphere , pole , great circle &c. which termes : in the conoeid , answer to those in the sphere , and the worke is done . let bac , ( in the seventh figure , ) be a portion of a spheare , or conoeid , parabolicall , hyperbolicall , ellipticall , &c. whose axis is ae , and whose basis is bc ; and let ab be the streight line drawn from the pole , or vertex , a , to the base in b : and let ad , equall to ab , touch the great circle , ( or section made by a plain passing through the axis of the conoeid , ) bac , in the pole , or vertex , a. it is to be proved that a circle made by the radius ad , is equall to the superficies of the portion bac . let the plain aebd be understood to make a revolution about the axis ae . and it is manifest , that , by the streight line ad , a circle will be described ; and , by the arch , or section , ab , the superficies of a sphere , or conoeid mentioned ; and lastly , by the subtense ab , the superficies of a right cone . now , seeing both the streight line ab , and the arch or section ab , make one and the same revolution ; and both of them have the same extreme points a & b : the cause why the sphericall or conoeidicall superficies which is made by the arch or section , is greater then the conicall superficies which is made by the subtense , is , that ab the arch or section , is greater then ab the subtense : and the cause why it is greater , consists in this , that although they be both drawn from a to b , yet the subtense is drawen streight , but the arch or section angularly ; namely , according to that angle which the arch or section makes with the subtense ; which angle is equall to the angle dab . for the angle of contact , whether of circles or other crooked lines , addes nothing to the angle at the segment : as hath been shewn , as to circles , in the chapter of the article : and as to all other crooked lines , lesson . pag. . lin . ult . wherefore the magnitude of the angle dab , is the cause why the superficies of the portion described by the arch or section ab , is greater than the superficies of the right cone described by the subtense ab . again , the cause why the circle described by the tangent ad , is greater then the superficies of the right cone described by the subtense ab , ( notwithstanding that the tangent and subtense are equall , and both moved round in the same time , ) is this , that ad stands at right angles to the axis , but ab obliquely ; which obliquity consists in the same angle : dab . seeing therefore that the quantity of the angle dab , is that which makes the excesse both of the superficies of the portion , and of the circle made by the radius ad , above the superficies of the right cone described by the subtense ab : it followes , that both the superficies of the portion , and that of the circle , do equally exceed the superficies of the cone . wherefore the circle made by ad or ab , and the sphericall or conoeidicall superficies made by the arch or section ab , are equall to one another . which was to be proved . shew me now if you can , ( for you have pawned all your geometry , upon this one issue , ) where the demonstration halts more on my part then it doth on yours ? or , where is it , that it doth not as strongly proceed in the case of any conoeid , as of a sphere ? all that you can think of by way of exception ( and you have had time to think on 't ever since i wrote last , ) amounts to no more but this ( which yet is nothing to the purpose ) you ask , in case the crooked line ab , were not the arch of a circle , whether do i think , that the angles which it makes with the subtense ab , at the points a & b , must needs be equall ? i say , that ( its possible , that in some cases , it may be so ; and j could for a need , shew you where ; and therefore , at least as to those cases , you are clearely gone ; for you had nothing else to say for your selfe ; but ) this is nothing at all to the purpose whether they be or no ; for the angle at b , what ever it be , comes not into consideration at all ; nor is so much as once named in all the demonstration ; so that its equality or inequallity , with that at a , makes nothing at all to the businesse . and therefore your exception is not worth a straw . think of a better against the next time ; or else all your geometry is forfeited . and they are like to have a great purchase that get it , are they not ? at the . article ; ( having before , art. . undertooke to teach the way of drawing and continuing those curve lines , by points : and directed us ( for the word require doth not please you ) for that end to take mean proportionalls ; ) you now tell us how that may be done ; viz. by these curve lines first drawn . i asked , whether this were not to commit a circle ? you tell me , no. but mean while take no notice of that which was the main objection ; viz. that this constructiō of yours was but going about the bush ; for , upon supposition that we had those lines already drawn , the finding of mean proportionalls by them might be performed with much more ease than the way you take . and i shewed you , how. but that which sticks most in your stomach , is a clause in the close of this chap. i told you that some considerable propositions of this chapter ( and i could have told you which ) were true , ( though you had missed in your demonstration , ) however you came by them . but that i was confident they were none of your own . ( and you know , i guessed right . ) and least you should think i dealt unworthily to intimate that you had them elsewhere : unlesse i could shew you where : i told you , that i did no worse than those that a while before , had hanged a man for stealing a horse from an unknown person . there was evidence enough that the horse was stolen ; though they did not know from whom . so , though i knew not whence you had taken them , yet i have ground enough to judge they were not your own . and since that time , ( and before that book was fully printed , ) i found whence you had them ; namely out of mersennus , ( as i told you then pag. , , . ) and to take them out of mersennus , was all one as to rob a carrier ; for there were at lest three men had right to the goods , ( and some of them if they had been asked , would scarce have given way that you should publish their inventions in your own name , ) des chartes , fermat , and robervall : and perhaps a fourth had as much right as any one of these ; and that is cavallerio , who ( though , i then did not know it ) hath ( contrary to what you affirme , that they were never demonstrated by any but you selfe ; and that as wisely as one could wish : ) demonstrated those propositions in a tractate of his de usu , indivisibilium in potestatibus cossicis . but though the thing be true enough and you cannot deny it , yet you doe not like the comparison . and would have me consider , who it was , was hanged upon hamans gallows ? and truly j could tell you that too , for a need . the first letter of his name was h. but enough of this . sect . xii . concerning his , , . chapters . well ! we have made pretty quick work with the chapter . with the we shall be yet quicker . the charge against this chapter , was , that it was all false . and , you confesse it . not one true article in the whole . but , you tell us , in the english 't is all well . it is now so corrected in the english as that i shall not be able ( if i can sufficiently imagine motion , that is , if i can be giddy enough , ) to reprehend . very well ! ( 't is a good hearing when men grow better . ) they that have a mind to believe it , may : i am not bound to undeceive them . we have had experience all along , that you have a speciall knack at mending . ( as sowr ale doth in summer . ) you grant that i have truly demonstrated , what was before , to be all false . you would have me do so again , would you ? very good ! when i have nothing else to doe i 'le consider of it . they that think it worth the while , may take the pains , to examine it a second time . for my part , i think i have bestowed as much pains upon it already , as it deserves , ( and somewhat more : ) and all the amendment that i find , is this ▪ that whereas before wee had three false articles , now we have but two ; and the number of true ones , just as many as we had before , viz. never a one . in the chapter there were faults enough in conscience ( for a matter of no greater difficulty than that was ; ) i noted some of them ( and left the reader to pick up the rest : ) two or three of the lighter touches , ( about method , ) you take notice of , and make a businesse to justify or excuse them ; and the main exceptions ( as you use to do ) you passe over with a light touch , and a way . i told you , in the beginning of it , that your chapters hang together like a rope of sand . and 't is true enough , for they have no connexion at all . there are so few hooked atomes , that a man cannot tell how to tacke them together . next , that having in your chapter undertaken to shew us , what is the angle of incidence ; and , what , the angle of reflexion ; and , that the angles of incidence and of reflexion are equall : you do , in pursuance of that assertion , in this chapter , shew us the consequences thereof . upon this i asked ; why not , either this after that ; or that before this ? you tell me , that ( think i what i will , ) you think that method still the best ; ( to set the cart before the horse . ) then you tell us , that i say , you define not here . ( nay that 's false , i did not say so ; and 't is not the first time that i have taken you tripping in this kind ; ) but many chapters after , ( that i said , i do confesse ; and you know 't is true ; ) what an angle of incidence , and what an angle of reflexion is . and then , talk against hast , and oversight . but if your selfe had not been over hasty , ( or rather willfully perverted my words , ) you might have seen ( and you know it well enough ) that i blamed you here , and two or three times before , not so much for using words , before you had defined them ( for this fault , as j remember , j mentioned but once ; and there you took it patiently : ) but for defining words so long after you had used them . for when words , for two or three chapters together , have been supposed , and frequently so used , as of known signification , ( whether they had been before defined , or not , ) it is ridiculous for a mathen atician to come dropping in with definitions of them at latter end , ( as your fashion is , ) like mustard after meat . for these definitions should either have come in due time , or else not at all . the two first articles are very triviall . and yet ( as if it were impossible for you , be the way never so plaine , not to stumble ) there wants , at least in the english , a determination in the second corollary ; and yet ( as if that were to make amends for t'other ) there 's one too much . if upon any point ( say you ) between b and d , fig. . ( yes , or any where else upon the same streight line , produced either way , though not between those points , ) there fall ( from the point a , you should have said , ) a streight line , as ac , whose reflected line is ch , this also produced beyond c , will fall upon f. here , i say , that limitation between b and d , is redundant ; and that from the point a , is wanting . for though c. be taken at pleasure , yet a is not , and if it come not from a , its reflex will not come at f. the third , fourth , and fifth articles , i told you were false . ( viz. the propositions affirme that universally , which holds true but in some particular case . and the demonstrations , proceed ex falsis suppositis , supposing that to be , which is not ; or is , in many cases , impossible . ) and this you confesse to be true ; but take it unkindly to be told of it . you have endeavoured a little to patch up the businesse in the english , but not so as to hold water . for they are yet lyable to divers exceptions if it were worth the while to unravell them . the eight article was ridiculous enough . it makes a huge businesse to no purpose . ( you spend the best part of two pages to resolve a problem which might as well have been dispatched in two lines . ) and you doe as good as confesse it all you say against it , is but this , that adduco is not latine for to bring . the twent●eth chapter will be soon dispatched . this chap. all but the two last art. is wholly new , as it is now in the english : that which you had before in the latine , being wholly routed & beat out the field ▪ ( & your problematice dictum into the bargain . ) we had in your latine three attempts for the squaring of a circle ; but they all came to naught , and are now vanished . in your lesson , you give us a fourth ; endeavouring to new mould and rally one of the former , which i had before routed ; and pretende to vindicate it from the exceptions i had made to it : but not an answer to any one of them ; nor is this new attempt better than the former , but retaines most of the fundamentall errors therein ; and when you have all done , you cashier it your selfe and dare not insist upon it . beside this , you have in your english , yet three attempts more ; and much a doe there is with long and perplexed figures to no purpose . they are by your own confession but aggressions ; and you doe not your selfe believe them to be exact . you doe not , i suppose , think it worth the while for me to confute them , ( or if you doe i doe not ; ) for to what purpose ? that you have attempted it , ( seven times over , ) no man can deny ; that your attempts come to nothing , your selfe confesse ; only , you think it convenient to let the reader know what paines you have taken to no purpose . for my part , j doe not intend to follow you in all your new freakes : nor think my selfe ingaged to confute false quadratures as oft as you shall make them . i have done enough already , to let the world see , how little 't is that you understand in geometry , and how much they deceive them selves who expect any great matter from you . your two last articles stand as they were , and so doth my answer to them . your attempt of finding a streight line equall to a spirall ; is but an attempt , as well as that of squaring a circle . your rant at analyticks , with which you conclude it , ( like doggs barking at the moon , ) hurts no body but your selfe . that art will live when you be dead ; and those that know it , will not think it ever a whit the worse for your not understanding it , or rayling at it . sect . iv. fig. . fig. . sect . v. cap : xiv fig. . fig. cap. xvi . fig. ● . fig. . fig● . fig. . fig. . cap. xvii . fig. ● . fig. . fig. . place this at the end sect . xiii . concerning his last lesson . your last lesson , little concernes mee ; but is directed mainly against my reverend and learned collegue ; who hath allready answered to it as much as he thinks it doth deserve , yet a touch or two there is wherein i am concerned . you had , in your latine , a railing rant against vindex , ( and though you thought fit to 〈◊〉 of that , chapter , yet placuit ea stare quae pertinent ad vindicem . but in the english that is expunged also ; and now he is left to learn 〈◊〉 , out of your lessons . ) and in order to this , j 〈◊〉 in my elenchus , ( p. 〈…〉 . . ) recited verbatim out of his vindiciae , those 〈◊〉 , which , it seems , stuck ▪ so much in your stomack ; concerning m. warners papers ; that the reader might see how small a matter would put you into a rage . ( which you knew well enough , and can upon no pretence plead ignorance of it . for it is the very same , which both the●● 〈◊〉 in your lessons , you referre to , and rant at . ) but 〈◊〉 forsooth , upon this , ( according to your usuall honesty ) you would have your reader believe , that j had there related some personall discourse , which vindex , creeping into your company unknown , had sometime had with you : and then rant at the incivility of such a carriage , and ( with a fling at moranus into the bargain ) raile a● it for allmost two whole pages together , p. , , . wherein , whether your civility or honesty , be more com●●cuous , let the reader judge . in like manner , because j cited a passage concerning rohervall , out of mersen●● , you suspect , p. . that somebody , you know not who , hath most magnanimously interpreted to me in 〈◊〉 d●sgrace , what passed between you and him in the cloister of the convent . which is a suspicion like to that of p. . that some of our philosophers that were at paris at the same time with you , may perhaps have accused you to us of bragging or ostentation . as though there were not ground enough in your writings , to evidence that , to any man , without any such relation . but , mean while , j wonder how you behaved your selfe at paris , that you should be so jealous least somebody there should tell tales . and all this is but a little to disguise the businesse , as if i had not by what is extant in print , in those places cited out of mersennus ( hydraulic . prop. cor. . ballistic . prop. , mechanic . praef . punct . . & . reflex . physico-math . cap. : art . . ) made it evident , that all or most of what was worth any thing in your mathematicks , was manifestly stollen from gasilaeo , robervall , cartesius , fermat , &c and 〈…〉 them as i perceive by somewhat but now come to 〈…〉 him , doth not stick to call you 〈…〉 , for so doing : and , if some of 〈…〉 were 〈…〉 doubt ▪ not but they would be ready enough to do the like 〈…〉 ▪ now this is all , ( 〈…〉 what was sufficiently 〈…〉 at before ) that in this 〈…〉 concerns mee . and , for what concernes my 〈…〉 , you have already from himselfe received sufficient 〈…〉 . i know now no exception remaining , unlesse like his , who putting a bond in suit when the defendant made proof of payment ▪ replyed , 〈…〉 the condition of the obligation was that he should 〈…〉 , satisfy , and pay ; and therefore , though the 〈…〉 all pay'd , yet forasmuch the plaintife was not 〈…〉 the bond was forfeit . now j hope the reader can bear witnesse , that you have been , by this time , sufficiently pay'd ; and , j hope , satisfyed ; but , if we must never have done till you be contented , i am afraid we shall dye in your debt . finis . errata . page . line . language , p. . l. . learn. p. . l. . dele quod . p. . l. . finding . p. . l. . suffer your . p. . l. ● . plin. p. . l . dos . p. . l. . sumere . p. . l . second . p. . l. ult . . p. . l. . † . p. . l , . not at all , p. . l. . for two . p. . l. . art . . p. . l. . proportion . p. . l. . art . . p. . l. . proportion . ibid. l. . art . . p. . l. . that greater . p. , l. , half the. p. . l. . proposition . p. , l. pen. and. p. , l. , the points . p. , l. . one another . p. , l. . √ ½ , or . p. , l. . of the ● ibid. l. . adde , as the product of one impetus into its time , to the product of the other impetus into its time. p. , l. . thought . ibid. l. . of celerity . p. , l. , it be . p. . l. , proposition . p. , l. , the rest . p. , l. , that table . ibid. l. , and √ is more . ibid. l. , not to be had ▪ a second letter concerning the holy trinity pursuant to the former from the same hand : occasioned by a letter there inserted from one unknown / by john wallis. wallis, john, - . approx. kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from -bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : - (eebo-tcp phase ). a wing w estc r ocm this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons . universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase , no. a ) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set ) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, - ; : ) a second letter concerning the holy trinity pursuant to the former from the same hand : occasioned by a letter there inserted from one unknown / by john wallis. wallis, john, - . w. j. [ ], p. printed for tho. parkhurst ..., london : . the text of a letter from w.j. to wallis, with wallis's reply. "i have, since yours, received ... a letter directed to me, subscribed w.j., but i know not from whom ..."--p. . reproduction of original in cambridge university library. created by converting tcp files to tei p using tcp tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between and available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the , texts created during phase of the project have been released into the public domain as of january . anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. % (or pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf- unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p , characters represented either as utf- unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng trinity -- early works to . - tcp assigned for keying and markup - apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images - mona logarbo sampled and proofread - mona logarbo text and markup reviewed and edited - pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a second letter concerning the holy trinity . pursuant to the former from the same hand ; occasioned by a letter ( there inserted ) from one unknown . by iohn wallis . d. d. london , printed for tho. parkhurst at the bible and three crowns in cheapside near mercers-chapel . . a second letter concerning the sacred trinity . sir , i understand by your letter ( of sept. . ) that you have printed a letter of mine concerning the trinity ; and have sent me some copies of it to oxford . but i am not there to receive them ; and so have yet seen none of them : ( but your letter thither was sent me thence by the post. ) i have , since yours , received ( by the same way ) a letter directed to me , subscribed w. j. but i know not from whom . i suppose it is somebody in london , to whom you have presented a book , for which he returns me thanks . that letter to me was thus , ( with the post-mark at london , se. . from whence i supply the date , which in the letter was wanting ) for the reverend dr. wallis , professor of geometry , at oxford . sir , i received the honour of your letter ; and return you humble and hearty thanks for it . 't is writ in my opinion , in a modest , peaceable , and christian stile : and i wish it may please others as well as it doth me . i am afraid however , that it will not give satisfaction to the scholastick athanasian trinitarian . for they are so particular , and withal so positive , in the explication of the greatest of mysteries , as if they understood it as well as any article of their christian faith. your explication of personality , gives no distast to me , when you say ( page . ) they are distinguished by personality : and , by personality i mean , that distinction whereby they are distinguished . yet i 'm afraid the high-flown school-trinitarians will say , this is trifling , and idem per idem . though to me it hath this good sense , that we know there is a distinction betwixt them , which we call personality ; but we can affix no notion to this personality , which is common to it with other personalities , either humane or angelical ; and therefore we can only say , it is that distinction whereby the three hypostases are distinguished . but you still use a greater latitude , as to the notion of these persons , or personalities , when you call them somewhats ( page . ) that , you say , which is pretended to be impossible by the anti-trinitarians , is only this , that there be three somewhats , which are but one god ; and these somewhats we commonly call persons . this i take only to signifie , that the true notion , and the true name of that distinction is unknown to us , yet the distinction is certain . but the deep-learned school-trinitarians , who decide all things to an hairs breadth , will , i imagine , ridicule this expression . a late learned and ingenious author , you know , hath gone much further in his determinations about this point . he makes your three somewhats , not only three persons , but three substantial beings , ( page . ) and three infinite minds , ( page . ) and the contrary , he says , is both heresie and non-sense . three infinite minds , is the same as three infinite spirits . and , by infinite , the author understands here , not infinite in extension , but in perfection . so that the three hypostases are three spirits , whereof each is infinite in perfection . then , saith the anti-trinitarian , they are three gods. for what better notion , or what better definition , have we of god , than that he is a spirit infinitely perfect . and , if there be three such , there are three gods. in like manner , three substantial beings really distinct , are three substances really distinct . and if each of these substances be endued with infinite perfection , it will be hard to keep them from being three gods. we do not well know what particular explication of the trinity those persons gave , whom the ancients call tritheites . but this we know , that the great offence which is taken at the christian doctrine of the trinity , by the iews and mahometans , is , from the appearance of polytheism in that doctrine . which appearance , methinks , is rather increased than lessened by this explication : and , consequently , the scandal which ( to them ) follows upon it . but the learned author hath an expedient to prevent polytheism , notwithstanding the real distinction of his three infinite spirits . which is , by making them mutually conscious of one anothers thoughts and actions : whereby , he says , they would be so united , as to make but one god. that , methinks , doth not follow , that upon this mutual consciousness they would be but one god. that which follows is this , that they would be three gods mutually conscious . for there is no reason why this mutual consciousness should make their godhead cease , if without this they would be three distinct gods. no union amounts to identity . it came in my way to mind you of this more punctual and demonstrative explication of the trinity , as it 's said to be , that you might not expect that every one should be of your mind , nor approve of your modesty as i do . your similitude and comparisons , are as just as the nature of the subject will admit . the great defect of the first , seems to be this ; that it cannot be said of any one dimension , that it is a cube , or a body : whereas it is said of every person , that he is god. your second comparison interferes again with the learned author above-mentioned . for he says , ( page . ) 't is a mistake to think that knowledge and power , even in men , is not the same thing ; whereas you suppose them distinct , and , upon that , ground your similitude . i cannot but be of your mind in this particular also . for power belongs to the * will , and knowledge to the understanding . and 't is plain , that we know many things that we cannot do : and , on the contrary , we can do many things , and know not how they are done . it may be the ingenious author would be hard put to it to tell us how he pronounces his own name ; that is , what organs of speech are moved , and how ; by what museles and nerves ; and what the whole action is that intervenes betwixt the inward thought and the outward sound ; or betwixt the first cause and the last effect . or , if he be so good an anatomist and philosopher as to understand all this , at least his little son , or little daughter , who can pronounce the same as well as himself , know not in what manner , or by what means they do it . so , fools and children can move their hands , fingers , and all the members of the body , as well as philosophers : though they do do not know , in what method , or by what mechanism , they are moved . these things are the effects of will , independently on knowledge . and 't is as plain , on the other hand , that we know how many things are to be done , which yet we cannot do , for want of strength or force . i can lift a weight of two or three hundred pounds , but i cannot lift one of five or six hundred ; though i understand as well how the one is moved as the other . and a brawny porter shall raise that of five or six hundred , though he understand staticks less than i do . i can bend a stick , but cannot bend a bar of iron : though i use just the same method , and understand as much how the one is done as the other . and innumerable instances of like nature shew , knowledge and force to be different things . but this , sir , i say only in your defence . your conclusion also agrees very well to my sense . and i think them exceedingly to blame , that presume to measure these infinite natures , and all their properties , by our narrow understandings . the anti-trinitarians generally are no great philosophers , yet they take upon them as if they were the only masters of reason : and in the most sublime and mysterious points , will scarce allow revelation to be of greater authority than their judgment . but however , on the other hand , ( though i never felt any inclination or temptation to socinian doctrines , yet ) i cannot heartily join with you in the damnatory sentences ; neither would i have us spin creeds , like cobwebs , out of our own bowels . in the name of god , let us be content with what is revealed to us in scripture concerning these mysteries ; and leave the rest to make part of our heaven , and future happiness . to strain things to these heights , makes still more divisions in the church . we that now have school-trinitarians , and scripture-trinitarians ; and either of them will have their plea , and pursue their interest ; till , by zeal for opinions which are disputable , we have destroyed christian charity and unity , which are indispensable vertues and duties . i am , sir , with sincerity and respect , london , sept. . . your obliged humble servant , w. i. if you know from whom it is , pray thank him from me for his civilities therein . and you may please to tell him , that he doth understand me aright , and puts a true sense upon my words : by personality , i mean that distinction ( whatever it be ) whereby the three are distinguished ; but , what that is , i do not pretend to determine . and if i should guess ( for it will be but guessing ) how it may be ; i should not be positive , that just so it is . ( upon the same account , that it is not thought prudent in a siege , to inlarge the line of defence too far . ) there is a distinction ( this we are sure of ) between the three : this distinction i call personality : and by this word i mean that distinction , whatever it be : but , what this distinction is ( or what degree of distinction ) i cannot well tell . if this be trifling , i cannot help it , ( nor , if they please to ridicule it : ) but , to me , it seems to be good sense . if others will venture to determine it more nicely than i have done ; they perhaps may understand it more distinctly than i pretend to do ; but will give me leave to be ignorant ( therein ) of what the scripture doth not tell me . of the damnatory sentences ( as he calls them ) i had said nothing . nor do i think , that the author of the athanasian creed did intend them in that rigour that some would put upon them . and , if it be well considered how there they stand , he will find them annexed ( at least so they seem to me ) only to some generals which he thought necessary , ( as , that we ought to hold the catholick faith , that the trinity in unity is to be worshiped ; that the son of god was incarnate ; ) not to every punctilio in his explications . which are but as a comment on these generals , how he thought they were to be understood , or might be explained . which explications i take to be true , and good ; but not within the purview of those clauses : and that a man may be saved ( even in the judgment of that author ) who doth not know , or doth not fully understand , some of them . his true meaning therein , seems to me to be but this ; that the doctrine therein delivered ( concerning the trinity , and the incarnation of christ , ) is the sound orthodox doctrine ; and such as ( for the substance of it ) ought to be believed by those who expect salvation by christ. certainly his meaning never was , that children , and idiots , and all who do not understand the school-terms , or perhaps have never heard them , should be therefore denied salvation . as to what he objects to me , that it cannot be said of any one dimension , that it is a cube , or a body ; whereas it is said of every person , that he is god : he might observe , that i had already obviated this objection . for though we cannot say ( in the abstract ) that length is a cube , ( and so of the rest ; ) yet ( in the concrete ) this long thing ( or this which is long ) is a cube ; and so , this which is broad , or this which is high , is a cube : iust so ; we do not say ( in the abstract ) that paternity is god ; but ( in the concrete ) the father is god ; ( and so of the other persons . ) the personality is not said to be god , but the person is . which fully answers that exception . what he cites of a learned author falls not within the compass of what i undertook to defend ; ( and that learned person will excuse me , if i do not pretend to understand all his notions ; and leave it to him to explain himself . ) but what i have endeavoured to defend , is as much ( i think ) as we need to maintain in this point . where that author calls it a mistake to think that knowledge and power ( in the same man ) are not the same thing : i suppose ( not having the book at hand ) he means no more but this ; that though they differ indeed ( to use the school-language ) ex parte rei , yet not ut res & res , but rather ut modus & modus ; that is , not as two things , but as two modes of the same thing . and if he should say the like of length , breadth , and thickness ; i would not contend about it : for , even so , it will serve my similitude well enough . if that of the three persons be more than so : it is then ( i think ) such a distinction as to which ( in our metaphysicks ) we have not yet given a name . but of this , i determine nothing ( because i would not spin the thread too fine : ) and content my self to say , it is that of the three personalities in one deity ; without determining , how great that is . and i may the rather be allowed thus to forbear ; because i find , even in matters of ordinary conversation ( such as those but now mention'd ) the school men are not well agreed , what things shall be said to differ ut res & res , and what only ex parte rei . much more therefore may i be allowed a like latitude of thought in the present case . i add no more but that i am yours , john wallis . soundess , sept. . . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a -e dr. sherlock . * i should rather say , to the executive faculty ; or , power of doing . the necessity of regeneration in two sermons to the university of oxford / by john wallis ... wallis, john, - . approx. kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from -bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : - (eebo-tcp phase ). a wing w estc r ocm this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons . universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase , no. a ) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set ) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, - ; : ) the necessity of regeneration in two sermons to the university of oxford / by john wallis ... wallis, john, - . [ ], , [ ] p. printed for will. rogers ..., london : . errata: p. [ ] at end. reproduction of original in cambridge university library. created by converting tcp files to tei p using tcp tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between and available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the , texts created during phase of the project have been released into the public domain as of january . anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. % (or pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf- unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p , characters represented either as utf- unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng church of england -- sermons. regeneration (theology) -- early works to . sermons, english -- th century. - tcp assigned for keying and markup - spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images - melanie sanders sampled and proofread - melanie sanders text and markup reviewed and edited - pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion the necessity of regeneration : in two sermons to the university of oxford . by john wallis d.d. professor of geometry in that university ; one of his majesty's chaplaines in ordinary ; and a member of the royal society . london , printed for will. rogers at the sign of the sun in fleet-street , over against st. dunstan's church , . to the right honourable john , lord roberts , earl of radnor : lord president of his majesty's most honourable privy council . may it please your lordship , the ensuing sermons ( preached , in my ordinary turns , to the vniversity , ) were not intended to be more publick than that auditory : but ( being made acquainted that they would not be unacceptable to your lordship ; ) i have presumed to publish them under your lordships patronage . i have therein purposely waved ( as i alwaies do ) all nice disputes of speculative subtilties in controversal points ( wherein those may possibly differ , who yet agree in the setled doctrine of the church of england ; ) as more tending to disturb the peace of the church , than to promote piety . the design of them is , to shew the necessity of habitual grace in our hearts with the practice of it in our lives ; and the need we have of god's assistance to both . and i therein keep close to the doctrine of our own church ( which i judge , in the whole , to be sound and orthodox , ) and as near as may be , in her own words . if any shall please themselves with thoughts of doing good , without being so ; or , contrariwise , of a good heart , without a good life ; or , that he is of himself sufficient for one or both of these ( so as to please god ) without the divine assistance : i am sure he is , therein , no true son of the church of england . thus far , i hope we do all agree . and , being to speak to many of those , whose function calls them to speak to others ; i thought it seasonable to inculcate these necessary truths : whereof they cannot be ignorant , and of which i would not have them vnmindfull , in their great work of saving souls . and i heartily wish there were more zeal for these great truths , and less animosities about little things , which unhappily divide good men , break our peace , and gratifie those who seek our ruine . i am my lord , your honours very humble servant john wallis . the necessity of regeneration . a sermon preached before the university of oxford at christ church , september th . . john iij. . jesus answered and said unto him , verily verily i say unto thee , except a man be born again , he cannot see the kingdome of god. the words are christ's to nicodemus , a great man among the jews : a pharisee ; a ruler of the jews ; a master in israel : ( for so we find him stiled ver . . & . ) yet did not understand the doctrine of regeneration . as appears by his questions ver . , & . how can these things be ? how can a man be born when he is old ? can he enter a second time into his mothers womb ? &c. and by christ's expostulation , ver . . art thou a master in israel and knowest not these things ? much like that of the apostle to those heb. . . who , when for the time they ought to be teachers , had need themselves to be taught again the first principles of the oracles of god ; and had need of milk , not of strong meat . the pharisees , we know , though great pretenders to religion , and a strain of devotion beyond others , and to a great exactness to the modes and formalities of the jewish worship then in practice : yet were no great friends to christ , or to his doctrine . this made nicodemus , being one of them , not willing at first to own it openly , ( that he might not give a publick scandal to those of his own party , ) till he should be better informed of the truth of it : and therefore , in a private way , ( to avoid offence , ) came to jesus by night . for , being an inquisitive person , willing to satisfie himself , and not ( relying only upon others judgements ) to go blindfold as the crowd carried him ; and suspecting , there might be somewhat more , than men were commonly aware of , in this despised doctrine : he resolved first to know what it was , before he would condemn it . and therefore made this address to christ , as best able to inform him . and he came not , as at some other times the pharisees did , to tempt him , to deride him , to cavil at him , to blaspheme him , to insnare him , seeking how they might destroy him : but , with an honest intention , to be informed . as appears by that his respectfull address , ver . . rabbi , we know that thou art a teacher come from god ; for no man can doe those miracles that thou dost , except god be with him . and christ , being as willing to teach , as he was to learn ; sets him first this lesson , except a man be born again , he cannot see the kingdome of god. not as being the most easie to learn , ( for , we see , to nicodemus it seemed at first very strange : ) but as being one of the most necessary and fundamental doctrines in religion . and that which is christ's doctrine in the text , shall be my doctrine at present ; whereof ( through god's assistance ) i now purpose to speak : the necessity of regeneration , or a new birth , except a man be born again , he cannot see the kingdome of god. it is a doctrine , which perhaps may seem as strange to some in this age , as it did to nicodemus then . there being those , who do not only ( as perhaps at first he did ) doubt of it ; but scoff and reproch it , who make but a jest of it at the best ; if not a subject of burlesk and drollery , and such like unsavoury discourse , unbeseeming a christians mouth and ears . but we shall find it , first or last , to be a serious thing : not so needless , nor yet so very easie , as prophane persons perswade themselves . as to the truth of this doctrine ; it will need no great proof ; being the very words of the text. and those who , upon the evidence of this one text , will not believe it ; would perhaps as little believe it , if i should produce many more . it will rather need explication , than confirmation . and two things there are to be explained : what is here meant by seeing the kingdome of god ; and , what by being born again . first , what is meant by seeing the kingdome of god. the word kingdome , in its first and proper signification , imports , that state , dignity , and power , which earthly kings and princes , have over their people and subjects ; with the greatness , splendour , and other appurtenances to such dominion . but is here to be understood in a figurative sense ; for something great , splendid and excellent ; as kingdomes are , or be thought to be . for it is not meant , that those who are here said to be born again , shall be kings and princes , such as on earth are so called , but , that they shall injoy a condition , as great , as glorious , as excellent ; as that of kings and princes : yea , much more than so . and thus much is implyed in that addition , when it is called the kingdome of god. which is partly a note of distinction , partly a note of eminence . 't is usual in scripture , when a word of ordinary use for natural and earthly things , is metaphorically applied to signifie somewhat that is spiritual ; to add some epithete for distinction . as when christ is called the true vine , the true shepheard , the bread of life , the bread that came down from heaven , the spiritual rock , &c. by way of distinction , from bread , a rock , a vine , a shepheard , in the proper acceptation of the words . but they do , withall , imply an eminency , or greater excellency , of the things so metaphorically described ; then of that which the words in their proper sense do signifie . for the meaning is not , that christ is truly a vine , or truly a shepheard , &c. in the proper sense of those words : but , somewhat that is thereby resembled , more excellent than it . that he is so fruitfull , so pleasant , so comfortable ; as that the fruitfulness of the vine , the pleasantness of the grape , the comfortableness of the wine , ( which makes glad the heart of man , ) is but a faint shadow and resemblance , of what he is in truth . that he is so kind , so tender , so carefull of his ; as that the kindness , the tenderness , the care of a shepheard , towards his flock , doth but faintly resemble , what he is in truth . so here : the kingdom of god , or ( as elsewhere ) the kingdome of heaven , the heavenly kingdome , ( with the like expressions ; ) do import ; not such as what men , on earth , call a kingdome : but , somewhat else , thereby resembled ; and somewhat more excellent ; which god vouchsafes to call by that name : as much surpassing that of men , as heaven is above the earth . heb. . . a kingdome that cannot be shaken . pet. . . an inheritance incorruptible , and vndefiled , and which fadeth not away , reserved in heaven for us . pet. . . a crown of righteousness , which fadeth not away . tim. . . a crown of righteousness , laid up for us ; which god the righteous judge shall give us in that day . mat. . . a kingdome prepared for us from the beginning of the world . by the kingdome of god , therefore , we are to understand , that glory , that happiness , that blessed condition , ( whatever it is ) which the children of god , ( those that are born again , ) do seek after , and shall enjoy : partly in this life , where it is called the kingdome of grace ; and partly hereafter , which is the kingdome of glory . and thus we are to understand it in mat. . . seek first the kingdome of god and his righteousness . and . cor. . . know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdome of god ? gal. . — . the works of the flesh are manifest , adultery , fornication , uncleanness , &c. ( with a large catalogue of such others ; which concludes with this ) they which doe such things shall not inherit the kingdome of god. but , blessed are the poor in spirit , for theirs is the kingdome of god : blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness sake , for theirs is the kingdome of god , mat. . , . now , this blessedness of the children of god , ( here and hereafter , ) is called by the name of a kingdome : not as if this did fully express the nature of it : but because ( as the saying is ) nihil est in intellectu , quod non fuit prius in sensu ; we cannot easily apprehend intellectual objects , otherwise than by some resemblance of things to sense . and therefore , there being a want of words , and of notions too , which might adequately express the nature of this spiritual and heavenly happiness : we are fain to make use of sensible things , some way to resemble them , though not perfectly to express them by . and all those things , which are looked upon here , as the most excellent , the most desirable , in any kind ; are made use of to this purpose . 't is called life ; and life eternal . 't is called a treasure , laid up in heaven ; and durable riches . 't is called fulness of joy and pleasures for evermore . 't is called a royal feast ; a marriage supper ; a feast of fat things . 't is called a reward ; a glorious inheritance ; everlasting mansions ; an house not made with hands ; and the like . 't is called , a crown of glory ; a crown of righteousness ; a heavenly kingdome ; the kingdome of heaven ; and ( as here ) the kingdome of god. not as if any , or all of those , did adequately express its worth : but , these being the great desirable things of the world ; and which our senses are carried away with : they are all made use of , to represent a condition , which hath as much , and more , of happiness , than all that of riches and honours , profits and pleasures , gladness and feasting , houses and lands , treasures and inheritances , crowns and kingdoms , yea and life it self . and , when we have fancy'd all that is great and glorious , in all these sensible objects ; we must then conceive , there is somewhat yet more excellent , than all that we can fancy . cor. . . for eye hath not seen , nor hath ear heard , nor hath it entered into the heart of man to conceive , what god hath prepared for them that love him . and such is that kingdome of god , which the text speaks of . now , what it is to see this kingdome of god ; is not hard to understand . it is not , to see it afar off , so as to have no concernment in it ; as the rich glutton , luk. . . in the parable , might see lazarus in abrahams bosome ; but without any possibility of coming there . but so to see , as to enjoy it , and bear a part in it . so to see , as when christ saith mat. . . blessed are the pure in heart , for they shall see god. or as saint paul , cor. . . so to see the glory of god , as to be changed into the same image , from glory to glory . or as st. john , joh. . . behold we are now the sons of god , and it doth not yet appear what we shall be : but , when he shall appear , ( or , as the words may as well be rendered , when it shall appear , ) we shall be like him ; for we shall see him as he is . an operative sight , not meerly speculative . so here to see it , is to enjoy it : or ( as christ explains himself ver . . ) to enter into it . for , what is here said , he cannot see the kingdome of god ; is there , he cannot enter into the kingdome of god. or to inherit it : as cor. . . flesh and bloud cannot inherit the kingdome of god. to see the kingdome of god , therefore , is to enjoy , to enter into , and to inherit , that glory , that happy and blessed condition , which god hath designed for those that he makes his children . but those who are to enjoy this happiness , must first be born again . for so we heard but now , flesh and bloud cannot inherit the kingdome of god. and , as the text hath it , except a man be born again he cannot see the kingdome of god. we are therefore , in the second place to consider , what it is , to be born again ; or , as the margin reads it , to be born from above . and it is not much material which way we read it . for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is but ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which is properly enough rendered born again : and answers to that of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , t it . . which is there rendered regeneration . the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in composition , importing the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . and answering to the latine re. as in that place just now cited tit. . . where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is renovatio . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . by the washing of regeneration , and renewing of the holy ghost . or , if we please to put a greater emphasis on the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as signifying from above : ( like as also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in composition , oft times signifies vp ; as when 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie ascension and descension ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in composition , answering to the adverbs 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ) the meaning will be still the same : save that , here will be further imported , the principle whence this new birth proceeds . the former of these seems to be favoured in the th . verse , where it is explained by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( and so , it seems , nicodemus understood it , ) can a man enter a second time into his mothers womb , and be born ? the latter in th . verse ; where what was before said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is now expressed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; except a man be born of water and of the spirit , he cannot enter into the kingdome of god. but , either way , the thing will be the same . for there must be a second birth : and it must be , by a power from above . for the better understanding of which , we are to consider , that what was before said of the word kingdome , is here applicable to this , of being born again : that is , that spiritual things are , figuratively , expressed , by words importing things natural . now for as much as , our first birth or generation , is the rise or origine of our natural being ; as reasonable creatures , and the children of men : that therefore which gives us our spiritual being ; as new creatures , and the children of god , is , by analogy thereunto , stiled regeneration , our second birth , or being born again . if any would be so nice , as to object , that a child , before it be born , is indued with a reasonable soul ; and therefore his birth , not the first origine of his rational nature : this alters not the case at all . for we are not here to take the word birth so strictly , as respecting that moment only of coming into the world , ( as we use to speak : ) but with a retrospection as far backward as to the first conception ; as being of the same import with generation , ( and might have been so rendered , ) answering to the greek words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . as in matth. . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the book of the generation of jesus christ. and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which we render , abraham begat isaac . and ( in tit. . . ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is as well rendered by regeneration , as if it had been rendered a new birth , or being born again . and pet. . . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is rendered , who hath begotten us again unto a lively hope . yet of the same import with that of the text , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which we here render , born again ; but may as fitly be rendered by regenitus as by renatus . and both words are indifferently used , as relating to the whole time from the conception to the birth . to be regenerated therefore or born again , ( take which word you please , ) is ; to have a new nature wrought in us ; whereby we become new creatures , and have a spiritual being ; as , by our generation or first birth , we become reasonable creatures ; and have our natural being . this being called flesh ; and that , spirit ; in the following explication , ver . . that which is born of the flesh , is flesh , and that which is born of the spirit , is spirit . that is ; like as by our fleshly , carnal , or natural generation , ( or first birth , ) from our natural parents ; we are made flesh and bloud , ( indued with a reasonable soul , and natural life , as humane creatures , and the children of men : ) so , by our regeneration , ( or being born again , ) by the spirit ; we become spiritual , or new creatures ; endued with a spiritual life and vigour ; are made partakers of the divine nature , and become the sons of god , pet. . . but ( as to this antithesis of flesh and spirit ) we are to consider further , that the term flesh ( as it is here called , ) or flesh and bloud ( as elsewhere , ) are words of a middle signification ; but sonantia in malum : words not evil in themselves ; but most frequently used in the worst sense . and therefore though flesh and bloud , as it importeth only humane nature , and what appertains to man as man , imply nothing evil in it self : yet , since the pollution of our nature by the fall of adam , there is , not only a guilt derived to us from him ; but a depravation of nature ; which i will not take upon me to describe otherwise , than in the words of our church , in her ninth art. this our church there calls original sin ; and declares it to be , the fault and corruption of the nature of every man , that naturally is engendred of the off-spring of adam ; whereby man is far gone from original righteousness , and is of his own nature inclined to evil ; so that the flesh lusteth always contrary to the spirit . and therefore , in every person born into this world , it deserveth god's wrath and damnation . and though this infection of nature ( as our church calls it ) be indeed proeternatural , as to the essentials of humane nature : yet , being so far spread over all , as to become universal ; we now , by nature , do commonly mean , corrupt nature ; ( not as god made it , but as we have made it ; ) and , by flesh , or flesh and bloud , ( especially when contradistinguished to the spirit , ) is commonly meant , not humane nature simply considered ; but humane nature thus corrupted , or sinfull flesh. and in this sense it is , that flesh and bloud cannot inherit the kingdome of god , cor. . . that is ; not while it remains sinfull flesh and bloud . but when it shall be purged from sin ; flesh and bloud , thus purged from corruption , ( the essentials of humane nature remaining , ) shall ( after the resurrection of the body ) inherit this kingdome of god. the meaning therefore , of the text and doctrine , is this : the nature of man , though at first made pure and righteous , ( and thereby fitted for communion with god ; ) is , by the fall so depraved , as that he is now become naturally prone to sin , and averse to righteousness ; and this natural propension , is further improved by sinfull practices ; ( and so more and more daily , while this propension lasts ; ) which doth unfit us for such communion : so that , before we can be in a capacity to inherit the kingdome of god ; there must be a new nature wrought in us , and those propensions changed for better ; a new principle must be instilled , which shall render us inclinable to righteousness , as before we were to sin. and this is that which the text calls , a being born again . nor is this so harsh a trope , or uncouth form of speech , as at first view it may seem to be : but very usual ( with some little alteration ) in all languages . for denuo nasci , or de novo nasci , ( to be born again , or born anew , ) is all one as , to have novam naturam , a new nature ; ( natura , being but a verbal of nascor ; like as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ) and we know 't is very usual , to speak of good natures , better natures , new natures , &c. when we intend only different qualities , or habitual propensions and inclinations ; though without an essential diversity . 't is not indeed so obvious , to observe that equivalency , in our own language ; because the noun and verb are not conjugates , as in the greek and latine . the word nature coming by a french extraction from nascor : but , to bear , and to be born , by a saxon , from pario . but both are words of the same import . for nascor doth but supply the passive voice of pario : and they are so rendered in english : pario , to bear ; and nascor , to be born. so that , to be born again , or born anew , is the same as to have another nature ; a new nature ; to become ( as we use to say ) another kind of man , ( for kind or kin , is from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and that from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nascor ; ) to become a better natur'd man : and , to be born of god , is but what we say in another phrase , to be made partakers of the divine nature ; ( which the greeks would not scruple to express by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) so , to be born of the spirit , is , to have a spiritual nature : born of the flesh ; a fleshly nature . all the difference is this ; that what , according to the common idioms , is expressed by natura ; is , according to the idiom of the hebrews , expressed by natus ; ( a son , a child , or being born ) which idiom , the writers of the new testament do frequently follow ; as being much conversant with the jews ; and accustomed to their forms of speech . thus john . . if ye were the children of abraham , ye would doe the works of abraham ; is as much as to say , if ye had abraham's nature , ye would doe abraham's works . and again ver . , . if god were your father , ye would love me ; because i came from god : but ye are of your father the devil ; and the lusts of your father ye will doe . that is ; if ye were of a godly nature , ye would love him that comes from god ; but because your nature is devilish , your designs are so too . thus , mat. . . sons of belial ; a generation of vipers ; isa. . . a seed of evil-doers ; sam. . . thou son of the perverse woman ; ezek. . . thy father was an amorite , and thy mother an hittite ; ( with the like expressions ; ) import , such a nature , such a disposition , as that of those whose children they are said to be . and all , upon that general notion , that the off-spring or progeny are frequently observed , to imitate those from whom they proceed . whence that of st. paul , ephes. . . be ye followers of god as dear children . but , for the better understanding of this phrase , we are to consider further , that we are , in scripture , called the children of god , or sons of god , in at least a twofold acceptation . sons of god by adoption : and , sons of god by regeneration . which , though they both belong to the same persons , yet in a very different notion . the one imports a relative change : the other , a real . that relates to the business of justification : this , to that of sanctification . adoption is a forensick word ; and implies an act of grace , or favour ; by which those that by nature are not sons , come to be so reputed , and are put into a like condition , as if they were sons ; and are thereby intituled to the inheritance . it implies therefore a change of state , not a change of nature ; a relative , not a real , change : it doth , without conferring a new nature , create at least a new relation . but a son by birth , receives from his parent , not a relation only , but his very nature and being . and the scripture , in calling us the sons of god , hath respect to both these notions . that of adoption , we have in gal. . , , . in the fulness of time , god sent his son made of a woman , made under the law , to redeem them that were under the law , that we might receive the adoption of sons ; wherefore thou art no more a servant , but a son : and , if a son , then an heir , &c. and ephes. . . having proedestinated us to the adoption of children . and , if children , then heirs ; heirs of god ; and joint-heirs with christ ; as in rom. . . and this , ( i take it ) is the same which by some divines is called positive justification ; relating to what they call christ's active obedience : which they do contradistinguish , to what they call negative justification ; which they refer to the passive obedience of christ. what christ hath done and suffered for us , considered as a satisfaction to divine justice , ( which they call his passive obedience , ) doth ransome us from the curse of the law done to us for sin ; and puts us in a condition of not guilty ; ( which they call negative justification , or absolution . ) and by this we are excused from hell. but what he hath done or suffered , by way of purchase ; meriting a reward for us ; ( which they call , his active obedience , ) gives us a title to heaven , or as it is called eph. . . ) the inheritance , of that purchased possession . and this they call possitive justification ; and is in scripture language , called adoption . which yet need not be so understood , as if some parts of christ's obedience , were only satisfactory , and not meritorious ; others , meritorious only , and not satisfactory : but the same obedience , may sustain both considerations . considered as satisfactory , it frees us from hell : considered as meritorious , it entitles us to heaven . now 't is one thing , for a prince to acquit a traitor , of all crimes , as well of omission , as of commission ; which absolves him from punishment : another thing to adopt him moreover as a prince , and entitle him to a crown . and though both be coincident on the same person ; yet under a different notion : the one , as an act of pardon ; the other , of bounty . and if a third person , by what he doth or suffereth , procure both for him : 't is as to the one , a satisfaction ; as to the other , a purchase . now , whether we call that , negative justification ; and this possitive justification : or call that , justification ; and this , adoption : is but a difference of words , the notions are still the same . but neither of these , ( whether that of justification , or that of adoption , ) do properly import , in the object , a real change , but only a relative . for the traitor , thus pardoned , and thus advanced ; may yet remain a wicked person , and as very an enemy to his soveraign as he was before ; if there be not a change wrought in his mind , as well as in his relative state . nor is this the sonship , which the text speaks of . but , beside this sonship by adoption ; there is also a sonship by regeneration ; which the text mentions , as necessary to those who shall see the kingdome of god. and this implies , ( as was said before , ) not so much a relative change , of the state ; as a real change , of the person . except a man be born again , ( and thereby have a new nature , as well as a new relation , ) he cannot see the kingdome of god. 't is vain , to think of being the sons of god by adoption ; unless we be his sons by regeneration also . the one never goes without the other . for , like as 't is a vain thing , to talk of saving faith , which is not ( as occasion serves ) attended with good works : and a vain thing to talk of being justified , without being sanctified also : so 't is a vain thing to talk of adoption , without regeneration . for , though the notions be different ; the things alwaies go together . and are commonly so mentioned in scripture . thus ; joh. , . to as many as received him , that is , to as many as believed on his name , ( as it is there explained , ) he gave power , ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) a right or privilege , ( as the margin renders it , ) to be the sons of god , to wit , by adoption : but it then follows ) ; which were born , ( to wit , by regeneration ) not of the will of man but of god. those that are the sons of god , by adoption ; must be born again , by regeneration . so gal. , , . when he had said , god sent his son , &c. that we might receive the adoption of sons ; he adds , and because ye are sons , god hath sent the spirit of his son into your hearts , crying , abba father : that is , the spirit of regeneration ; the same spirit by which the text says , we must be born again . except a man be born of water and of the spirit , ( ver . . ) he cannot enter into the kingdome of god. and again rom. . , . we have not received the spirit of bondage again , to fear ; but we have received the spirit of adoption , whereby we cry , abba , father : the spirit it self bearing witness with our spirits , that we are the sons of god. but how doth he thus bear witness to our adoption ? he tells us ( ver . . ) for as many as are led by the spirit of god , they are the sons of god : by being a spirit of regeneration , it bears witness of our adoption . for , like as no man can know , that he is elected ; till he know , that he is justified and sanctified : so neither can we know , that we are adopted ; till we first know that we are regenerate . whom he did fore-know , ( saith st. paul , rom. . . ) he did also predestinate to be conformed to the image of his son ; that is , whom he designed to be happy , he designed to be holy : and whom he did thus predestinate ; them he called ; them he justified ; and them he glorified . but , till we find by the effect , we were designed to be holy ; we can never know , that we are designed to be happy . and , in like manner , till we find that we are led by the spirit , of regeneration ; we can never know that we are the sons of god , by adoption . and our text , says the same , though in other words : except a man be born again , he cannot see the kingdome of god ; that is , except he be born again , by regeneration ; he cannot pretend a title to the kingdome of god , by adoption . till they be born again ; they cannot be children of the kingdome ; as the phrase is , mat. . . adoption , and regeneration , alwaies go together . now as , being the sons of god by adoption , is the completing of our justification : so , to become the sons of god by regeneration , is the beginning of our sanctification . for what , in the origine or beginning , we call regeneration , or a new birth ; that , in the progress , we call sanctification or a new life . and 't is called , in scripture , by many other names , to the same purpose . 't is called , a dying to sin , and being alive to god , rom. . , . that we may thenceforth walk in newness of life . 't is called conversion ; or , a turning from darkness , to light ; from the power of sathan unto god , act. . . that they may receive forgiveness of sins , and inheritance among those that are sanctified . where you see conversion , attended with justification ( or the forgiveness of sins , ) and adoption , to the inheritanc● ; but 't is , amongst those that are sanctified . and again , mat. . . except ye be converted , and become as little children ; ye shall not enter into the kingdome of heaven . where , being converted , is the same with what the text calls , being born again . 't is , becoming a new creature , gal. . . if any man be in christ he is a new creature : old things are passed away , and all things are become new , cor. . . a new heart ; a new spirit ; ezek. . . that is , a new frame and temper of mind ; new principles , new propensions and inclinations . to be renewed in the spirit of our minds ; eph. . . to be created in christ jesus unto good works , ( eph. . . ) which god hath before ordained that we should walk therein : that is ( according to our present idiom , ) wherein god hath before appointed that we should walk . 't is a repairing of god's image , in us ; which , by the fall was obliterated and defaced . a putting off the old man with his deeds ; and putting on the new man , which is renewed after the image of him that created him , col. . , . a putting off the old man , which is corrupt according to the deceitfull lusts ; and putting on the new man which after god is created in righteousness and true holiness , eph. . , . with many other expressions of like import . for , in expressing spiritual things by metaphors taken from things sensible : 't is frequent in scripture , ( because no one can adequately reach it , ) to make use of many , some-way to resemble the thing intended . the result of all tends to this : that there must be a change of nature wrought ; in those who are to inherit the kingdome of god. not , as to the essentials of humane nature ; but , as to the perverse inclinations of corrupt nature . whence those who by nature , ( as now corrupted , ) are prone to evil ; may , from a new principle , become in love with god. and that , in order thereunto , we must have , not only a principle of reason , ( from our first birth ) to act as men ; but a principle of grace also ( from our new birth ) to act as good men. for an evil tree , heb. . . or ( a root of bitterness , ) will never , mat. . . bring forth good fruit : but the tree must be made good , mat. . . that the fruit may be so also . there must be a new nature , to bring forth a new life . i have now done with the explication of the text and doctrine . there be two things yet remaining ; which ( if there had been time for it ) were proper enough to have been here discussed . . from whence it is , that this necessity of a new birth proceeds . . by what power it must be wrought . the first of them we have touched by the way , in shewing , it is not humane nature ▪ as god made it ; but corrupt nature , that makes this work necessary . for if we had not degenerated from what god at first made us ; there would not have been that need of being regenerated , which now there is . the latter , is intimated , partly by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the text ; and partly in christ's further explication ( ver . . ) except a man be born of water , and of the spirit . for that which is born of the flesh , is but flesh : 't is that which is born of the spirit , is spirit . but these ( the time not permitting ) i must either omit altogether ; or at least reserve till another season . the necessity of regeneration . a sermon preached before the university of oxford at st. mary's oxon. october th . . john iij. . jesus answered and said unto him , verily verily i say unto thee , except a man be born again , he cannot see the kingdome of god. i have heretofore begun the handling of this text ; and ( through god's assistance ) hope now to finish it . by the kingdome of god , is meant , all that happy estate which the children of god ( those that are born of him ) do enjoy , as well here , as hereafter . this the scripture doth usually set forth by metaphors taken from all those things which , amongst men , are accounted excellent , or desirable ; either as necessary , as pleasant , as profitable , as glorious , or on what other consideration soever , ( as being much more desirable than all these put together ) and , amongst the rest , by that of a kingdome . 't is called here the kingdome of god , and the kingdome of heaven , elsewhere ; by way of eminence , and of contradistinction , to those on earth , those of men ; as much surpassing them as heaven is high above the earth . this kingdome , is commonly distinguished into that of grace , and that of glory . and they are both here intended in the word kingdome . but especially the latter : those of grace , being included in the former words , except a man be born again ; except he do here attain the kingdome of grace , he cannot hope hereafter to see that of glory . to see this kingdome , is not , so to see it as the rich glutton saw lazarus in abraham's bosome , luke . . ( to see it a far off , without being the better for it : ) but , so as when christ says , mat. . . blessed are the pure in heart , for they shall see god ; and saint paul , heb. . . without holiness no man shall see the lord : that is , to see it , as to enjoy it , and have a share in it . and he that would thus see the kingdome of god , must ( the text tells us ) be born again : that is , he must have a new nature , a new nativity . he must by regeneration , or his first birth , or a second birth , become a child of god , a child of grace , as , by generation , or his first birth , he is a child of man , a child of sin. now we are , in scripture , called the children of god , in a double sense : children of god by adoption , and children of god by regeneration . which , though they both belong to the same persons ; yet in a very different notion . the one implies a change of state or condition : as when a person who , by nature , is not a son ; is , by adoption put into such a condition as if he were a son ; and intituled to the inheritance . the other implies a change of nature or disposition : as when a lion becomes as a lamb ; when a fierce nature becomes meek and gentle ; when a wicked man becomes holy. like as , 't is one thing for a prince to pardon a malefactour ( and put him into a condition of not-guilty : ) another thing , to make him an honest man , and not inclinable to the like offence again . the former of these , relates to justification ; the other , to sanctification . adoption , being the compleating of justification ; as regeneration , is the beginning of sanctification . and 't is the latter of these , that the text means in being born again . but , though the notions be different ; the things do alway go both together . and so the text tells us , except a man be born again , he cannot see the kingdome of god. we cannot expect to be the sons of god by adoption , and so intituled to the kingdome of god ; unless we be first the sons of god by regeneration , and so made partakers of the divine nature . and this is the result of what we discoursed more fully the last time : to shew the necessity of this change of nature , in those who shall see the kingdome of god. there remain yet two things to be ( as we then said ) considered . . from whence it is that this necessity of a new birth proceeds . and . by what power it must be wrought . and , after that , to make application . as to the first of these ; the ground of this necessity : we are to consider of man , in a double capacity : first as god made him ; and secondly , as he made himself . god made man upright ( saith solomon ) but he hath found out many inventions , eccles. . . god , at first , created man after his own image , gen. . , . in knowledge , righteousness and true holiness , eph. . . col. . . void of all sin , habitual , or actual . and , had we continued in such a state as wherein god made us ; there would have been no necessity of this change of nature . we had then , without it , continued holy , and happy . had there been no sin , there had been no need of a new-birth . had there not been a degeneration , from what god made us at first , there had been no need of a regeneration , to reestate us in it . but man , by sin , having lost his holyness ; lost his happiness also . as by one man sin came upon all : so , death , or misery , the effect of sin. rom. . . by one man sin entered into the world ; and death by sin : and death passed upon all men , for that all have sinned : or ( as the margin reads it ) in whom all have sinned . ( and so grotius renders it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , per quem ; by whom . ) ver. . even upon them who had not sinned after the similitude of adam's transgression : that is , ( as it is commonly understood , ) even on children , who had not sinned by imitation , or as adam did . and so grotius , etiam pueros nullius commissi reos , v. . from whence st. paul there infers , that there is sin , even in such : as without which they would not been subject to death . and david tells us of himself , psal. . . i was shapen in iniquity , and in sin did my mother conceive me . and st. paul likewise rom. . . i know that in me , ( that is , in my flesh , ) dwelleth no good thing . ver. . the good that i would do , i do not ; but the evil which i would not do , that i do . ver. . i delight in the law of god after the inward man : ver. . but i see another law in my members , warring against the law of my mind ; and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin. nor need we here dispute the point , whether st. paul speak this of himself as in his regenerate condition ; or , in his unregenerate : for , either way , it serves our purpose well enough ; that there is in man , at least before his regeneration , such habitual corruption , as makes him thus prone to sin , and averse to good. how much of it remains afterward , ( because that we are sanctified but in part , ) is , to our present purpose , not necessary . but , that there is too much of it , even those that are the most sanctified , find cause to bewail . this depravation of nature , or , as our church calls it , infection of nature , she hath so well described in her th . article , that i will not take upon me to mend it . she calls it , there , original sin ; and declares it to be the fault and corruption of the nature of every man , that naturally is engendred of the off-spring of adam : whereby man is far gone from original righteousness ; and is , of his own nature , inclined to evil : so that the flesh lusteth alwaies against the spirit . and therefore , in every person born into this world , it deserveth god's wrath and damnation . with more to the same purpose . i do not intend here , to enter into a nice discourse of original sin ; what it is , or by what means it comes to be derived upon us . it is enough , for our present purpose , which our church saith explicitely ; that such a thing there is ; that by this we are inclined to evil ; that it is universal to all naturally descended from adam ; that it sticks so close to us as to be called our own nature ; and that it deserves god's wrath and damnation . now , this being our nature , as we proceed from adam ; there will be need of another nature , before we can be accepted of god. which i do not mean , of a physical change ; as to the essentials of humane nature : but , of a moral change ; as to the propensions and inclinations of it . and this change of nature is that which the text means by being born again . for ( though our english-tongue do not so much favour it ) nova natura , and de novo nasci , are all one . a new nativity , is , a new nature . and it is the hebrews common form of speech , ( which the greek in the new testament doth use to follow , ) to call men the sons of such , whose natures they imitate . ( upon a common presumption , that animals are of the same nature with those from which they descend . ) thus , a generation of vipers ; a seed of evil doers ; children of belial ; ye are of your father the devil ; and the like ; imply as much , as a viperous , wicked and devilish nature . and , contrariwise , to be born of god , on the child of god , is , to be like god , to be made partaker of a divine nature . and christ to the pharisees joh. . . if ye were the children of abraham , ye would do the works of abraham : v. . but ye are of your father the devil , and the lusts of your father ye will do . that is ; if you had abraham's nature , you would act like abraham : but , being of a devilish nature , you act accordingly . and thus much for the ground or reason of this necessity . it is the corruption of our own nature , that makes it necessary to have a new nature ; before we can see the kingdome of god ; where no unclean thing may enter ; eph. . . we must put off the old man , which is corrupt according to the deceitfull lusts : v. . and be renewed in the spirit of our minds : v. . and put on the new man , which after god is created in righteousness and true holyness . we are next to consider , by what power it is , that this change of nature must be wrought . and this , christ tells , ( joh. . ) must be by the spirit . except a man be born of water and of the spirit . 't is not enough that a man be washed with water , ( such as were many of the jewish cleansings , and initiations ; but insufficient to wash away sin : ) he must be born of the spirit also ; and by that be cleansed from the pollutions of nature ; if ever he see the kingdome of god. ver. . for that which is born of the flesh is but flesh ; 't is that which is born of the spirit , that is spirit . to be born of the flesh , is enough to give us a fleshly nature ; that of a reasonable creature , or a sinfull creature : and to be washed with water , may take away the filth of the body ; but it must be a spiritual birth , that gives us a spiritual nature : and it must be the laver of regeneration , and the renewing of the holy ghost , tit. . . that washeth away the filth of sin. no man comes to me , saith christ , joh. . . except the father who sent me draw him . 't is according to his divine power ( saith peter , pet. . . ) that we are made partakers of the divine nature , v. . 't is by the spirit of his son , ( saith st. paul , gal. . . ) which god sends into our hearts , whereby we are inabled to cry abba father . those to whom there is no condemnation , ( rom. . . ) are they who walk not after the flesh , but after the spirit : those who have another principle of life , and action , by spiritual regeneration ; than that of the flesh , by carnal generation . ver. . for they that are after the flesh , do mind the thi●gs of the flesh ; but they that are after the spirit , the things of the spirit . ver. . for to be carnally minded ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) is death ; but ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) to be spiritually minded , is life and peace : v. . because the carnal mind ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) is enmity against god ; for it is not subject to the law of god , neither indeed can be . ver. . so then , they that are in the flesh , cannot please god. v. . but ye are not in the flesh , but in the spirit ; if so be that the spirit of god dwell in you . now , if any have not the spirit of christ ; he is none of his . ver. . for , if ye live after the flesh ; ye shall dye : but if ye , through the spirit , do mortifie the deeds of the body ; ye shall live. ver. . for as many as are led by the spirit of god ; they are the sons of god. with much more there to the same purpose . i know very well , that the name of the spirit , in this loose age , is made matter of burlesk and drollery . but so are all the sacred things of god : his being , and providence ; heaven , and hell : and the day of judgment . yet we must not therefore be drolled out of our religion . the truths of god , will still be the truths of god , notwithstanding the follies of men . those admonitions of quench not the spirit , thes. . . grieve not the spirit , eph. . . walk in the spirit , and ye shall not fulfill the lusts of the flesh , gal. . . were intended for serious advice . and why should we grieve that spirit ; which is to be our comforter , joh. . . and . . by whom we are sealed to the day of redemption ? eph. . . and . . and david prays , in good earnest , psal. . . create in me a clean heart , o god , and renew a right spirit within me : v. . take not thy holy spirit from me : v. . vphold me with thy free spirit . nor did god mock us , when he promised to pour his spirit upon all flesh , joel . . nor christ , when he says his father will give his holy spirit to them that ask , luke . . and the threatnings of god are very severe , against those that do despite to the spirit of grace , heb. . . and who blaspheme or speak against the holy spirit , mat. . , . nor will the follies of some , ( who may pretend to what they have not , ) excuse the malice of others , who make a mock of holy things . but , to return : this change of nature must , i say , be wrought by the spirit of god. not but that we must be active also ; in a diligent use of the means of grace , whereby god's spirit doth ordinarily work grace in us ; as praying , hearing and reading the word of god , keeping his sabbaths ; and other of his ordinances . for god hath appointed them for that very end : that the spirit of god may , by them , work grace in us . but we are so to use them , as yet to look beyond them ; and wait for a work of god by his spirit upon our hearts , in concurrence with them , to make them effectual to us . i have planted ( saith paul , cor. . . ) and apollo watered ; but god gave the increase . ver. . so then , neither is he that planteth any thing , neither he that watereth ; ( that is , nothing in comparison : ) but god that giveth the increase . hence it is , that under the same means of grace , and the same arguments used to perswade us , one is taken and another left , mat. . , . ( as christ speaks in a like case : ) one converted , and another remains obdurate : and , to the same person , there be some mollia tempora fandi ; those arguments at one time prevail , which at another time do not . and , when they do , it is not without a special concurrence of god with them ; and not meerly from other circumstantials , or a power of our own without it . and our church saith the same , ( in her tenth article , ) in the words : the condition of man , after the fall of adam , is such , that he cannot turn or prepare himself , by his own natural strength and good works , to faith and calling upon god : wherefore we have no power to do good works pleasant and acceptable to god , without the grace of god by christ , preventing us , that we may have a good will ; and working with us , when we have that good will. if any shall yet inquire , as nicodemus here , how can these things be ? joh. . . how is it , that god , or his spirit , can thus work upon our hearts , man being a free agent ; or how this is consistent with the freedome of man's will ; or the like : i do not know , that we are obliged to trouble our selves with those nice inquiries . sure it is , that , when we act , we act freely ; not against our wills , certum est , nos velle cum volumus ; sed deus facit ut velimus : is a known saying in the case . when we will , 't is voluntary ; but 't is god makes us thus to will. and st. paul long before , it is god which worketh in us , both to will and to do , of his good pleasure , phil. . . as to the manner of it ; if we say , god works we know not how ; it doth not therefore follow , that he doth not work . if we do not know , how the bones grow in the womb of her that is with child , eccles. . . ( which yet , we know , do grow ; ) we may , as likely , be ignorant , how god works in the new-birth . we have in job . a great many hard questions , concerning natural things , which god himself puts to job , ( to check his curiosity in higher matters , ) which would trouble any of us to answer , as to the particular manner ; and yet , in general , that the things be so , we cannot deny . st. paul , rom. . to such captious questions , why doth he yet complain ? for who hath resisted his will ? makes this grave reply , v. . nay but , o man , who art thou that disputest against god ? 't is hard for us to set bounds to the almighty ; to say , what he doth ; or what he may doe . modesty becomes us herein . vain man ( saith zophar in job , job . . ) would needs be wise : though man be born like a wild asses colt. nor is it for us to give law to the almighty , or say unto him , what doest thou ? and here , if ever , that counsel of solomon is seasonble , eccl. . . be not rash with thy mouth , and let not thy heart be hasty , to utter any thing before god ; for god is in heaven and thou upon earth ; therefore let thy words be few . and our saviour here to nicodemus , from our ignorance in earthly things , pleads for a modest submission in things of a higher nature : joh. . . the wind bloweth where it listeth ; thou hearest the sound thereof , but canst not tell whence it cometh , and whither it goeth : so is every one that is born of the spirit . ver. . and , if in earthly things , we are at a loss , how much more in heavenly . and solomon , to the same purpose ( in the place before cited , ) eccl. . . as thou knowest not what is the way of the spirit , nor how the bones grow in the womb of her that is with child : even so thou knowest not the works of god , who maketh all . 't is commonly , either from a vain curiosity , or proud arrogance , that makes men over confident in such things . i find , the church of god , in the first ages of the world , did for a long time ( for ought we see ) rest satisfied with that first general promise , that the seed of the woman should break the serpents head , gen. . . that god would , by some born of a woman , find a way ( they knew not how ) to deliver us from that wretched condition , which by the serpents malice and subtilty was brought upon us : without being over inquisitive , when , or how , or by whom it should be brought about : till god saw fit , in his own time , upon the coming of our saviour , to declare it more plainly and fully . and in like manner , when god promises , to circumcise our heart , deut. . . to give us a new heart , and put a new spirit within us , ezek. . . to take away the heart of stone and give us a heart of flesh , ezek. . . to put his law in our inward parts , and write it in our hearts , jer. . . to put his fear in our hearts , that we shall not depart from him , jer. . . we may well rest satisfied , that he who hath said it , can doe it ; without cavilling , or nice inquiring , how can these things be ? and the like , when god threatens to harden pharaoh's heart , exod. . . and . . or , to make the heart of the people fat ; that hearing they may hear , but not understand , isai. . , . and seeing they may see , but not perceive , mat. . , . to wit , by leaving them to their natural hardness and blindness ; without correcting it by his spirit . now that which hereby we prove , is this , not , that god forces us to will against our wills ; ( for that in sensu composito as to the elicite act , is impossible , as implying a contradiction in the terms ; for , as to what we will , we are so far willing : ) but , that , by the spirit we are born again ; that is , that god , by his spirit , works in us a new nativity , a new nature ; that is , a new habit of grace ; whereby we are inclined to love and delight in good , as , by the habitual corruption of our nature , we are inclined to evil. and this is the concurrent doctrine of the schools ; who ( i think ) do generally allow , that our souls are capable of infused habits , as well as acquired . and if , by derivation from our first parents , we be capable of habitual corruption ; i see not why we should doubt , but that we are alike capable of habitual grace . and of this , for ought i know , as early as of that . for like as there may be habitual corruption , before we be in a capacity ( for want of the use of reason , to commit actual sin : so may god , as early , put into our hearts the seeds of grace ; which may afterwards , when occasion shall serve , bring forth the fruits of good living . he may , i say , when he please ; not , that he alwaies so doth . we reade of isaiah , that he was called from the womb , isai. . . and of jeremiah , jer. . . before thou camest out of the womb , i sanctified thee : and of john the baptist , that he should be filled with the holy ghost , even from his mothers womb , luk. . . and our church presumes , of infants , that they be , at least some of them regenerate when baptized . and therefore . for as much as all men are conceived and born in sin ; and that our saviour jesus christ says , none can enter into the kingdome of god , except he be regenerate and born anew , of water and of the holy ghost : doth direct us to call upon god the father , through our lord jesus christ , that of his bounteous mercy , he will grant to this child , that thing which by nature he cannot have : and doth pray accordingly , that god will wash him and sanctifie him with the holy ghost : and that he may receive remission of sins by spiritual regeneration . nor is the holy ghost less able to work effectually afterwards . else , why are we taught to pray to god , to grant us true repentance , and his holy spirit , that the things may please him which we doe at present , and that the rest of our life hereafter , may be pure and holy : that all our doings may be ordered by his government , to doe alwaies that which is righteous in his sight . and , for the king's majesty , that god will replenish him with the grace of his spirit , that he may alwaies incline to god's will , and walk in his waies : and to endue him plenteously with heavenly gifts . and , for the royal family , that god will endue them with his holy spirit , and enrich them with his heavenly grace . and for the clergy , that god will send upon our bishops and curates , and all congregations committed to their charge , the healthfull spirit of his grace . and for our selves , that being regenerate and made his children by adoption , and grace , we may be daily renewed by his holy spirit . that , as , by his special grace preventing us , he puts into our minds good desires ; so , by his continual help , we may bring the same to good effect . that , by his holy inspiration , we may think those things that be good ; and , by his mercifull guiding , we may perform the same . that , god , who did teach the hearts of his faithfull people , by sending them the light of his holy spirit ; will grant us , by the same spirit , to have a right judgment in all things . that , because , by the weakness of our mortal nature , we can doe no good thing without him ; he will grant us the help of his grace ; that in keeping his commandments we may please him , both in will and deed. that , god , who is the author and giver of all good things , will graft in our heart the love of his name . that he will grant us the spirit , to think and doe alwaies such things as be rightfull , that we who cannot doe any thing without him , may by him be enabled to live according to his will. that , because the frailty of man , without him , cannot but fall ; he will keep us ever by his help . that , his grace may alwaies prevent and follow us ; and make us continually to be given to all good works . that , almighty god , will cleanse the thoughts of our hearts , by the inspiration of his holy spirit ; that we may perfectly love him , and worthily magnify his holy name . with much more , in the prayers of our church , to the same purpose . all which implies , that there is a power in god , to work in our souls , by his spirit , such a gracious frame and temper of heart , ( inclining it to good , as before it was to evil , ) as , without it , would not have been . and truly if we do allow , that the wisdome of man , by moral arguments and rational discourse , may ( without doing violence to his will ) perswade another to think otherwise , than before he did ; and to doe , what otherwise he would not have done ; ( which yet , when he doth , he doth freely : ) nay more , if a glass of wine , ( though taken moderately , and without excess , ) may give a man that life , vigour and alacrity , as to make him almost another man ; to speak , think , and doe , what else he would not , or at least not in such a manner and to such a degree : surely we may allow the wisdome of god , and the efficacy of his spirit , ( without intrenching upon our freedome , ) to doe as much , or more than so : and , either without , or in concurrence with , such moral swasions , to put that warmth into our hearts , as to act beyond what , without it , we should have done . nor is there any reason to fear , that such inclination to good , from the spirit of god , should prejudice the freedome of our will ; any more , if so much , as the inclination to evil from our own corruption , or the temptations of sathan . especially , since that the blessed angels , and the glorified saints in heaven ( where sorrow and sin shall be no more ) shall , as freely , love god , and praise him , as we on earth can do : notwithstanding that they shall be then , not only inclined to , but confirmed in good , and not in a capacity to sin : not , for want of freedome ; but , as having no inclination to evil. all which is not said , to incourage any man in sloth or idleness ( in doing what is his duty , ) upon pretence of waiting on the spirit of god to doe all for him : but rather , to a diligent use of all the means of grace , in hope of his concurrence ; and to implore withall the divine goodness , to assist us mercifully ; to prevent us in all our doings , with his most gracious favour , and further us with his continual help ; that in all our works begun , continued and ended in him , we may have his blessing on them . according to solomon's advice in a like case , eccl. . . in the morning sow thy seed , and in evening withold not thy hand : for thou knowest not whether shall prosper , either this , or that ; or whether they shall both be alike good. and st. paul makes the like inference from the same premises , phil. . , . work out your own salvation with fear and trembling ; for it is god that worketh in you both to will and to doe , of his good pleasure . and , if we be not failing on our part ; we have great incouragement to believe , that god ( though a free agent ) will not be wanting to give his holy spirit to those that ask him , luk. . . now ( for application ) this doctrine ( concerning the necessity of regeneration , in those who shall see the kingdome of god ) doth vindicate our church ( whose doctrine it is ) from the reproach and calumny cast upon her doctrine : as if , when she says , that we are justified by faith only , she taught a loose and easy way of coming to heaven , without regeneration , sanctification ; or , good works , the effect of both . 't is very true , she saith in her th . article , we are accounted righteous before god , only for the merit of our lord and saviour jesus christ by faith ; and not for our own good works or deservings . wherefore , that we are justified by faith only , is a most wholesome doctrine and very comfortable . ( and more , to the same purpose in the homily to which that article refers . ) but , though she say we are justified by faith only ; she doth not say , there is nothing more , requisite to salvation . for we must be sanctified , as well as justified , if ever we be saved . and therefore , that we may not possibly mistake her doctrine ( unless wilfully ) she adds in the next words ( which are her twelfth article ) albeit that good works , which are the fruits of faith , and follow after justification , cannot put away our sins , and indure the severity of god's judgment : yet are they pleasing and acceptable to god in christ ; and do spring out necessarily of a true and lively faith : in so much as , by them , a lively faith may be evidently known , as a tree discerned by the fruit. but ( which is her tirteenth article ) works done before the grace of christ , and the inspiration of his spirit , are not pleasant to god : forasmuch as they spring not from faith in jesus christ. neither do they make man meet to receive grace , or ( as the school authors say ) deserve grace of congruity . our church therefore , in teaching justification by faith only ; doth not teach us , that we need no more to carry us to heaven , but only a sanguine belief that we shall come there ; and may thenceforth live as we list , without holiness , or a godly , righteous and sober life . for she makes this necessary to bring us to heaven , as well as faith , or justification it self . and a pretence of faith without this , she doth not own for faith , but presumption . she owns none for a true and lively faith , but what is attended herewith , as the necessary fruit thereof , only she doth distinguish , what of this belongs to justification , and what to sanctification : which others labour studiously to confound . if any please to cavil , that , if we be justified by faith only , then there need no more to save us ; because god saves all that he justifies : i say , this cavil , might seem to have some weight in it ; if god did justify any , whom he doth not sanctify also . a prince , i confess , may sometimes pardon a male-factour , ( and so justify him , or put him in●o a condition of not-guilty , ) without making him an honest man : but god never justifies any , whom he doth not also sanctify . and therefore 't is , here , the same thing to infer , that a man may be sanctified without holiness ; as , that he may be saved without it ; if justified by faith only . but if any indeed there be ( i confess i know none , except the papist , ) that hold , a man may be justified and saved ; without being sanctified : i have nothing to say in the defence of such . nor is this the doctrine of our church , when she says , we are justified by faith only . and , for any to load her doctrine , with such consequences , is great ignorance ; or , somewhat worse . but i proceed . the two great enemies to the doctrine before us ( the necessity of regeneration and sanctification , in order to salvation , and , consequently , of good works , the effect thereof ; ) are , the atheist , and the papist : with whom we may join those who symbolise with either , so far as they so do . with the atheist ( who thinks there is no god , ) i join the profane debauched person , who so lives as if there were none : such as profess that they know god ; but , in works , deny him : being abominable , and disobedient , and , to every good work , reprobate , tit. , . these men have as little veneration for heaven and holiness ; as the papists have for the word of god : which they can make use of , as a nose of wax ( as they phrase it ) to serve a present turn ; so far as it makes for them : but , as to much of it , they had rather it were not at all : and , therefore , care not how little it be known : and , when it is , they would have it truckle under their churches interpretation , as if insignificant without it . and , in like manner , the profane atheist , as to a holy life , and a future state. he could wish perhaps , with balaam , to dye the death of the righteous ; and that his latter end might be like his , num. . . but , finding so little hopes of that , doth rather wish , there were no such thing : and thinks it his great unhappiness , that he is not a beast : that , since he lives like a beast , he cannot dye like a beast too ; without hopes or fears of heaven or hell. for , since he so lives as to have little hopes of heaven ; he heartily wisheth there were no fear of hell. with such as these , if any man presseth for regeneration , sanctification , and a holy life : he was to pass , heretofore , for a puritan ; then , a roundhead ; and , now , for a damn'd fanatick . nor shall he scape this censure , though never so great a church-man , and do exactly conform to the church as now established . for 't is holiness they hate , more than non-conformity . to these men , i shall say little more at present , than to repeat these words of christ , joh. . , . except a man be born again , of water and of the spirit ; he cannot enter into the kingdome of god : and that of the apostle , heb. . . without holiness no man shall see the lord. ( a wicked life , will never bring us to heaven . ) and then , what is like to be their condition , themselves may judge . the other enemy to this doctrine , is the papist . for though they talk much of good works , yea works of supererogation , ( works better than they need to be : ) yet are they no friends to the doctrine of sanctification , and a holy life . their first artifice , is , to confound justification , and sanctification . for so they doe when they tell us , we are justified by inherent righteousness . now , what is inherent righteousness , but holiness and a good life . next ; this holiness , or inherent righteousness , doth silently pass into the term of good works . and , here , the opus operatum ( as they call it ) shall serve the turn , without much troubling themselves about the habite of grace or holiness , from whence these good works should proceed ; and , without which ( our church tells us ) good works ( works materially good ) cannot be acceptable unto god. and 't is craftily done , to annex justification to good works : else there would be no need , for those who have no good works of their own , to purchase out of the churches treasury , the good works of other men : and so the market of indulgences would fail . next , these good works are signally ( though not only ) to be understood of alms-deeds : and these , principally to the church ; that is , to their priests or other ecclesiasticks ( as they be contradistinguished from the laicks ) or to some of their religious orders . for alms-deeds will hardly pass for meritorious ; unless to some of these . then ; these good works , are to be commuted , for penance , and the priests absolution . for though they have nothing of good works at all ; nay , though they be guilty of very great immoralities : yet if they confess to a priest , and receive absolution ( which may be had at an easy rate , ) they are then declared as innocent as the child that is new-born . especially , if they perform the penance imposed ; that is ( for the most part ) if they say so many pater-nosters , and so many ave-maries , or ( if it be for a great offence ) say over the seven penetential psalms , ( for that is a great penance ) or at least get some body to say it for them . nor is it necessary , to this absolution , that they should be contrite , or heartily sorry ; for attrition , with auricular confession , shall pass in stead of contrition : that is , in effect , if they be but sorry for the penance , though they be not sorry for the sin. or , if all this should fail ; it is but being at the charge of an indulgence , or popes pardon : that is , to purchase so many penyworth of other mens merits ( having none of their own ) out of that surplusage which those others have had to spare ( more than to serve their own turn ) which remain stored up in the churches treasury , to be dispensed at the popes pleasure , to those who will give so much money for them . or lastly , if they leave a legacy at their death , or their friends will be at that charge when they are gone , to purchase so many masses to be said for them , as shall be thought necessary to deliver their souls out of purgatory . and , in case they purchase more than are necessary for that occasion ; the surplusage shall remain in the churches treasury , for the benefit of others ; to be dispensed , as was aforesaid . and this is what they require , by way of commutation , in stead of regeneration , sanctification , holiness and a godly life . but i shall leave them . and exhort those of our own communion , ( who desire truly to please god , ) to seek after real holiness in their hearts , and the practice of it in their lives . first , i say , real holiness in the heart . mat. . . men do not gather grapes of thorns , or figs of thistles . ver. . a good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit ; nor a corrupt tree , good fruit . mat. . . therefore make the tree good , that the fruit may be good also . ver. . o generation of vipers ( saith christ ) how can ye , being evil , speak good things ? for out of the abundance of the heart , the mouth speaketh . 't is not enough to lop off some of the branches in practice , so long as there remains a root of bitterness in the heart , heb. . . my son , give me thy heart , saith solomon , pro. . . and 't is out of the good treasure of the heart , that the good man bringeth forth good things , mat. . . 't was hezekiah's great comfort , that he had walked before god in truth and with a perfect heart , king. . . and , contrariwise , a blemish on amaziah's good actions ; that he did what was right in the sight of the lord , but not with a perfect heart , chron. . . without which , bodily exercise profiteth little , tim. . . 't was for want of this , that god complains of the solemn services of his own people : isai. . . to what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices ? i am full of your burnt-offerings of rams ; and the fat of fed beasts . i delight not in the bloud of bullocks , or of lambs , or of hee goats . ver. . bring no more vain oblations : incense is an abomination to me . ver. . your new moons , and your appointed feasts , my soul hateth : they are a trouble to me : i am weary to bear them . because , though these were good things , they were ill done . and god will not accept of outward services , in lieu of holiness . i know , 't is a fancy that some have taken up ; that , of those before christ , god required only outward services ; and therefore promised only temporal rewards : whereas , say they , if he had required spiritual services , the rewards promised would have been sutable thereunto . but sure , as to the services , david was of another mind . psal. . . thou delightest not in sacrifice , else would i give it : thou delightest not in burnt-offerings , ( that is , comparatively : ) ver. . but the sacrifices of god , are a broken spirit : a broken and a contrite heart , o god , thou wilt not despise . ver. . then shalt thou be pleased with sacrifices of righteousness ; with burnt-offering , and whole burnt-offering : but not till then . and , as to the rewards promised ; our church is positive , ( in her seventh article : ) the old testament is not contrary to the new : for , both in the old and new testament , everlasting life is offered to mankind by christ : who is the onely mediator between god and man ; being both god , and man. wherefore they are not to be heard , who feign , that the old fathers looked only for transitory promises . and truely they might as well say ; that , when god threatens , in the day that thou eatest thereof , thou shalt dye the death , gen. . . 't was meant only of a temporal death ; ( and how comes he then to punish with hell ? ) as , that , when he promiseth , the man that doth them , shall live in them ; 't is meant only of temporal life . if the promises be but of things temporal ; how come the threatnings to be , of things eternal ? but they are indeed , both of them , of things eternal , as well as temporal : and the services required , are spiritual as well as bodily : and that of the spirit principally and in the first place . yet it is not of the heart only ; but secondly , of the life also , that god requires . 't is in vain to talk of a good heart towards god ; with a wicked life , in the face of the world. mat. . . if the tree be good ; the fruit will be so too . a wicked life , is a certain sign of a naughty heart . and this obedience , must be uniform , and universal . psal. . . then shall i not be ashamed , saith david , when i have respect to all thy commandments . we are not to pick and choose , what to obey , and what not . as if a double diligence in some one particular , ( wherein our own interest prompts us , ) would expiate for a supine negligence in all the rest . it was suspicious in jehu ; who was very zealous , against the worship and priests of baal ( set up by ahab and jezabel ; ) the better to secure his interest against the house of ahab , and the adherents thereof : ver. . but adhered to the sins of jeroboam the son of nebat , and the golden calves which he set up in dan and bethel : and , otherwise , ( as 't is expresly noted , ) ver . . took no heed to walk in the law of the lord god of israel with all his heart . and christ taxes the pharisees ; who quarrelled with his disciples , for transgressing the tradition of the elders , in eating with vnwashen hands ; while themselves made void the law of god , by their traditions : as men zealous in small punctilio's , of tithing mint , annise and cummin , while they neglected the weightier matters of the law , mat. . . and straining at a gnat , while they swallow a camel ; ver. . and making clean the outside of the cup and platter , while their inward part was full of wickedness , luk. . . and , while they made new sins , which god never made ; were very remiss , as to those that were notorious , and undeniably so . but , if we would indeed approve our selves to god ; we must take heed to duties of all sorts : of a chast , temperate and sober life , as to our selves ; of loyalty , obedience and due submission , to our superiours , in church and state ; of charity , equity and just dealing , to inferiours , equals , and all men ; of religion , piety and devotion , to god : and all this , out of a pure heart , and of a good conscience , and of faith vnfeigned , tim. . . for all which , because we are of our selves insufficient , without the assistance of god's spirit ; we are to call in that to our aid : as the text directs us ; and the collect for the day , ( with which i will conclude ; ) o god , forasmuch as , without thee , we are not able to please thee : mercifully grant , that thy holy spirit may , in all things , direct and rule our hearts through jesus christ our lord. to whom , with the father , and the holy ghost , be honour and praise , now and for ever . amen . finis . errata . page . l. penult . press . p. . l. . to things of sense . p. . l. . for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . p. . l. ult . for done r. due . p. l. . for god r. good. p. . l. . for those r. that . l. . so to see . l. ult . dele or his first birth . p. . l. . these words . p. . l. . needs . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a -e august . publike baptism of infants . absolution . third collect. prayer for the king. royal family . clergy . christmas . easter day . . sunday after easter . whitsunday . . sunday after trinity . . sunday . . sunday . . sunday . . sunday . before the commandments . communion collects . albertus pighius . lev. . . ezek. . . rom. . . gal. . . king. . , . mat. . , , . mar. . , , , . . sunday after trinity . an eighth letter concerning the sacred trinity occasioned by some letters to him on that subject / by john wallis ... wallis, john, - . approx. kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from -bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : - (eebo-tcp phase ). a wing w estc r ocm this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons . universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase , no. a ) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set ) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, - ; : ) an eighth letter concerning the sacred trinity occasioned by some letters to him on that subject / by john wallis ... wallis, john, - . p. s.n., [london : ] caption title. imprint suggested by wing. dated at end: novemb. , . errors in paging: p. - , - misprinted - , - . reproduction of original in the union theological seminary library, new york. created by converting tcp files to tei p using tcp tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between and available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the , texts created during phase of the project have been released into the public domain as of january . anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. % (or pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf- unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p , characters represented either as utf- unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng trinity. theology, doctrinal. - tcp assigned for keying and markup - aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images - mona logarbo sampled and proofread - mona logarbo text and markup reviewed and edited - pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion an eighth letter concerning the sacred trinity ; occasioned by some letters to him on that subject . by john wallis d. d. &c. since my publishing seven letters , and three sermons , concerning the sacred trinity ; i have received , on that occasion , several letters from divers persons , ( some known , some unknown , ) concerning that subject . mostly by way of gratulation and approbation of what i have done . and where some expressions therein are not just the same with mine ; they are much to the same purpose , and not at all contrary to what i undertook to maintain . one of them ( from an unknown person ) subscribed a. b. was written ( it seems ) by a countrey gentleman , not a professed divine : who though he do not pretend to be much versed in school-divinity ; yet is , i find , not a stranger to it . it was left for me at my booksellers , with an intimation , that the author was willing to have it printed . and i left it again with the bookseller for that purpose ; though it hath been delayed hitherto . which ( because the author did desire it ) is as followeth . a letter to the reverend doctor wallis occasioned by his several letters touching the doctrine of the trinity , &c. reverend sir , 't is gratitude and acknowledgement directs these lines to you . i have been so fortunate to meet with your several letters in affirmance of the doctrine of the blessed trinity , &c. and cannot but confess my self not only confirmed , but much enlarged in my notions about that doctrine by the so plain and pressing reason of your discourses . but lest i should seem fond of my own understanding , and fancy to my self that i do comprehend more touching these matters than i indeed do , i shall humbly offer to you my method of thoughts , and submit the same to your grave judgment and allowance . the metaphysicians i remember teach us that one way to know the deity is by way of eminency , is there any good or perfection in the creature ? then , say they , god that is the great author and cause of all things , must be so in a more eminent and high degree . the attributes of god are competent to man ( whom he made after his own image ) in some measure , but in god they are in the highest and superlative degree . now besides these eminences and perfections in the deity , there are three more particular and more transcendent eminences , wherein and whereby god hath manifested himself to and for the good of mankind . god almighty was pleased in his infinite mercy to determine that mankind should be rescued from that state of sin , which the defection of our first father brought us into , and be brought back into a state of salvation . but how he should bring about and effect this great work , is out of the reach of humane contemplation , and can no otherwise be known , than as god himself hath been pleased to reveal and discover the same to us in the scriptures . now the scriptures intimate to us three several manifestations of the deity in this great work of our salvation . the first is that of a father . that god the father of heaven and earth , who created the world by his power , and preserveth it by his providence , so loved this world , that he sent his only begotten son to be our saviour and mighty redeemer . the second is that of a son. that jesus christ the only begotten son of god , undertook this great work of man's redemption , and to that purpose came into the world , and became man , a second adam , who by his holy life , and absolute and perfect obedience to the will of god , did expiate and make atonement for the disobedience of the first . the third is that of the holy ghost , who by his inward operations and gracious influences , doth incline and prevail with man to embrace the redemption purchased for him upon the terms of the gospel . now in respect of these three several manifestations of the deity , there is said to be a trinity of persons in the vnity of the godhead , and the same god in respect of one of these manifestations of himself , is called god the father ; in respect of another is called god the son ; and in respect of the third is called god the holy ghost . that there are these three more eminent manifestations of the deity , and under these denominations , of father , son , and holy ghost , is most plain in the scriptures . but the great doubt is whether these be three personalities in the deity . and this doubt ( i take it ) ariseth from a misunderstanding and mistaking the true sense of the word persona . for this word persona , i think the philosophers are short in their definitions of it . boethius defines it to be naturae rationalis individua substantia . this other philosophers dislike as too scanty , because it is applicable to man only , and doth not include spiritual beings . and therefore they to inlarge it , and make it more comprehensive , call it substantia particularis , intelligens & incommunicabilis , &c. but for my part i cannot but like boethius his definition best , and think him so far in the right , in that he makes the word persona only applicable to man ; for so doubtless it is in its true and proper signification ; and it is applicable to spirits by a metalepsis only and transumption of the word . and herein the philosophers are too short in their definitions of persona , that while they done so much upon the word substance , they forget that accidents are a more necessary ingredient in its true definition . the word persona in relation to man , doth not only signifie individuality , and denote a particular or single man , but it doth imply those qualities also whereby one man differeth from another . by the word quality her i do not mean the single predicament so called , but all the other predicaments except that of substanee , it being those whereby the naturae rationalis substantia is individuated . 't is quantity that differs the person of taller stature from the lower . 't is quality that differs the learned from the vnlearned person . 't is relation that differs the father from the son. 't is the ubi or locality that differs john of noke from john at style . and so of the other predicaments . i would therefore propose the adding a few words to boethius his definition , and then i think it will be well enough . let it then be thus , viz. persona est naturae rationalis individua substantia taliter qualiter ab aliis differens . thus defined it relates to man only , and so to one man as he differeth from another by accidental individuation . for though 't be true that every person is a single substance , yet 't is as true that they are accidents that do determine the personality . and as the specifick differences do constitute the species , so predicamental accidents do constitute the individual . thus rationality doth constitute the species of man , and differs it from that of the brute . and thus wisdom , fortitude , &c. do differ this particular man from another , and make him to be this person and not another . nor can we have any certain notion of naked substances , or otherwise conceive of them than as they are clothed with and variegated by accidents . to this purpose also is the true sense and meaning of the greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which strictly translated is in latine subsistentia . now subsistentia doth not only import the esse of the substance , but the modus essendi : and what is that doth modifie substance but qualities and accidents ? the fundamental mistake therefore in this great point hath been in making the word substance so more than necessary in the definition of persona , and concluding from thence that there cannot be three persons but there must be three several substances . whereas in truth there may be in the same one particular man , diversly qualified and circumstanticated , diverse personalities . thus in the man melchisedeck . melchisedeck king of salem may be said to be one person , and melchisedeck the priest of the most high god another . so in david , in respect of his double qualification of a king and a prophet . thus much for what i conceive to be the true notion of persona . now to consider this word persona as it hath been applyed to the godhead . and here i must say again , as i said before , that this word persona is used only in a borrowed sence , and for want of another word that might more appositely and fully signifie what is intended by it . god cannot properly be said to be a person . there are no accidents in him . all his attributes are essential to him . that wisdom that is finite in man and accidental to him , is infinite in god and essential to him . and so of all the other attributes and perfections of the deity , that are in an imperfect and low degree competent to man. in this borrowed sence therefore it is that this word persona is applyed to the deity ; and in respect of those three eminent manifestations of the deity there are said to be three persons in it . not that the word person , and distinction of personalities in respect of men doth bear a full analogy to the difference of personalities in the deity , for in this as in all other contemplations of god , we must expect to fall short and not comprehend . but that the consideration of the different personalities amongst men may help us in some imperfect measure to conceive of that trinity that we adore in the vnity of the godhead . object . but here i expect an objection , that if in respect of these three manifestations of the deity there are said to be three persons , why are there not said to be more persons in the godhead than three , even as many as there are divine attributes , for so many are the manifestations of the deity to us . answ. there is not so much reason to imagine more personalities in the godhead than these three , as that there are these three and no more . for although it be true that every attribute doth import the deity , and can be predicated of nothing else but the deity , yet every single attribute doth not ( if i may so speak ) import the whole deity . his infinite wisdom doth not necessarily import or administer to us the notion of his infinite power . and so of the other attributes . but these three several manifestations of the godhead , that are called three persons , are such wherein the whole deity ( as i may say ) doth exert it self , and appear in all its attributes , and therefore i call them three more transcendent eminences or manifestations of the deity . thus i do conceive this trinity of persons in the godhead in some sort intelligible , without any necessity of thinking that these three persons must be three several substances , and consequently three gods. and i must confess i cannot but think this great dispute a meer wrangling business , and a contest more about words than things . for at the same time that our adversaries are so fearful of multiplying the deity by dividing the substance , we tell them that we believe in one god only , and that these three persons in the godhead are but one god. so that all the dispute is whether to say there are three persons in the deity doth necessarity imply that there are three substances , which we declare we do not mean nor intend by it . and for my part if they will as fairly declare that they believe these three several manifestations of the deity , viz. of god the father , god the son , and god the holy ghost , as held forth to us in the scriptures , i would willingly compound with them for the word person , and comply with them in the use of any other word they shall find out that may better or as well express what we mean by it . i come now to the other great objection of our adversaries touching the hypostatical vnion . how the divine and humane nature could be united in the same person , and this person be at the same time both god and man , and this without multiplying or dividing the deity , or without confining the omnipresent to the scanty tenement of an humane body . how this god-man should be born of a virgin by the overshadowing of the holy ghost , and humane nature propagated without the natural help of a man. these things seem so utterly impossible to these men of great reason , that therefore they must not , cannot be ; and the scriptures themselves must rather be mistaken or false , than that can be true which they think cannot . bvt when they argue thus from impossibility , i wonder their curiosity doth not question the creation it self , how it was possible for god to make all things of nothing . and for the hypostatical vnion , methinks before they question that so strictly , they ought to give a better account than yet can be given of the vnion of the soul of man with his body . and when they question the being born of a virgin , may they not as well question how the first woman was made of the rib of a man : one as well as the other being supposed to come to pass by the divine power . bvt because i am apt ( with you ) to suspect how far the scriptures are of authority amongst these reasoning men , i will adventure to propose to them one consideration touching the hypostatical vnion to shew that it is not so inconceivable a thing to humane reason as they would have it . let them but consider the several degrees of beings that god hath made in the world. the trees and plants to which he hath given vegetation . the brutes to which besides vegetation , he hath given animal life ; senses and appetites to discern and endeavour after what is necessary to the preservation of their beings . then to step further and consider man , to whom , besides all these , god hath given a rational mind and soul. and to step yet further , let them consider those higher beings the angels , what pure intellectual beings they are , and what degrees of perfection god hath given them , beyond what he hath given to man. i say when we consider these , what necessity is there of limiting and confining god almighty here ? may we not as reasonably think , that if in his infinite wisdom he so thought fit , he might as well make a being yet more perfect ? why is it not as conceiveable , that , ( to bring about his own eternal purposes ) he might actuate the humane nature by the divine power , and make a man in whom even the perfections of the deity should reside ? is the principle of essentiality and vitality any whit divided in or from the deity by giving life and being to those creatures ? is the eternal mind any whit multiplied or divided by giving a rational soul or mind to man ? nor is the infinite and eternal spirit of the world , multiplied or divided by creating and giving being to those glorious spirits the angels . what necessity then to think that the godhead must be either multiplied or divided , or in any wise varied by acting the divinity in the humane nature ? oh rebellious mankind , that hast offended thy creator ; but more ungrateful , that wilt not accept his mercy upon his own terms , and believe it exhibited in that manner that he himself has revealed it ! is it not that god , whose justice is infinite , that is offended ? is it not the same god , who is also infinite in goodness and mercy that is appeased ? what room for his mercy , without derogation to his justice , unless there be satisfaction ? and what satisfaction can be competent to the offended deity ? were men or angels fit to mediate , or could they make a satisfaction ? surely not . 't is his infinite mercy only that can appease his justice . there is mercy with him , that he may be feared , yea mercy rejoycing over judgment . now because it is inconceivable to man how the offended deity should make a satisfaction to it self , god almighty is pleased thus far to condescend to the capacity of humane nature as to tell us in what manner he hath done it . viz. that he hath sent his only begotten son into the world to be born of a woman to live a life of righteousness for our instruction and example , and to dye the death of sinners to satisfie for our defection . and further , that our original taint might not prevail over and misguide us into actual transgressions , he hath sent his holy spirit amongst us to lead us into the ways of truth and righteousness . this he was pleased to promise after the fall , by his prophets in the times of the old testament , and has now performed it to us in the times of the new. now , is it fit for us to object against this manifestation of his mercy to us , and glorious contrivance of our redemption , because we cannot comprehend the mystery of it ? that surely was ne're meant to be within our fathom . in the days of the old testament when god was pleased to command the adoration and duty of his people , he manifested himself to them under several appellations , whereby he put them in mind of his mercies to them and their duty to him . i am ( says he ) the god of abraham , the god of isaac , and the god of jacob. and so in the prologue to the decalogue — i am the lord thy god which brought the out of the land of egypt , out of the house of bondage , &c. intimating thereby to them the great mercies he had shewn in his miraculous preservation of the patriarchs , and people of isreal . so now in the days of the new testament god almighty has been pleased to manisest himself to us under other denominations and appellations , viz. those of god the father , god the son , and god the holy ghost ; intimating thereby to us in what manner be hath made good his promised mercy , and brought about the great work of our redemption , and that under those appellations and manifestations of himself he will now be worshipped in the times of the gospel . but for us to understand the great mysteries of our salvation in this manner offered unto us , ( viz. that the trinity in the vnity of the godhead , and that of the incarnation of our blessed saviour , &c. ) was certainly never intended by god almighty . and shall we doubt what god himself tells us because we cannot comprehend it ? when god said to the people of israel ; i am the lord thy god which brought thee out of the land of egypt , &c. had it been fit for them to have enquired how he brought them out of egypt , and to have ravelled into all the miracles he wrought for that purpose , and to have brought them to the touch of their understandings , and to have doubted the truth thereof , or the power of god that did them , because they could not reconcile them to their own reason ? yet thus ill certainly do they use god almighty , who will doubt the manner of our salvation , because they cannot understand the mystery . alas , vain men , that will not believe what god himself has reveal'd , because it will not bear the test of their weak reason ! do they think the wisdom and power of the almighty are to be bounded by the scanty limits of their vnderstanding ? that were for what is finite to comprehend infinity . god were not god if that were so . and these very men , who value themselves so much upon their reason , that they think they ought to understand the very arcana of heaven , would , i doubt not , be ready enough by the same strength of reasonng , to disown that deity that they could comprehend . thus i have presumed ( reverend sir ) to trouble you with this draught of my rude notions about this matter , which i hope you will excuse , they coming from a private countrey-gentleman , unread in polemick divinity , and particularly in this dispute , and in whom these thoughts were occasioned by the perusal of your late papers , i am , sir , may th , . yours most humbly , a. b. this letter being for substance , much to the same purpose with what i had undertaken to maintain ; and the expressions not much different , and in nothing contrary to it : i shall not detain the reader with any long discourse upon it ; because it speaks sufficiently for it self . it hath been suggested to me by another anonymous ; that , we knowing so little of the infinite divine nature , there may possibly be greater distinction between the three ( which we use to call ) hypostases , or persons , than ( what he calls ) the civil or relative acceptation of the word person ; ( and we may as well prejudice the truth , by affirming too little , as by affirming too much . ) and it is very true ; there may be , for ought we know , ( and perhaps there is ) more than so , ( nor have i any where denyed it : ) but , how much that more is , we cannot tell . sure we are , not so as to be three gods ( or more gods than one : ) and i choose to say ( with st. austin ) that these three are one spirit ( as we say , they are one god , ) not three spirits . the true ancient import of the word person ( when first applied to the trinity ) implies no more than as i explained it : which was a full answer to the anti-trinitarians popular argument ( from the modern gross acceptation of the word person , in english , ) as if three divine persons , must needs be three gods , because three persons amongst men doth sometimes ( not always , nor did it anciently so , ) imply three men. and , when we say , these three persons are but one god ; 't is manifest that we use this metaphor of persons ( when applyed to god , ) as borrowed from that sense of the word person , wherein the same man may sustain divers persons , or divers persons be the same man. i have seen , more than once , an address from edward earl of clarendon , chancellor of the vniversity of oxford , to edward earl of clarendon lord high chancellor of england , ( in a claim of privilege , to remove a cause from the court of chancery , to that of the vniversity . ) yet these two chancellors were not two men , nor two earls of clarendon ; but one and the same , sustaining two persons , ( one addressing to the other . ) and if this do sufficiently answer that popular cavil ; 't is as much as 't was brought for . if it do otherwise appear , that the distinction between these three divine persons be more than so ; ( but yet more god's than one ; ) that may well enough be , though this metaphor do not necessarily imply so much . 't is certain , that three persons , neither according to the true import of the words , nor according to the intent of those who so speak , doth not imply three gods : but three persons which are one god , or one god in three persons . i have also a third letter from w. i. much to the same purpose with what he had written in his two former . ( and therefore i do not think it needful to insert it here ; nor do i see that he desires it . ) it is , he tells me , to take his leave of me , as not meaning to give me any farther trouble in this kind . 't is full of divers expressions of respect , thanks , and approbation ; and he doth insist ( as in his two former he had done ) upon these two things ; not to be too positive ( in these matters ) beyond what the scripture tells us ; and , not to lay the like stress upon our argumentations from thence , as on what we find thore . in both which ( as before i did ) i do fully agree with him . because , in matters of pure revelation , we know no more than what is revealed : and , because 't is very sure , that ( even in natural things ) men do oft mistake in their argumentations , from principles which they think to be true and clear ; ( else it could not be that divers men , from the same principles , should infer contrary conclusions : ) and because we find it difficult , sometimes , to reconcile some things , which yet we cannot well deny to be true . and , if it be so , even in natural things : much more may it be so in things of an infinite nature . so that herein ( i think ) he and i do not disagree . yet would i not infer from hence ( nor doth he ) that we must therefore be scepticks in all things , because it is possible that in some things we may mis-take . for it is one thing to be infallible ; another thing not to err. a man who is not infallible , may yet argue truly ; and where he doth so , his argument is conclusive . and we may accordingly rest in it , and insist upon it , more or less , according to the degree of evidence . for things equally true , are not always equally evident ; nor equally necessary to be known . where the evidence is not clear ( and the matter not needful for us to know ) we are not to be too positive in our determinations , ( but rather be content to be ignorant farther than god is pleased to reveal : ) but where it is , ( and the things be of moment ) we must hold fast that which is true , and not suffer our selves to be easily wheedled out of it . which , i suppose , is his opinion as well as mine . for he seems to interpose this caution ( particularly ) as to that hypothesis ; to which ( as before he had done ) he doth suggest some new difficulties : but , wherein i am not concerned . that god is trin-unus , he doth profess . and the word person he doth not dislike . but thinks it safe not to be too positive in determining precisely how great that distinction of persons is . in all which , i do concur with him . now as to the word person ( though i am not fond of words , where the sense is agreed ; ) i am not willing to quit it , because i do not know a better to put in the room of it : and because , if we quit the word , which the church hath with good reason made use of , for so many hundred years ( without any just exception made to it : ) those anti-trinitarians , who would have us quit the word , will pretend , that , in so doing , we quit the doctrine too . that we do not , by person ( when applyed to the sacred trinity ) understand such a person , as when applyed to men ; and , that by three divine persons , we do not mean three gods : hath been so often said , and so fully , by those who believe the trinity ; that those who cavil at it , cannot but know it : but by person in the deity , we mean only what bears some analogy , with what amongst men is said of several persons ( even without being so many several men ; which the true sense of the word person doth not import , as hath been often shewed : ) as do the words , beget , begotten , sending , proceeding or going-forth , and many more ; which all are metaphorical expressions , taken from what amongst men is wont to be said of persons , ( for , of whom , but persons , are such expressions used ? ) and they who use to cavil at it , may as well do it when we talk of the foot of a stool , the arm of a chair , or the head of a staff ; and perswade us , that when we so speak , we do believe a stool , a chair , a staff , to have life and sense , because a foot , an arm , a head ( properly taken ) have so and they may as well cavil at the word sacrament ( which is a name that we have given to that of baptism and the lord's supper ; ) attributes , ( which is a term we give to some of the divine perfections : ) creed , ( by which we mean an abstract of some principal things that we believe : ) and a great many such other words that we find occasion to make use of : whereof yet there is no danger , when it is defined and determined what by such word , in such discourse , we mean ; even though , in some other discourses , such word may signifie otherwise . 't is well known , that a cone in euclide doth not signifie just the same as in apollonius ; nor a triangle in euclide , just the same as in theodosius , and others , who write of sphericks : but when we meet with these words in euclide , we must there understand them as they are defin'd by euclide ; and when in others , so as they are defin'd by those others . and so when we speak of persons in the deity , we must be so understood as we there define : that is , for somewhat analogous , but not just the same , with what is meant by it , when applyed to men ; and , particularly , not so distinct as to be three gods. and , for the same reasons , i am not willing to part with the athanasian creed ; lest those who would have us so do , should then say , we have parted with the doctrine also . they , upon pretence , that some expressions in it , though true , are not absolutely fundamental ; would fain wheedle us out of all . they might as well say , that , because some words might be spared in what we call the apostolick creed , or nicene creed ; or some other words put in ; therefore those creeds should be laid aside also . and when they quarrel with the preface of it , ( whoever would be saved , ought to hold the catholick faith ; and the catholick faith is this ; ) as if it were intended thereby , that every syllable in it were so fundamental , as without knowing whereof , a man could not be saved : ( which no man can reasonably think to be so meant by the penners of it ; since that thousands were saved ( even in their opinion ) before that was penned ; and others since , that never heard of it ; ) is mere cavilling . for no more can reasonably be thought intended by it , but that this is found doctrine , which , for the substance of it , ought to be believed by those who would be saved : like as if i should say , who ever would be saved , ought to believe the word of god ; and this is the word of god , ( pointing to our bible ; ) no man ( who is not mad ) would think my meaning to be , that no man could be saved who did not know that one of iob's daughters was named iemimah ; or that zeruiah was mother ( not father ) to those who are called the sons of zeruiah . as to that question ( which i meet with in some of the letters ) why just three persons , and no more : the answer is short and easie ; because the scripture tells us of three , but of no more . ( and , had not the scripture told it us , we had not known of these three . ) we are baptized into the name of ( and therefore into the faith of ) the father , son and holy ghost ; ( as if this were the first christian creed . ) we are told , there are three that bear record in heaven ; and , these three are one : ( not , that there are more such than three : ) and to these three ( somewhats ) we give the name of persons ; meaning , by the word persons , these three . and if by persons in the deity we mean but these three ; then there are but three in the deity whom we call persons ; or , whom we mean by that name . there is another ingenious person ( a stranger to me ) who hath written to me divers letters on this occasion , ( full of gratulation , approbation and applause : ) but in one of them he moves a question concerning a passage in one of mine ; where i say , we have no notions in our mind , other than what we derive , mediately or immediately , from sensible impressions of finite corporeal beings : and tells me , that it seems to him , that the notion of one infinite essence should be excepted . and that he hath formerly vindicated des cartes against mr. hobs , who had affirmed , that there is no conception in a man's mind , which hath not at first totally , or by parts , been begotten upon the organs of sence : and again , that a man can have no thought representing any thing not subject to sense . but , in a following letter , he declares himself fully satisfied , ( and that my sentiments do not really differ from his , ) when i had sent him this answer , viz. as to what you say of my affirming , that we have no notions in our mind , other than what we derive , mediately or immediately , from sensible impressions of finite corporeal beings : when you consider it again , i believe you will be of my mind . if you can suppose a man in such circumstances , as never to have seen , or heard , or felt any thing : i doubt whether he would have any thoughts of god , more than an embryo yet unborn , ( who hath the same soul , that he will after have ; but hath , i doubt , as yet , no notions of a god. ) sure i am that we attain it by other steps . the heavens declare the glory of god : but not without being seen , or at least heard of , or some way made known to us by sensible impressions . the invisible things of him ( even his eternal power and godhead ) are clearly seen ; but it is by the creation of the world ; being understood by the things that are made . but if we neither see , nor hear of , nor have any notion of the things that are made ; how shall we thence derive the notion of a god ? and there must be many notions , antecedent to that of one infinite essence , ( which must be derived from sensible impressions of corporeal beings . ) we must have the notion or conception of ens , esse , finis , finitum , non-finitum , vnum , non-nullum , non-multa ; before we can have the notion of one infinite essence . and those antecedent notions , i think , we do derive ( mediately or immediately ) from what we see , hear , feel , or some way apprehend by the help of our sences . as to des cartes ; there must be a great many notions , or simple apprehensions , which he must presume , before he can come to the complex notion of deus est. and a great many illative notions ( from natural logick ) before he can argue , cogito , ergo sum . he must at least have a notion , or simple apprehension , of what is meant by cogito , and of what is meant by sum , and of what by ego : and then a complex notion , that what is not , cannot think : and then this illative notion ( from natural logick . ) but , i think , therefore i am . and , i doubt , he cannot come at all this , without some use of his senses . and , even after all , it seems to me , that to be is a notion more simple ( and therefore antecedent ) than to think ; and therefore soone to be apprehended by it self , than by consequence from that . but it is not now my business to dispute against des cartes . onely to shew , that sensitive notions are subservient to our notions of a god ; and , from these our understandings do , by steps , ascend to these . upon this answer , he owns my sentiments to be the same with his , &c. that ( in a natural way ) the humane intellect hath no operation , but what is occasioned , or suggested by sensible objects . but he thinks , i perceive , ( and so do i , ) that from these notions occasioned or suggested by sensible objects , our intellect , or reason improved , may ascend , by steps , to a discovery of something concerning god , which , in corporeal objects it cannot find ; in which we both agree . now the best means we have for the forming of such notions concerning god , is chiefly by one of these two ways ; that of eminency , and that of negation . whatever of good , or excellency , we find in the creature , we conclude that in god ( who is the fountain of all excellency ) there is somewhat analogous thereunto , but much more eminent . and whatever of imperfection we find in the creature , we conclude , that in god ( who is infinitely perfect ) there is nothing of this imperfection . and , from both , we conceive a notion of somewhat in god , which is more great than is possible for us fully to comprehend : but , what that somewhat is , we cannot fully understand , now , these being the steps , by which we form these notions ; we know no better way to express these conceptions , than by metaphors taken from such objects , from whence these notions take their rise , or some such figurative expressions . ( and it was with this prospect that i mention'd that observation . ) and , in the same way , god is pleased ( in scripture ) to express himself to us ; by somewhat analogous ( not just the same ) with what we meet with in the creature ; as when it speaks of god's eyes , ears , hands , feet , &c. of his seeing , hearing , striking , going , &c. so when the father is said to beget ; the son to be begotten ; and both these to send out , and the holy ghost to proceed , or go forth from them . all which expressions are such , as we commonly apply to what we call persons . and in what sense those are to be understood concerning god ; in such sense they are fitly called three persons . and those who in such sense cavil at the word person ; would no doubt ( if there were not somewhat else in the wind ) as well cavil at those other words . but because , so to do , were directly to affront the scripture ( whose words they are ) they do not think fit so to speak out , whatever they think . when christ saith , of himself and the father , john . . i came forth from the father , and am come into the world ; again , i leave the world , and go to the father : of himself and the holy ghost , ver . , . if i go not away , the comforter will not come unto you ; but if i depart , i will send him unto you ; and when he is come , he will reprove the world , &c. of himself and the other two , iohn . . and . . the comforter which is the holy ghost , whom the father will send in my name , he shall teach you all things , and bring all things to your remembrance whatsoever i have said unto you . and again , when the comforter is come , whom i will send you from the father , even the spirit of truth which proceedeth from the father , he shall testifie of me : what could be said , as of three persons , more distinctly ? and if the scripture speak of them as three persons ; why should we scruple to call them so ? but these three persons are but one god. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . these three are one ; vnum ( not unus ) one thing , iohn . . and john . . i and the father are one ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( unum sumus ) we are one and the same thing ; and therefore one god. and , that there is no other god but one , is known to be so often said that i need not repeat it . but 't is not so much the word person , is the deity of christ , which these men are offended at ; and all their cavils at the word person , ( and the athanasian creed , ) are but to undermine our saviours deity . of this i have said enough elsewhere , and need not here repeat it . the lord our god is one lord , deut. . . that is , the lord god of israel is one lord ; or iehovah the god of israel is one iehovah . there are not more iehovah's than one : and this one iehovah is the lord god of israel . and isa. . , . i the lord ( jehovah ) am the god of israel : i am the lord ( jehovah ) and there is none else . there is no god beside me : ( no god beside the lord god of israel . ) so in kings . . and many other places to the same purpose . now our christ , is this lord god of israel , luke . , . many of the children of israel shall he ( iohn the baptist ) turn to the lord their god , ( to the lord god of israel ; ) and he ( john baptist ) shall go before him , ( this lord god of israel ) in the spirit and power of elias . now no man doubts but that it is our christ , whose fore-runner john baptist was ; and before whom he was to go in the spirit and power of elias . therefore our christ is this lord god of israel : this one iehovah . 't is true that the greek septuagint's translation of the old testament doth not retain that word , but doth every where wave the word iehovah , and puts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instead of it . and accordingly , the new testament ( which mostly follows the language of that , the only greek translation then in use ) doth so too . but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( which they substitute for iehovah ) is so oft applied to christ ( even in those places cited out of the old testament wherein iehovah is used ) that none can be ignorant of it . and though we have not there the word iehovah , yet we have as full a periphrasis of it as can be desired . 't is well known ( and owned by all ) that the two proper names of god , iah and iehovah , are derivatives from the verb hajah or havah which signifieth to be , ( which whether we take for one and the same root , or two roots of one and the same signification , is not material ; the letter iod and vau in hebrew being so oft used promiscuously , or one changed for the other : ) and therefore the noun verbal must needs import a being . and it hath been further observed long since by hebricians , that the name iehovah hath moreover the peculiar characteristicks of the three times , ( past , present , and future , ) ie the characteristick of the future tense ; ho , of the present tense or participle ; and va of the preter tense , ( which i did forbear to mention formerly , lest they should throw it off as a criticism ; till i had a fresh voucher for it , so good as dr. pocock in his late commentary on ioel. chap. . . ) and we have all this in that character of god ( indefinitely ) rev. . . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , from that being , who is and hath been , and shall be for the time to come . and it is particularly applied to christ , at ver . . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . i am alpha and omega , saith the lord god ( jehovah elohim ) which is , which was , and which is to come , the almighty . which is a full account of the name iehovah ( here translated , as elsewhere , by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) with a discant upon it , importing his being , with the three diversities of times , ( past , present , and future , ) and his omnipotence superadded . that being which now is , which ever was , and which ever shall be , the lord god , almighty . ( so rev. . . and rev. . . ) and in rev. . . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( so beza , and so dr. pocock reads it , and so ours translate it . ) and much to the same purpose is that rev. . , , . rev. . . ( and elsewhere ) i am alpha and omega , the beginning and the end , the first and the last ; he that liveth and was dead , and behold i live for evermore . so rev. . , . rev. . , , who liveth for ever and ever . which fully answers that title , the living god , whereby the true god doth so oft distinguish himself from other gods ; as ier. . . and elsewhere frequently . but i have said so much formerly to this point , that i shall now add no more . i had almost forgotten one piece , ( wherein i find my self mentioned ) intituled , a suit for forbearance , &c. it aims chiefly at two things . one is against arging ( on others ) too strict an vnion , wherein christianity , as delivered by our lord and his apostles , hath left a latitude and simplicity : but herein i think , he hath no cause to blame me ( nor do i see that he doth ) he doth not find me to trouble him with cramping scholastick terms . i know not how i could speak more tenderly than to say these three are three somewhats , ( not three nothings ; ) and if he please to sport himself with that , he may . and , that 't is convenient , to these somewhats , to give a name ; and , that i know no better name than persons ; and , therefore , that we may still say ( as we were wont to do ) three persons and one god ; even though by person , i do not require men to fancy just such a person , as what we so call amongst men. like as by father , son , beget , &c. i do not understand ( in god ) just such as what these words signifie amongst men. and i do not know how he could wish me to speak more tenderly , or more agreeing to the christian simplicity , wherein it is delivered by our lord and his apostles . the other is ; he thinks it not adviseable in things sufficiently setled by just authority ( as is that of the trinity ) to revive a controversie long since determined , and draw the disputatious saw : because , to litigate about a fundamental , is to turn it into a controversie . and herein , i am so much of his mind , that i would not have advised to start the controversie , about what we have been in quiet possession of , for so long a time . and i am ready to own , that it is an art of our adversaries the papists , to perswade the world that we have no better ground for the doctrine of the trinity , than they have for transubstantiation ; ( for they care not what they overthrow , if thereby they may advance their own ends : ) and , that atheistical and irreligious men will be glad of any opportunity to ridicule religion . but if others will make it their business to run down religion ; and profess to the world , there is nothing but authority to define it ( which they despise ; ) and no reason or scripture for it , more than for transubstantiation : i think we are not obliged to stand ( all of us ) so silent , as if we had nothing to say for it , or yielded up the cause . there is a middle way ( for the promoting what he calls a purer and more scriptural divinity . ) between a rigorous imposing all the scholastick cramping terms ; and , a giving up the cause . a modest defence of what the scripture teacheth us , ( without excursions into a rigorous pressing of extravagant niceties of our own inventions ) may be of good subserviency , to shew , that the doctrines of our religion are not inconsistent with right reason . what he tells us of some body who had been heretofore master of the temple , that did express himself to this purpose , the substance of god , with this property , to be of none , doth make the person of the father ; the very self same substance in number , with this property , to be of the father , maketh the person of the son. the same substance having added to it the property of proceeding from the other two , maketh the person of the holy ghost . so that , in every person , there is implyed , both the substance of god , which is one , and also that property which causeth the same person really and truely to differ from the other two. this , i say , would pass with me well enough . and if he please so to express himself , i should not quarel with it . again ; if i should express it thus , that god considered as the original or fountain of being ( who himself is and gives being to all things else ) may be called god the father , ( or the god and father of all : ) and the same god , as the fountain of wisdom or knowledge ; be called god the son , ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the word , wisdom or reason ; the true light , that lighteth every man that cometh into the world , ) gods wisdom resulting from his essence or being : and the same god , as the fountain of power , might or action ; be called god the holy ghost ; ( gods power of acting , proceeding from his essence and wisdom also : ) and this eternal , all-wise , and almighty god , is one god : perhaps he would not much mislike this . or , if he should ; i would not quarel with him on that account ; or be positive that it must just be so . we know that christ is called the wisdom of god ; the son of god ; the son of the highest : and the holy ghost is called the power of the highest . and we know that , amongst our selves , knowledge results from the essence of our soul ; and action proceeds from both. 't is said also , that in him we live , and move , and have our being . ( from god we have our being , our rational life , and our motion : in whose image and likeness we are created . ) yet would i not be positive ( much less would i require every one to be of that opinion ) that the personalities in god must needs be these . i am content to rest here , that these three , father , son , and holy ghost ( whatever name you call them by ) differ in somewhat ( more than what we commonly call the divine attributes ) yet not so as to be three gods ( or more gods than one ; ) but are one and the same god. and so far we be safe . nor is there any danger ( that i can see ) in giving the name of persons to these three : nor know i a fitter name to give them . and this , i think , is as much as need be said , as to all those letters , which , on this occasion , have come to my hand , since the publishing of those already printed . there being nothing in all these which is contrary to what i therein undertook to defend . ( nor should i have said thus much , if the author of the letter here inserted had not desired to have it published . ) and now i hope to trouble the press no more upon this occasion . novemb. . . yours , john wallis . finis . a seventh letter, concerning the sacred trinity occasioned by a second letter from w.j. / by john wallis ... wallis, john, - . approx. kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from -bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : - (eebo-tcp phase ). a wing w estc r ocm this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons . universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase , no. a ) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set ) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, - ; : ) a seventh letter, concerning the sacred trinity occasioned by a second letter from w.j. / by john wallis ... wallis, john, - . [ ], p. printed for tho. parkhurst ..., london : . reproduction of original in huntington library. created by converting tcp files to tei p using tcp tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between and available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the , texts created during phase of the project have been released into the public domain as of january . anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. % (or pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf- unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p , characters represented either as utf- unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng w. j. trinity -- early works to . - tcp assigned for keying and markup - aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images - mona logarbo sampled and proofread - mona logarbo text and markup reviewed and edited - pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a seventh letter , concerning the sacred trinity ; occasioned by a second letter from w. i. by iohn wallis , d. d. professor of geometry , in oxford . london : printed for tho. parkhurst , at the bible and three crowns , in cheapside , . a seventh letter concerning the sacred trinity . in a postscript to my sixth letter ( which should have been printed with it ; but came , it seems , too late , after all the sheets were printed off , ) i gave notice , that i had received from london the night before ( march . ) another letter from w. i. of a like import with his former ; but somewhat fuller . that , what in it did directly concern me , was but expressions of thanks , respect , and approbation . for which i knew not how otherwise ( than by such a way ) to return him my acknowledgment : because he did neither signifie who he is that writes ; nor do i know any in london , to who 's name the letters w. i. do belong . that , there were reflections in it , on some expressions of a learned author : which expressions i do not see that i am at all engaged to defend : and did therefore wave them . that , to say , the three divine persons , are three intelligent beings ( three substantial beings , three spirits , ) really distinct , ( though mutually conscious , ) is more , he thinks , than that learned author needed to have said ; ( and i think so too : ) and that it is more safe , to be less positive and particular , as to what the scripture leaves in the dark . and his answer ( i think ) would not have been less valid , ( against those he undertakes to answer , ) though such expressions were omitted . that , i did forbear to publish that letter without his order ; because i was loth to engage the learned writer thereof in a publick dispute against that learned author , unless he please . since which time ; considering , that the postscript came too late to be printed with that letter of mine ; and , that the letter of this reverend divine ( for such i take him to be by the contents of it , ) seems to be penned with that care and caution , as if he were willing to have it publick ; and without any intimation of dislike for my having published his former letter in like circumstances : i have thought not amiss ( nor unagreeable to his mind ) to publish this also . which is as followeth : ( supplying the date from the post-mark at london , denoting what day it was given-in to the post-office there . ) for the reverend dr. wallis , professor of geometry , at oxford . london , march . - . sir , your repeated letters , give me a just occasion of repeating my hearty thanks to you . and i hope you will give me leave to join both my good wishes and endeavours to promote that moderation which you seem to aim at , in stating the mysterious truths concerning the trinity . methinks we might be easily perswaded to this ; by the difficulties which all men find in conceiving those mysteries : especially the consequences which some make from them ; and impose upon us as certain and sacred truths . sir , because i would have you lose as little of your time as may be in reading my letters ; i will enter immediately upon the subject proposed ; and consider , not some lesser niceties , but the two main points in the doctrine of the trinity ; and the difficulties which our vnderstandings represent to us in the conception of them . the two main points are these : the unity of the godhead , notwithstanding the distinction of three persons : and the equality of those three persons , notwithstanding their derivation one from another . concerning the divine persons ; the hypothesis which we referred to formerly ( and shall still follow ) asserts these three things . first , that they are three beings ( or three intelligent beings ) really distinct. secondly , that they are three substantial beings , really distinct. thirdly , that they are three infinite minds , or three holy spirits , really distinct. and to these , i think , we may of course add a fourth character , that they are three compleat beings , really distinct. they are not inadequate or partial beings . for a spirit infinite in perfection , as each of these is represented , can want nothing to compleat its being or perfection . let us now , if you please , run over these characters ; and observe the most obvious difficulties , that occurr to our minds in the conception of them . for the first , three beings really distinct . according to the plain tract of humane reason , every real being hath its essence ; ( that is the basis it stands upon , as distinguished from non-entity , or a fictitious being ) . and every distinct being hath its distinct essence : i mean , numerically distinct . and therefore , according to this principle , there ought to be three distinct essences in the godhead , seeing there are three beings , there , really distinct . furthermore ; if you give one single essence to three beings really distinct , you must either divide it , or multiply it . either each of these beings must have a piece of this essence ; and then you divide it : or each must have the whole ; and then , being but one whole , you cannot give it to three without multiplying of it . this is still made more difficult to conceive , when the author allows these three to be as distinct as peter , james , and john. for if they be as distinct as peter , james and john ; they are one but as peter , james and john. for every degree of distinction takes away a degree of vnity : as every degree of heat , takes away a degree of cold. we proceed to the second character . the three divine persons , are three substantial beings , really distinct . that is , in plain english , are three substances really distinct . as a spiritual being is a spirit ; a corporeal being , a body : so a substantial being is a substance ; ( putting onely two words for one. ) and the author must understand it so ; because he makes them three spirits afterwards : and therefore they must be three substances . besides , what are they , 'pray , if not substances ? they cannot be modes , or bare relations . i know some platonists call them super-substances . or , if you will think them lower , and call them semi-substances , ( as some philosophers do their substantial forms : ) all this is but playing with words . for there is nothing represented to our faculties , but as substances , modes , or relations ; excepting what is meerly notional . and the learned author must not debar us the use of the word substance , under pretence that it sounds corporeally . for two creeds make use of it : and the scripture it self , upon a fair interpretation , heb. . . to proceed therefore . here are three substances really distinct , whereof each is a god ( pag. . l. . p. . l. . ) and yet there is but one god. this is very hard to conceive , as contrary to all our idea's of number and numeration . 't is true , we may conceive these three substances , in strict vnion one with another , notwithstanding their real distinction . but union is one thing , and unity is another . for vnity excludes all plurality and multiplicity ; which vnion doth not , but rather supposes it . vnity also , in simple natures , excludes all compositions : which vnion , on the contrary , always implies , in one kind or other . accordingly ; substances , upon vnion , are not confounded or identified , or brought to vnity of substance : but , continuing numerically distinct substances , acquire some community or communication of operations : namely , of such actions and passions as they are respectively capable of . let us consider instances of these things , in the chief unions that are known to us . our soul and body are two substances really distinct , and in close vnion with one another : but , notwithstanding this , they continue distinct substances under that vnion . in like manner , the humane soul of christ is in vnion with the logos , or second person of the trinity , which we call an hypostatical union : but neither doth this vnion make any vnity of substance ; for the two substances of the divine and humane natures , continue distinct under that vnion . which must not be allowed in the vnity of the godhead , where there can be no plurality or multiplicity of substances . the learned author does acknowledge ( p. , . ) that these three substances , if they were separate , would be three gods : but being inseparate and inseparable , they make but one. this is again uneasy to conceive , that substances really distinct , should not be separable . for the notion of a substance , is , of that which may subsist by it self : and what mark have we of separability but real distinction ? things that are only modally or notionally distinct , we allow cannot subsist separate : but if they be really distinct , as substances , why may they not be separated really ? when we have proved , the real distinction of the soul and the body , as two substances ; we think we have sufficient ground to assert the separability of the soul from the body . and from the same reason , we assert the parts of matter to be separable , as being really distinct substances , let their vnion be otherwise what it will. for , if our faculties be true , what things we clearly conceive really distinct ( ut res & res ) may ( possibly ) be separated . clear and distinct conception being to us the rule of partibility . but however ! suppose , if you please , this vnion indissoluble ; this does not change it into vnity . if the soul of man was made to be in perpetual conjunction with matter , as some platonists affirm : that doth not make matter and the soul , one and the same substance ; nor matter cease to be matter , or the soul a spirit . so , if you suppose these three divine substances to be under an indissoluble vnion ; that doth not make them cease to be three substances , but , it makes them , three substances in an indissoluble vnion . what the learned authour says concerning matter and extension , may be returned upon him in reference to the godhead . ( p. . l. , . ) he supposes extension to consist of parts , if they be only assignable parts , whether they can be divided or not : so , say we , ( according to this opinion ) the godhead may consist of several substances , if they be only assignable substances , whether they can be divided or not : and you may as distinctly assign , by your vnderstanding , three substances in the godhead , that of the father , that of the son , and that of the holy ghost ; as you may assign three parts in a physical atome , by a. b. c. lastly , there is no substance lost or destroyed in this or any other vnion , dissoluble , or indissoluble : therefore , as to substances , they are the same , whether in conjunction or separation . we come unto the third character . ( pag. . . . see also p. . ) the three divine persons are three infinite minds , or three holy spirits : and yet but one god. this rises still higher than the former as to its vnconceivableness . it seems to say and unsay the same thing , with the same breath . an infinite spirit is compleatly a god , as to essence and attributes : therefore three such are three gods. omnis mens infinitè perfecta est deus ; tres sunt mentes infinitè perfectae ; ergo tres sunt dii . where is the fourth of this syllogism ? this character seems to assert three infinites : whereas the athanasian creed , which stands at the highest pitch of any , is yet very tender and cautious in giving the number three to any thing but the persons . it will not allow three eternals , nor three incomprehensibles , nor three almighties : but , three infinites include all these . an infinite spirit ( as i said before ) is a god , ( i mean , infinite in perfection , as our authour doth , ) and three spirits , whereof each is infinite in perfection , are three gods : as , three creatures , whereof each is a rational animal , are three men. both these propositions go upon the same ground , namely , that the definition , and the thing defined , are reciprocal and of the same extent . now as we have no better definition of a man , than that he is a rational animal ; so neither have we a better definition of a god , than that he is a spirit infinitely perfect . and as so many animals rational , so many men ; so likewise , so many spirits infinitely perfect , so many gods. i speak this according to the use of our faculties . for , what the true and precise state of things is , in themselves , when the question is concerning infinite natures , i do not presume to determine . but thus much , i think , we may safely determine , that in such cases where our faculties are at a loss , the safest way is to keep close to revelation and the words of scripture . and that 's the conclusion i drive at . lastly , to put a plain question , which will come into every one's mind : here are three spirits infinitely perfect ; either they are gods , or they are creatures ? they must be one of the two. when we speak of a spirit infinitely perfect , we describe an absolute , compleat , entire being . which must be of some denomination , either a god , or a creature ; for we know nothing of a middle nature betwixt these . possibly they will answer this by a distinction ; namely , that they are three gods considered separately ; but considered collectively and in vnion , they are but one god : and seeing they cannot be really separate , it would be improper to call them three gods. but , pray , why not as properly three gods , as three infinite spirits ? seeing these terms , a spirit infinitely perfect , and a god , are terms equivalent or identical . what partiality is it then to allow the one , and not the other ? and if these infinite spirits be inseparable , why do you grant the number three to that name , and not to the name of gods ? seeing they are both the same thing , and equally inseparable . we observed before , that this learned authour is liberal in his threes ; three intelligent beings , three infinite minds , three holy spirits , three divine glories , three majesties ; but not three kings . 't is the name , it seems , is scrupled , rather than the thing . sir , i will add no more upon these heads . but will consider now the grand principle which is designed to take off all these difficulties ; and that is , mutual consciousness ; whereby all these threes are made one ; and reduced to a perfect numerical unity . i need not spend time in telling you what the author means by mutual consciousness , nor how he applies it to the present case : you know them both sufficiently . but methinks this vnitive principle is defectively expressed , by the word consciousness . for bare consciousness , without consent , is no more than bare omnisciency . as god is conscious of all our thoughts , good or bad ; and of all the devils thoughts ; without vnion , as without consent . if a good and bad angel were made mutually conscious of one anothers mind , they would not thereupon become one , being still of different wills and inclinations . it may be the author will say , consciousness involves consent , as he says , knowledge involves power , or is the same with it . but , besides , that i cannot well reconcile the author to himself in this point , ( see p. . l. , . compared with p. . ) i have given you instances in a former letter to the contrary . to which you may add , if you please , this further consideration : if knowledge be the same thing with power , then actual conception is the same thing with actual execution . and if so , then you and i may sit quietly in our studies , and , with our thought and pen , build palaces , and take towns and cities . for we know the methods of both , and can distinctly conceive them and delineate them . and as these are not the same thing in us , so neither can we conceive them , in all respects , the same in god. for , from all eternity , god had a clear idea of the frame of the world , and of the manner of producing it : therefore , if gods conception or knowledge had been the same with his power , the world had been produced from eternity . but to proceed , let us give this principle its full strength , consciousness and consent : they would not together make a perfect vnity of operations in the deity , much less of substance . we noted before , that vnity and vnion are different things . and this is more apparent now , when three spirits are to be united into one. for how that can be done without some sort of composition , is an unconceivable mystery . you may indeed conceive these three spirits , singly and separately , as simple beings : but if you conceive these three simple beings united into one ( without annihilation of any one ) that one must be a compound being , according to our conceptions . then , as to vnity of operations : besides the energies peculiar to the father and the son , this author allows ( p. . ) that every one of these three minds , notwithstanding their vnion , hath some distinct consciousness , not common to the other two : therefore the godhead , which consists of these three minds , cannot be one as a single mind is one ; where there is an intire community and sameness of consciousness , in all operations . in my opinion , if this hypothesis were prest to speak out , the plain language of it would be this ; there are three divine substances , three holy spirits , infinitely perfect , and , in truth and reality , three gods : but , for some reasons , not fit to be called so . these three beings , by similitude of nature , mutual consciousness , consent , cooperation , are under the greatest vnion possible ; and , in that state of vnion , do constitute the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the intire all , comprehensive godhead . this , i confess , books something like a conceivable thing : but the christian trinity does not use to be represented thus . for this amounts to no more than a kind of hypostatical vnion of three divine spirits . sir , i will trouble you no further upon the first general head , the distinction of the persons . i proceed now to consider the equality of the persons . which i will dispatch in a few words . the first argument against their equality may be this ( pag. . l. . &c. ) the father is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , self-existen● , self-originated : whereas the other two are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , existent and originated from another . now this cannot but make , according to our faculties , not only some difference , but also some inequality . for 't is a fundamental perfection to be self-originated : and what is not so , is not equal to that which is so . you will say possibly , though the son and holy-ghost are produced of the father , yet 't is not in such a way as creatures are produced . that is , by a voluntary external act ; but this , by an internal , necessary , and emanative act. we will allow your distinction ; and admit that the son and holy-ghost have a different origin from that of common creatures . but this does not remove the difficulty . it shews indeed a great difference and inequality betwixt any of the divine persons , and bare creatures : but it does not shew any equality amongst the divine persons themselves . 't is true , the dependance which a creature hath upon the creator for its being , is of another kind and degree from that of the son or holy-ghost . but however , they are derivative beings , in some way or other , and dependent upon the father . and we cannot but conceive some inequality betwixt an original and a derivative , a dependent and independent being . secondly , that act whereby the son is generated by the father , is some energy and perfection : nay , 't is an energy of the highest perfection ; because the result of it is the most perfect being that can any way be produced ; or the noblest and greatest product in things . creation , or that energy that produceth a creature , hath not a term or effect so noble or so great , as that energy whereby the son is generated : and consequently it is not so great a perfection to create a world , as to generate the divine logos . this being so ; there is , you see , not only self-origination in the father , which is not in the son : but also an active perfection of the highest degree possible , in the one , which is not in the other . and therefore we cannot in either respect , conceive these two beings equal . besides , if you make them all three equal , and all infinite ; they will be co-ordinate , ( i mean internally , & as to perfection of nature : for , external subordination , as to oeconomy , signifies nothing in this case . ) and are no more one , than three individuals of the same species are one ; that is , than peter , james and john are or may be one. and this , i think , was the doctrine of the tritheites , or very near it . lastly , you may please to reflect upon the various sentiments and expressions of the ancients , concerning the dignity and preheminence of the fathers , ( which you know are noted by petavius ( de trin. lib. . c. . & l. . c. . § . . ) and consider their consistency or inconsistency with perfect equality . sir , as i do not write this with any disrespect to that treatise , ( which contains many excellent things : ) so neither to represent absolute truth or vntruth : but the difficulty of our conceiving things of an infinite nature . from which consideration i would willingly infer two conclusions . first , that we ought to keep close to scripture in these mysterious doctrines . secondly , that we should not impose consequences humanely made , with the same rigour as divinely revealed truths . the anti-trinitarian system is not at all suited to my genius . yet i would not stretch our trinitarian doctrine so far , as to set it at a distance from scripture as well as from reason . secret things belong unto the lord : but those things that are revealed , belong to us and our children . deut. . . and the angels , it may be , think us as foolish and ridiculous , for pursuing these notions , as we think our selves wise and learned in such pursuits . i am , sir , with all sincerity , your most humble servant , w. i. to this letter , i reply as followeth . to the reverend w. j. sir , i am obliged to you for the kind and respectful character , which you are pleased to afford me in both your letters . i am not at all displeased ( but thank you for it ) with a like moderation in yours ( to what you commend in my letters ) as to the mysterious truths concerning the sacred trinity : and do fully close with what you say in the conclusion , that the angels may think us as foolish and ridiculous , for pursuing these notions further than they are revealed , as we think our selves wise and learned in such pursuits : like as you or i should laugh at a blind man ( who had never seen ) that should undertake to conceive in his mind , and express to us in word , ) a distinct and perfect notion or idea of sight , light , and colours . he may hear the noise or sound of those three words ( supposing him , though blind , not to be deaf also , ) and may believe that they signifie somewhat . but , what that somewhat is , he cannot tell ; having never had an idea thereof in his mind , nor a perception thereof by his senses . and if you or i ( from that notion which our selves have of it ) would explain it to him : we could do it no otherwise than by the use of such words ( in a sense analogical ) as do properly belong to somewhat of which he hath ( from experience ) some idea . sight , we might say , is a certain kind of sense or feeling in our eyes ( which we have not in our hand , feet , or other parts of our body , ) whereby we can ( as it were ) feel with our eyes , the shape , figure , bigness and proportion of a body at a distance ; as we might , with our hands if within our reach . whereby he might apprehend , that there is some kind of resemblance between seeing and feeling ; but , what indeed it is to see , he cannot comprehend . light , we might tell him , is a necessary requisite to such a feeling with our eyes , as that for want of it ( which want we call darkness ) we can no more so feel , or discover , by our eyes , such shape , figure , or bigness ; than we could , with our hands , that ( suppose ) of a piece of money locked up in a box which we could not open ; but , by the admission of such requisite , we are inabled so to feel it with our eyes , as we might with our hands , if the box were opened whereby we might come to handle it . colour , we might tell him , is somewhat of such a nature , as that , on a plain board ( or the like ) on which by our hand we can feel nothing but smooth and uniform ; by it may be represented ( to be so felt with our eyes ) as great variety of shapes and figures , ( suppose , of a horse , a bird , a ship , a house , or any shape whatever ) as by our hand we might , if we had such shapes formed in wood or stone ; and the different motions of such . but , after all this , it is not possible for this blind man , to have that idea or notion in his fancy , of sight , light , and colour , which we have who see. and it is much more impossible for us ( who have no notions in our mind , other than what we derive , mediately or immediately , from sensible impressions of finite corporeal beings ) to have a clear and perfect notion , of the nature , unity , distinctions or attributes of an infinite spiritual being ; or otherwise to express them than by some imperfect analogies or resemblances with things we are conversant with ; and by words in a borrowed sense from such . i do therefore fully agree with you in your two conclusions ; namely , that it is safe and prudent to keep close to scripture in these mysterious doctrines ; ( since we know nothing of them otherwise than as there revealed : ) and , not to impose consequences of humane deduction , with the like rigour as divinely-revealed truths . for , even in common affairs , when things are represented onely by the analogy or resemblance which they bear to some other things ; it is seldom that the similitude is so absolute between them , but that there is some dissimilitude likewise . much more when the distance is so great as between finite corporeal beings , and what is infinite and incorporeal . so that we cannot always argue cogently from one to the other . and therefore the words nature , essence , vnity , distinction , father , son , person , beget , proceed , ( and the like , ) when applied to god in a borrowed sense from what they properly signifie as applied to creatures , must not be supposed to signifie just the same , but somewhat analogous to that of their primary signification ; nor consequences thence to be deduced with the same rigour . it would be mere cavilling for any to argue , that , because knowledge and strength are separable in man ; therefore , what in god we call by those names , are so in god ; and that , consequently , it may be possible for the all-wise god , not to be almighty ; or the almighty god , not to be all-wise . so , if we should argue from the manner of our locality or duration , to god's vbiquity without extension , and his eternity without succession ; the inferences must needs be lame and inconsequent . with other inferences of like nature . and , ( even without proceeding to infinites ) if we suppose a spirit , or the soul of man , to be void of parts and local extension , and therefore ( as the phrase is ) tota in toto & tota in qualibet parte of that space or matter to which it is compresent : and should yet argue ( as you do in a like case ) if one single spirit be compresent with three or more really-distinct parts of space or matter ; we must divide or multiply it : either each of these extensive parts must have a piece of that spirit ; and then you divide it : or , each must have the whole , and ( there being but one whole ) you cannot give it to each , without multiplying it : such inference upon such a supposition ( which supposition i am loth to think impossible , ) must needs be lame . yet such are commonly the cavils of those who study to pick quarrels with the doctrine of the trinity as delivered in scripture . and ( in particular ) though , amongst men , three persons are sometimes ( not always ) so used as to import three men ; we may not thence conclude , that the three divine persons , must needs imply three gods. or , if the word persons do not please , ( though i think it a fit word in the case ; we can spare the word , without prejudice to the cause , ( for 't is the notion , rather than the name , that we contend for , ) and content our selves to say , they be three somewhats which are but one god. or , we may so explain our selves , that , by three persons we mean three such somewhats as are not inconsistent with being one god. and hitherto , i suppose , that you and i do well enough agree . now , as to what you observe concerning the learned author ( dr. sherlock ; ) i shall begin where you end : and agree with you , that the treatise ( to which you refer ) contains many excellent things . the strength and weight of his arguments , as to those to whom he undertakes answer , doth not depend upon those expressions against which you object : but his arguments against those , are of equal force , though these expressions were spared . as to those expressions of his , by you noted , that the three divine persons are three beings ( three intelligent beings , three substantial beings , three holy spirits , ) really distinct , even as distinct as peter , iames , and iohn ; and one god onely as they are mutually conscious : i was ( i confess ) unsatisfied therein ( as you are ) from the first ; looking upon them as expressions too hardy for one to venture upon , ( and so i find are most others with whom i have discoursed about them : ) and wish he had declined them . yet i did not think it necessary for me to write against them ( though i did not like them ) but chose rather to wave them , and express my self otherwise . ( for it would be endless if i should make it my business to write books against every one who hath some expressions which i cannot approve , amongst many others wherein i think he doth well . ) nor shall i aggravate the objections which you have urged against them ; but leave them as they are . i might perhaps mollifie some of his expressions , by putting a softer sense upon them than at first view they seem to bear ; ( for i find some men , in such matters , do use words at a very different rate from what others do : ) but i have not ( where now i am ) the book at hand ; and have read it but once ( a good while since ) when it first came out : and therefore am not willing to say much without book , least i should miss his sense , or not perform it to his mind . that learned author may , if he think fit , so vindicate or explain those expressions as he shall judge convenient : or he may ( which i had rather he should ) decline them , without prejudice to his main cause ; ( which , in my opinion , he may as well defend without them : ) and thereby less expose himself to the cavils of the anti-trinitarians ; who are catching at every colourable pretence of objecting , though not against the main cause concerning the trinity , if but against some expressions of those who maintain it . thus far , i think , he and both of us do agree ; namely , that there is a distinction between the three , more than meerly notional , and even more than that , between ( what we commonly call ) the divine attributes ; yet not so as to be three gods , or more gods than one : ( which is as much as we need maintain against the anti-trinitarians : ) and , that the word person is no unfit name to denote that distinction . and thus far we may close with him , notwithstanding some other inconvenient expressions . and if it be agreed that these three ( thus distinguished ) are but one god ( each communicating in one and the same numerical essence , ) then they are all equal ( as to that common internal essence , and the common attributes thereof : ) and then an external subordination , as to oeconomy ( you grant ) signifies nothing in this case . now , sir , if you look back upon your own discourse : you will find , that the whole edge of your arguments is directed against those expressions , three beings , three substances , three spirits ; ( and i do acknowledge , that , as to these , the arguments seem to me sharp enough , and to do their work . ) but if , instead of these , he say ( as i think he should ) that the three persons are one being , one substance , one spirit , ( like as he says they are one god ) that edge will be taken off * . that ( i conceive ) which did impose upon him in this point , is the forced sense , which , in our language , we sometimes put upon the word person , for want of another english word ( answering to homo ) which might indifferently respect man , woman , and child : and a like forced sense put by the school-men upon the word persona , for want of a latin word which might equally relate to men and angels ; as signifying an intelligent being . whence he was induced to think , that three persons must needs be three intelligent beings . whereas persona , in its true and ancient sense ( before the school-men put this forced sense upon it ) did not signify a man simply ; but , one under such , and such , and such circumstances , or qualifications . so that the same man ( if capable of being qualified thus , and thus , and thus , ) might sustain three persons , and these three persons , be the same man. now if ( as he says of himself elsewhere in a like case ) he have not been taken to be a fool : yet a wise man may sometimes , upon second thoughts , see reason to change his opinion ( as in that case he did ) or rectify his expressions . and if then he consider , how much easier it will be ( and less obnoxious to exceptions ) to maintain his hypothesis thus rectified : he may think i have done him no ill offices thus to suggest . having thus given you my thoughts of this hypothesis : if you press me further ( as between our selves ) to tell you , what degree of distinction ( as in our metaphysicks they are wont to be reckoned up ) i take this to be , between the three divine persons : i think we need not much trouble our selves with such niceties . and if i do tell you ; it is only ex abundanti , as what doth not much concern the main question in hand ; ( which is safe enough without it : ) nor that i so prescribe therein , as to require others to express their sentiments just as i do . the degrees of distinction commonly mentioned in our metaphysicks , are such as these : distinctio rationis ratiocinantis , ( which is purely notional , and depends meerly on our imagination : ) destinatio rationis ratiocinatae ( which is otherwise said to be secundum inadaequatos conceptus ejusdem rei : ) distinctio modalis , ( either ut res & modus , or ut modus & modus , ) which is otherwise said to be ex parte rei sed non ut res & res : and distinctio realis , or ut res & res . though , in the names of these several degrees , all writers do not always speak alike . one perhaps by a distinction ex parte rei , may mean the same which another means by distinctio realis : and so of the rest . and these thus marshalled are but a contrivance of our own . they might , for ought i know , have been made more or fewer if the contriver had so thought fit . but these degrees of distinction , i take to be primarily fitted to our notions of created beings . and are not intended as applicable to god , otherwise than by analogy ; as other words properly fitted to created beings are wont to be so applied . and therefore i should choose to say , that ( in strictness of speech ) our metaphysicks have not yet given a name to these distinctions : nor do i know any need of it . the divine attributes , we use to say , are distinguished ratione ratiocinata , or as inadaequati conceptus ejusdem rei . and it is well enough so to say , to those that have not a mind to be captious ; but are willing to understand figurative words in a figurative sense . but , to those that have a mind to cavil , i would speak more cautiously , and say , it is , in god , somewhat analogous to what we so call in created beings . and , that of the divine persons , somewhat analogous , in the deity , to what , in created beings , is called distinctio modalis , or distinctio à parte rei , sed non ut res & res . if it be asked , what that distinction is which is thus analogous : i say , that i cannot tell . you must first tell me ( and enable me to comprehend ) what is the full and adaequate import of the words father , son , beget , proceed , &c. when applied to god , in a sense analogous to what they signify as to created beings . if you cannot tell me , precisely , what they are : how should i tell you , how they differ ? but what need we trouble our selves with these niceties , or names of these degrees of distinction ? ( which , when we have all done , will by divers men be diversly expressed . ) i think it is enough to say , the distinction is greater than that of ( what we call ) the divine attributes ; but not so as to make them three gods. or , that they be so three , as yet to be but one god. and i am content to rest there . i am , sir , yours to serve you , i. wallis . apr. . . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a -e * augustin . epist. . spiritus est deus ; & pater spiritus est , & filius , & ipse spiritus sanctus ; nec tamen tres spiritus , sed vnus spiritus ; sicut non tres dii , sed vnus deus . a vindication of an essay to the advancement of musick from mr. matthew lock's observations, by enquiring into the real nature and most convenient practise of that science / by thomas salmon ... salmon, thomas, - . approx. kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from -bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : - (eebo-tcp phase ). a wing s estc r ocm this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons . universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase , no. a ) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set ) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, - ; : ) a vindication of an essay to the advancement of musick from mr. matthew lock's observations, by enquiring into the real nature and most convenient practise of that science / by thomas salmon ... salmon, thomas, - . n. e. wallis, john, - . [ ], , p., [ ] folded leaf of plates : ill. printed by a. maxwell and are to be sold by john car ..., london : . written in reply to an attack on his "essay to the advancement of musick by casting away the perplexity of different cliffs." locke retorted in "the present practice of music vindicated." in the form of a letter to dr. john wallis. the p. at end contain a letter to the author, signed n.e., concerning his essay and locke's reply. reproduction of original in library of congress. created by converting tcp files to tei p using tcp tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between and available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the , texts created during phase of the project have been released into the public domain as of january . anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. % (or pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf- unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p , characters represented either as utf- unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng locke, matthew, or - . -- observations upon a late book entituled, an essay to the advancement of musick. musical notation. - tcp assigned for keying and markup - apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images - jonathan blaney sampled and proofread - jonathan blaney text and markup reviewed and edited - pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a vindication of an essay to the advancement of musick , from mr. matthew lock' 's observations . by enquiring into the real nature , and most convenient practise of that science . by thomas salmon , m. a. of trin. col. oxon. a senis notis , ah ! qualis mutationum mora , confusio clavium , substitutio vocum ? videas plerosque an indigneris , bonam aetatem impendisse huic arti , & exiguum tamen profecisse , perfectos annis prius quàm ejus . modi lectione . erycii put. musathena . london : printed by a. maxwell , and are to be sold by john car at the middle-temple-gate , . to the reader . morefields , or the bear-garden are entertainment only for the rabble : and , should i spend my time in wrangling , scratching , pulling by the hair , and such like ; the reader would have good reason to think himself but rudely treated . i shall therefore ( after i have a little caress'd my good friend , and old acquaintance , the observer ) enquire into the nature of musick , that we may a little discern what commerce it maintains betwixt its theory and practice ; and if we can obtain them both to vote in favour of our hypothesis , we shall have just encouragement to engage with the objections . to the eminent and learned dr. john wallis , savilian professor of geometry in the university of oxford . sir , having in a letter ( of feb. . ) received your approbation of my essay , ( than whom , none was better able to judg , whether it was agreeable to the true nature of musick ) i was not much sollicitous what the less-learned part of the world thought concerning it . but then , that learned as well as royal society , having in their transactions ( published febr. / n. ) upon their judgments recommended it to publique practise ; i must confess it was more than i expected , to be now so killingly convinced , and utterly destroyed by one single , though he was a very grand observer . and indeed , sir , what ruin may i not expect from such a formidable encounterer ? who , when i hop'd to have obtain'd a little respect by professing my self graduate of one of the most noble universities in the world , at one puff ( observe p. . ) turns me into a jack-an-apes , and all those venerable ancestors we study , into great bears . now , sir , for my part , i had never skill enough in my life , to take a man in pieces , and make him up into a monkey : wherefore i must stand staring and gazing upon my antagonist as the gigantick-champion of musick ; to which purpose , he is pleased ( p. . ) to call himself the great goliah ; and his small adversary , little david ; though before that ( p. . ) it lay in his way to call me hercules : and so powerful he is , sir , in this juggle of converting , that i am confident , at the same time he is able to turn me into a mouse , and an elephant . well , there are no hopes , but we must be undone : for we may pretend and expect what we will ; 't is impossible there should be any dealing with ' or resistance made against such a mighty man as this . wherefore i am resolved humbly to request and entreat all manner of men to believe , that i am and do whatever he would have me ; for there is nothing in the world does so spoil an ingenious jest , as for some silly people to get a whimsey in their heads , that i am of a sober conversation : whereas if they will but be so kind to their own diversion , as to grant me a sot and a cox-comb , then would they set ralpho's lice and maggots a wrigling , p. . then we should have burlesque upon poetry , and verses upon burlesque ; and that so violently , that if no body will bestow printing them , he 'l print them himself ; if no body thinks them worth answering , he 'l answer them himself : so very careful he is for the recreation of mankind . but , sir , i must remember you of one thing , that when i was supposing my self , i was willing to suppose my self one of the least things i could suppose my self ; that when this huge destroyer came , i might creep into an augur-hole , or behind the wanscot ; but i was afraid even to do that too ▪ for if you observ'd how archly he transposes and perverts my words , ( p. . ) you would take him for a living mouse-trap . however , having timely apprehensions of his coming , i was not out of all hopes to escape , did there not go before him a terrible fellow in buff , an epigrammatical poetaster ; this man , sir , ( one would think ) dealt only with pen , ink , and paper ; but alas ! he was arm'd with all the instruments of cruelty ; and heated with such an implacable malice , that he sentences me ; first , to have my hide taw'd till it was tender ; then to have the foresaid intimate garment , my skin , to be fley'd off whilst i yet remain'd alive : nay further , could he have got a rime for defunct ( which it seems was the word he designed ) i must also have been eaten alive with pepper and salt , three days after i had been defunct . but 't was well for us , his pegasus was jaded ; and so , farewel him . next comes the observer himself , whose remarques were fitter to be contemn'd than taken notice of ; yet their author being of so great fame and employment , i shall strictly examine each page ; which trouble i am the more willing to undergo ; because after this observer i suppose none will dare to make observations ; there being few men of greater skill ; of greater malice , none . observ. p. . the essay is , at first dash , found abusive , false , insignificant , contradictory , and ( in some parts ) impossible ; which to save himself the labour of proving , he supposes ; and accordingly to save our selves the labour of disproving , we suppose is not ; and so far we are even . but indeed , 't is no great matter which is true ; for the business does not lye in pro & con , but the way of propounding . he has ( saith the observer ) been liberal to evince the intricate and difficult way of your proceeding , by an experiment of his . now , sir , there is no such rugged uncompliant way of evincing , as that of experiment ; for thereby things will obstinately appear just as they are . and of all other experiments , those of arithmetick have lest of congé in them . ha sausebox ! dare you prove , that we require different alterations ( essay p. . ) ? now , sir , these numbers are so cross-grain'd , that all the money and interest in the world could not bribe times to be , they will make . and no musician can deny , but that there may be cliffs , and that every cliff sets all the notes belonging to it in different places , which must at the least be more than nine . ( for though g of the base , and one g upon the treble , both stand upon the lower line ; yet i am confident , he so far abominates my octaves , that he will scorn to save nine by that shift ) . so that proving them to make alterations of the notes , and my notes always to stand in the same place , this is the abusive rugged way . whereas the smooth taking way had been to have invited our angry observer to the tavern , fill'd his belly with a good fish-dinner , and made it swim agen ; then might a man have drawn forth an hypothesis with acceptance ; if so be one had been cautious all the while to have acknowledged that the old way was rare , convenient , and indeed best ; but it would be an infinite kindness and obligation if they would practise a new one ; which the worse it was , the greater kindness it would be to accept it . and this had been the modest way . but now , sir , you know it is the way of us speculative people , if we can but once demonstrate a thing to be easie and plain , we use to accept it without further charges of entertainment . and if this won't agree with the practical , then without doubt there is something more in it than we know of , and must be put among those things which are good in speculation , but not profitable to practise . and now , sir , lest my reader should be a little drowsie , you must give me leave to change the mood , and be more pleasant upon this subject of recreation . p. . do but turn over the leaf , and you will find me indebted to the observer for a tale ; and indeed , sir , i was never so indebted to any man in my life ; for he hath described himself to be an arrant fool , out of good will to prevent all ventersome young men from being the like . there he stands like a frightful scare-crow stuff'd with straw , an old hat , and a muckinger , holding forth his arms ; see here young men ! when i was a school-boy , &c. then was i lucifer-like ; which some wicked people say , was as proud and false as the devil ; but i don't believe that was his own meaning of it in this place , though afterwards he tells us plainly , he was wise in his own eyes ; that there was more hopes of a fool than of him . sir , one would long to be acquainted with the observer , to know what kind of man such an ill-begun boy hath made . but whatsoever he is , we thank him for his good advice , though we cannot admit the force of his argument , that if he was a fool when he was a young man , therefore all other young men must be so too . which is all the pertinent application i can dev●ise p. . and now our errant observer promises , to keep within compass ; where ( having just finished his own character and education ) he is pleased to insert mine : which i will not examine , because i have already professed my self to be , and do , whatsoever he says , except in the business of my forlorn fssay . i must acquaint you , sir , that it happened amongst the happenings of my life , to have to do with this observer , wherein i did my do , civilly and kindly ( as he himself confesses , lin. . ) and several others also , were the favours he received from our family , which he promises ( and we have experienc'd in these observations ) always to acknowledg . and indeed , such kind inclinations are as natural to him , as 't is for a stone to tend towards its center . for how can a sweet musical ingenuity , be any way tainted with the least rudeness or ingratitude ? especially being terrified in the days of school-boy , with that dreadful apothegm of lycosthenes , si ingratum dixeris , omnia dixeris . but i did that which was able to cancel all obligations . pity ! ah pity , sir , the common fate of scholars , who are all possessed with one incurable madness , to be ever enquiring into the reasons and nature of things . hence came the cause of my present ruin ! my canting questions , and my niblings after solutions . and here , sir , i am resolved to lay you something in the blame : for it was you that spoil'd me , by letting me know , that the satisfaction an octave created , did proceed from an exact duple-proportion , which it ever observed , with some other such like heathenish things . and this , by my reading , got such possession of my pericranium , as you can scarce imagine . particularly , when i was a young trader in philosophy , father galtruchius told me in the first chapter of his musical institutions out of old boetius and ptolomy , quod , voces in musicâ neque plures neque pauciores esse possunt , quam septem , ( i. e. ) there could be neither more nor less than seven voices , which are the seven intervals included in eight notes . not that seven were all the variety the ancients had : for aristoxenus , who was contemporary with alexander the great , and scholar to aristotle , tells us in his first book , p. . edit . m. meibomii , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . that the notes then in use , especially for humane voice , reach'd two eights and a fifth ; which ( not counting the fifth inclusively ) is just twenty notes , the compass of our modern scale from gamut to ela. but then this vile aristoxenus did so confirm me in my beloved octaves ( the same page ) where he thinks that notes might upon their account proceed ad infinitum , that i have ever since doted upon them . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . that an octave was of such an incomparable good nature , as if you added a greater , or less , or equal consonant to it , it would still be consonant , which he thought would hold to infinite ; but will not come to pass so much as in two fifths ( where the present division of cliffs is ) or any other consonants of the same kind , which being added together , make a most unpleasing discord . these learned men , sir , were those midsummer-moons which influenc'd my brains to think an octave to be a compleat cycle of musick ; which , in the greatest compass , still enjoyed it self in one and the same oeconomy . and this , sir , makes me still so mad as to think , that though my new scale doth divide it self at every octave , p. . yet it does not divide confusedly , or tinker-like , instead of mending one hole , make two . but , sir , these uncontroulable proverbs are able to undo any man living . and then for his poetry , he is altogether as invincible . from whence you see my misery in dealing with this man of proverbs ! and for burlesque , if not twin to hudibras , yet certainly he is his own younger brother . but i omit these titles , as ( perhaps ) only my own private sentiments . come therefore ( as i. philips calls thee ) , come thou apollo , thou sign of a sun-tavern ; come and behold the annual circuit of thy rival luminary ; see the like circulation of the imitating blood . or like a bowl , or like a wheel , or like the damask-rose you see . fye upon it ! observer , i believe thou observest , that they will not rime , which is the only thing necessary to verses . therefore ( good hudibras ) give me leave to retreat to prose . a diagramm for the uniting of speculative and practicall musick ; by rendring the order and proportions of the intervalls ▪ into practick notes upon their own constant lines & spaces . and here i intend to give an account of this whirlegig , because i think it does something turn and hindg speculative and practical knowledg together : so that we will a little look into the grounds of musick , and steer our course accordingly . mr. morley ( otherwise than the ancients did ) in his introduction , p . instructs his scholar philomathes , that there were in musick but six notes , which are called by those several names , ut. re , mi , fa , sol la , ( and why but six , i leave the observer to vindicate . ) now he , and their nomenclator guido , being both in a mistake for that , have ( as some think ) caused a great deal of confusion , by directing men to follow that in practise , which stands upon a false foundation , even against the very nature of the thing . thus they begin at every tetrachord , and so march up to the hexachord , and then down to the tetrachord again ; whereas the business is not done by fourths and sixths , but by a circulating octave . which they were something sensible of ; and therefore , after the two first tetrachords , began ut again at the next note ; that every octave . note might have the same denomination as well by its syllable , as its capital letter . and this the observer is so exceedingly angry at ( because i take some advantage thereby to plead for my octaves ; and therefore seem to have some reason , why men should involve themselves in my perplexities , as he says p ) that he thinks it rational , for the future , to take the alphabet endwise , even to w , x y , z ; though he add four more notes to the scale above ela. but 't is well for me , all men are not so spiteful : forreigners , who retain ut and re , have generally added the seventh monosyllable bi ; and therefore i doubt are something guilty of circulation , which is thereby brought to pass at every octave . but our own countrey-men have much out-done all the musicians in the world not only by pursuing the same circulation , but in so ordering the monosyllables , that the same should always signifie an interval of the same proportion . which , sir , was first taken notice of by your self , in your most ingenious letter of march / , to the r. society , representing musical harmony to the eye , in one of mr henry laws his airs , rendred in parallelograms . if you please to review my whirlegig , you will find in what order those monosyllables circulate , and how each of them is assigned to its own proportion : thus to bid one sing from the precedent note to sol , is as much as to say , sing an interval , whose two terms are in the proportion / , and after the same manner to la / to fa / , which being repeated , the odd note mi / comes and compleats the octave ; and this was the note ( though in another name ) which our good friend mr. guido , after he had added together a couple of tetrachords , wanted to compleat his octave . now the rations of any of those numbers being continued , return the proportion of the consonant required to be constituted by them : thus / × / the sum / — / which is a practical third major ; three notes including the two intervals , sol , la ; and if all seven were continued , the aggregate would be / — / a duple proportion . this account will be exact for any intermediate concord ; but that / × / will not constitute a true hemiditonus , as is demonstrated by r des cartes in his musical compendium , p. . where he gives an account of that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which will accordingly happen , and is most clearly explain'd by that truly noble person of honour in his animadversions upon him , p. . from whence it comes to pass , as also from the difference of the major and minor tones ▪ that practical musicians tune some notes bearing , that there may be a common respect and intercourse from any one term of the musick , to another . so that we have in that compleat cycle of an octave , the mathematical proportions united to the practical notes ▪ always signifying sol la mi fa sol la fa , &c. ● / / / ● / / / / o : ma : to : mi : ton : ma : hemito : to ▪ ma : to : mi : hemitonium which do run round , and will run round ( in spite of any man's teeth ) according to the foresaid detestable circulation ; and this we may call naming the notes according to their proportions but the notes are also allotted to so many letters of the alphabet , to shew the order of their procession in the septenary , and the distance of one note from another , that is more than a single interval ; for from sol to sol , may be either a fourth or a fifth wherfore the alphabetical letters make the distinction from sol in g , to sol in d , a fifth ; from sol in d ▪ to sol in g , a fourth . and for this purpose the letters in the circle are assigned to the monosyllables of proportion ; which we have in the diagram conveyed to the lines and spaces ▪ and rendred in practical notes , in their most natural posture ; the half-notes being possessed of those letters , which may properly be called their own homes . thus they are all possessed of their own lines and spaces ; and , if we can but withstand the furious invasions of our adversary , shall never change their habitations . and now , sir , i can't tell what to think is become of my observer all this while ; either he is fallen asleep by reason of these drowsie mathematicks , or else he is stamping and staring that ever such things as these should be committed in the face of the sun it self ; and ind●ed i should hardly have ventur'd it , had it not been lately reported , that the sun appear'd with a circle about it , perhaps in our defence against this apollo , its new corrival . from whence i take courage to say , that this circle doth best demonstrate the nature of the diatonick ▪ scale , exhibits to the eye its half notes , and shews that two whole ones stand betwixt them on one side , and three on the other , which is a tritonus ; and the former semicircle ( which consisted of two whole , and two half-notes ) a semidiapente . these being added together , constitute an octave , as their rations also do : / × / the sum / — / and were it not , sir , for making my opposer stark mad with this canting-philosophy , i would separate the margin of the circle from its radii ▪ and by the circular motion thereof demonstrate , . which are the proper assignments of all regular flats and sharps in any position of mi ? . why mi keeps that order , to be first in b , next in e , a , d &c. and why if there be but one regular sharp , mi is there situated , and in what order all the rest ? . to transpose a lesson from any key given , to any key required ; and shew which must be the sharps and flats in that key ? . for accommodation , to bring any key filled with what regular sharps and flats soever , into some key where all the notes are natural . which thing , though long custom , and a laborious computation , have made some men perfect in ; yet even to several expert masters it has been a very pleasant speculation to behold those numerous rules which a deep experience had wrought into their judgments , now ( by one turn of the circle ) clearly represented to their eye , with all the reasons and order of the diatonick scale . but these phaenomena requiring a movable instrument more than a diagram , i cannot here any further prosecute them ; only assuring the reader , that i am very ready to communicate this or any other small knowledg i have pick'd up , to any ingenious person . i shall only add this one corollary ; that since in natural keys we may have all the variety of thirds , and sixths , and sevenths , or what ever else a composer can either desire or invent with all his regular flats and sharps ; how happy would it be for the ease of musick , and the exactness of tuning , if the same proportions were ever fixed to the same places of the septenary , i. e. mi always in b. i know the present make and compass of instruments ▪ won't kindly comply with this proposal ; but surely , ● were well worth the while for instruments to be contriv'd accordingly , both for the excellency of musick , and advantage of its attainment . for whereas the keys of an harpsichord are now tuned in a common dilured proportion , they may hereby be made capable of the most accurate exactness ; and though a vulgar ear may not be able to judg the difference between a greater or lesser tone ; a true lesser third consisting of / × / or a false one of / × / yet there will be a dissatisfaction , though it be not evident in what particular to complain , as practical musicians have experience when they play a lesson in a forc'd unnatural key ; which is the same thing as if the instrument were out of tune . the eye is pleased with a concurrence of proportions , the natural casting of a shade , and the exactness of some oriental colours , whose just limits it can neither distinguish nor determine , but only satisfie it self in that whole accurate heap of enjoyment . it may not be able to descry every disordered atome , or give an account of each little unpleasing spot ; yet will it have an aversion for that soil'd impurity which is thereby caused . thus those little inharmonical relations only in general offend the ear , and make a kind of unaccountable resentment ; but if remedied by an accurate tuning , which the stability of proportions would produce , we might justly expect more powerful charms from the more exact harmony . since therefore musick consists in proportions , and 't is by them alone that it has an influence upon the soul ; i reckon it a most sure consequence , that by how much the more accurate those proportions are , the stronger must their influence be . but this is only to join madness to phrensie : what , add whimsey to whirlegig ! i am guilty ; and if the observer will but forgive me this one digression , i will pardon him every thing that ever he did in his life , or ever shall do , or any of his posterity , an hundred years after his death . nay further , i will give him leave at present to ease his stomach with one objection . obj. to what purpose are all these mathematical contrivances ? will they teach a man to make air , or maintain the point of a canon ? ans. we are not now discoursing the power of phansie , or how far it is capable of direction ; which without doubt ought to be very much left at liberty to the excellent masters of it : but here we consider the true reason and scientifical foundation according to which we ought to proceed . and truly this is the very objection i always expected ; for our observer neither understands nor loves these things , any more than a horse does nutmegs ( you see , sir , how he has infected me with an ugly proverb ) but though this be his humour , yet there are a great many inquisitive and ( as some say ) ingenious people , who desire to know the nature and reason of musick ; the proportions wherein it consists , and the arithmetical laws which it observes . these admire the glorious order of its composure , and the infinite wisdom of him that created it in so great proportion : to what other purpose does the astronomer consider the heavenly revolutions , and the exact courses of those bright luminaries ? after all his study , he cannot stop the course of the sun , or add one short day to his fleeting years ; yet he looks not upon his time as unprofitably spent , though he only contemplates , and never puts forwards so far as the compiling of an almanack . and i know several learned men who value such a speculative person far beyond a practical col●●ctor of months and eclipses , &c. who writes himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or a well willer to the mathematicks ; when perhaps he has scarce positive knowledg enough to determine , whether we have always the same moon , or every month a new one . i need not from hence urge , how truly noble it would be for a practical musician , to build upon such a scientifical and steady foundation : nay farther , there is good reason to think , that it will afterwards be of as great advantage , as it is of accomplishment to him . for the promoting of which purpose , i should have begun at the very division of an octave and have given the proportions of lesser concords ; have shewn how we came by those assigned intervals of notes and half notes ; but that our observer is so exceedingly impatient when he is thus tortur'd with numbers , that he will not let me tarry so long . i will therefore take for granted , that / is the proportion of a major tone ; because if you divide a string into nine equal parts , and stop one of them ; the other eight to the string open , will ( to any musicians ear ) give that sound which is called a whole note . which is true of all the other intervals and concords , thus : if you divide a string into three equal parts ; stop one , and the other two , to the string open , will be a practical fifth ; as is more at large exactly described by the acurate mersennus , from the use of an instrument called the harmonical canon : libro primo de instrumentis har. propos. . as also by guido himself . this is evident both to the ear and eye ; but then adding all the intervals of the circle together , they composing an aggregate of a duple proportion ( as hath been said ) no less demonstrate the just assignment of each of their proportions , according to mathematical consideration . the proportions of which notes and half-notes being most incompaably by english musicians distinguished by particular names , as sol always a major tone , fa an hemitone , &c. ( as they are placed in the cycle of an octave ) and these naturally circulating in a certain order , according as they are assigned to the first seven letters of the alphabet ; we may by the help of those pointed segments in the diagram , unite this speculative to our practical knowledg . there i find the sol , la , &c. the names of the circulating proportions in their alphabetical order landed upon lines and spaces ; though originally notes were only planted upon the lines , ( as now the letters of tableture are ) but then the number of them did so distract the eye , that it was thought convenient every space should also signifie the distance of a note from the line either above or under it . an account of which we have from the most excellent gassendus in his introduction to the theory of musick , tom. . where he tells us , that kircher had found at messane a song described upon eight lines ( it seems they had some affection to an octave ) which were begun with the first letters of the grecian alphabet . but then guido composing the scale , did upon the sorementioned reason set the notes in space also , though even then the time was writ separately over the head of the notes , as is now in tableture ; and they used the alphabetical letters , which were significative of the notes , instead of them , ( as i have in my essay to the base of the lute , for the help of young beginners ) till about three hundred years ago jean des murs of paris found out those characters which we now use to express time and tune together . you may then please to look back upon the foregoing diagram , and you will find the first note in the lowest of the four lines ; track him to g , which is our terminus à quo , from whence to the next note in space , ( which is united to a ) is the interval la ▪ or / ; from which to the note b transfix'd by the second line , is the odd interval mi , or / ; and these two intervals of the three including-notes gab , added together , constitute in their least terms / , the proportion of a greater practical third , as your ear may experiment if you divide the string into five equal parts ; stop one , and the other four , to the string open , will give the sound required . after which manner you may proceed , till you have compleated an octave ; and then the very reason and nature of the thing will force you to circulate , as my abusive , impertinent , contradictory , impossible hypothesis doth require ; which my observer doth rather scold at , than either understand or confute . as these things are true in speculation , so will every practical musician bear witness to them , that the same order of distances comes about agen at every eight notes , as in a suit of lessons the regular flats and sharps are always the same in every octave . by which discourse i have not only endeavoured to clear my hypothesis , to vindicate my reputation for circulating in an impertinent octave ( which , let the observer say what he will , is the very nature of musick , both to its division , and the return of the similar notes into the same places ) but also attempted to unite the theory and practise . from whence those honourable servants of his majesty would be esteemed as truly learned , as they are indeed ingenious , in this science ; when their judgments are as richly laden with the nature and reasons thereof , as their phancies and inventions are , with the ravishing pleasures of its performance . 't is impossible to conceive how much so happy an union would conduce both to the glory and advancement of musick , its bonds and fetters would be taken off , when the serious mathematician could be able to reduce his speculations to practise ; and agen the aery composer could render an account of his charms , in a mathematick theory . and now sir , i find my self sunk into the tedious stile of my essay . but that i may a little recover my self , and consider the sentiments of my observer : if you please to review the north-corner of magdalen-colledg-quadrangle , there he sets hugging himself and grinning ; i thought ( says he ) how our young man would undo himself by doting upon his philosophy , and tyring his readers with a heavy story of proportions ; these are the sad effects of superparticular and superpartient . whereas , if he had been at all acquainted with the winning complaisance of the town , he would have entertain'd them with burlesque and interludes ; some tickling raillery intermixt with a sly hint , and a long dash . — this sir , i must confess my self unable to do ; and therefore i most earnestly entreat you , as you have any kindness for me , or desire of your own refreshment to read over that awakening peal , that poetical alarm , to ralpho ▪ p. . ingenious ralpho ! — and then the observer's own answer to the same . p. . thou self-denying ordinancer , why — and i am the more earnest to obtain this request , hoping hereby absolutely to allay the anger and vengeance wherewith he is inflamed . for truly , sir , if you will believe me ( or any friend please to ask the observer himself , he will find ) i never in my life the least disobliged my incens'd antagonist ; but by this one thing ▪ of not suffering those verses to be printed before my essay . of which unkindness i am now so sensible , that i am endeavouring all the satisfaction i can invent ; to which purpose i would feign perswade the stationers , to print them before all the books that come out next term : but they grumble at taking up so much paper . though i am not out of all hopes to have them set at the beginning of the catalogue of books , because they will indifferently serve for all sorts of books in all arts and sciences . and if this won't satisfie him , i believe there are few people but will think him very unreasonable : but though this may allay him for the future ; yet we are still engaged in the past attacks of his fury ; especially , p. . where he would feign perswade you to believe , the encouragement and reception my essay hath obtain'd , proceeded from my diligence to promote it ; and this , sir , i must not dispute , because i have promised to submit to whatsoever he affirms . yet it does so vex his spleen , that he cannot but immediately vent himself by drolling upon those places of his profess'd obligations ; which , sir , you are well acquainted with , and know them to be of such vertue and modesty , that a person of his behaviour must needs quit them , as he hath lately done . and this , sir , i would by no means have written , but to shew you , that the most malicious page in his book may justly fly in his own face . however i must always admire his most noble skill in composition , which almost all people have a just value and esteem of ; but that he must thence become so tyrannical , as to think all the musick of the kingdom depends upon his pleasure , and no man may pretend to be able to write a lesson , otherwise than he will permit him , is something more than comes to his share ; especially since there are so many ingenious gentlemen of this profession , that never any prince in the world was served with more than his present majesty . p. . it deserves a smile to see how arrogantly he assaults my publisher ( a person who for his knowledg and industry in musick deserved rather his encouragement than envy ) for complaining that the ancient and modern authors were obscure in their musical writings ; so that we ought to believe they were very easie and plain when our observer read them ; and we may safely believe they were : for there is a cross thing , the restraint of languages , that makes 〈◊〉 believe they may have layn abed and slept all their days , for any thing the observer knows ; who is capable of reading few more than mr. morley , mr. simpson , mr. greeting 's instructions for the flageolet ; and above all , his good friend and hirer , mr. john playford ( who so learnedly stiles himself ) philo-music● . p. . now , sir , i must acquaint you that our observer hath two excellent eyes : one to see things with , that no body else can see ; and one , not to see those things which every body else can see . with this later he can look upon a printed page , like a piece of clean white paper ; or else the letters will appear so double that he can't read one word . and with this negative eye he read the four first pages of my essay , where i so largely treated of the divine institution of musick : which ( i said ) needed nothing else , nor could have any thing greater to command acceptance , than a challenge of its institution from divine providence it self , who had provided a peculiar faculty for its reception . ( which i since find the eminent dr. willis place in some peculiar schematismi of the cerebellum , anat. cer. cap. . ) the early use of it in holy writ by jubal , and that it was a sacred means to allay saule evil spirit . after all this the observer comes blinking with his foresaid eye , and admires that , amongst the many advantages of musick , i should not so much as take notice of its divine use , notwithstanding the many commands and examples recounted in holy writ to that purpose . now , sir , though he admired at me , yet i must entreat you not to admire at him ; for there is a private reason ( which i omit ) why the observer did not know god , jubal , and saul to be scripture names : and the same reason must deserve your charity , when he attempts a profane jest in scripture-phrase ; because you must suppose he did not know it to be holy writ . but this not-seeing eye being closed , he opens his other , which is his left eye and that looks something a squint ; with this he sees such revelations and visions as never appear'd . this was but one glance , and then he shuts it ; but privately unites them both into one , which , like polyphemus's , is placed at the very top of his fore-head . by the advantage whereof , p. . he looks beyond sea , where musitians have much respect , large rewards , ( as no body that i know of ever contradicted ) and many advantages to enrich themselves ( if they please ) . and at home too &c. i must confess , sir , within the narrow circuit of my progress ( as he says ) i was scarce so much acquainted with any , as the observer himself ; and , i know not what was the matter , it never yet pleased him to purchase an estate though i have since been acquainted with several that live very nobly and gentilely upon this profession ; as they may well do since his present majesty hath augmented the revenue to the gentlemen of his chappel almost double : yet this being procur'd by one whom our observer envies , and hath rail'd at in print ; 't was a thing that could not possibly be seen with either of his eyes , though it was the just acknowledgment of his prince's most gracious munisicence ▪ i must here , sir , most humbly entreat your pardon for troubling you with these late pages , which are impertinent to my design ; and i would not have inserted them , but that i was unwilling to leave any one side unanswered ; as also to satisfie the reader , that what i omit of such stuff for the future , may as well proceed from his ungrounded envy and malice , as what i have at present examined . and now after so long an entertainment of his wit and drollery , his burlesque and battery ; the observer comes to his business and presents you p. . with the old gamut , sanca panca's pudding ( as he likens it ) : and truly , sir , i am so much a scholar as to think it sitter to be eaten than learn'd without book . which , if you please to review according to the observer's own delineation , more plainly discovers in every column that old mistake of making six notes to be the compass of musick ; as also the beginning every sett of syllable ▪ ( when my abusive octave did not ●●oil their sport ) at a fourth , which ●●s c●r●●s at the end of his . chap. mus. comp . unkindly calls , a certain monster , or deficient , imperfect product of an eight . neither is there any thing in those names to express the true nature of musick , but the circulation of the capital letters , which is the only thing the observer thinks fit to be altered , to escape all suspition of my perplexities . i am sure it is false in our present practice to subscribe ( as he there does at the botom of the scale ) b naturalis , when mi stands in e la mi , which proceeds from that unnatural deduction of six notes . and that this is an old obsolete mistake , we have the honoured mr. simpson of our opinion , comp. p. . for that b naturalis , whose ut stood in c , being distinguished from b duralis , whose ut stood in g , ( which is an excellent piece of unuseful knowledg , that i believe few men now trouble themselves with ) was called properchant ; so that the six notes did not reach so high , as to touch b either flat or sharp ; but in our modern musick we acknowledg no such thing as properchant , every song being of its own nature either flat or sharp . so he . which shews , if the observer had but any kind compliance with the judgment of him whom he pretends to esteem , that he need not think there is so great vertue in those admirable charming words of the gamut , which i suppose produce their effects by being seal'd up , and carried in the pocket ; though i would entreat him in his next to open them , and shew their operations ; for without doubt , sir , he intends to do something ▪ having resolved in his conclusion , pag. . that he will vindicate this old scale , except he meet with a better ; ( which i am sure , sir , you know to be impossible ) so long as there is any paper or ink in the world ; nay so long as he is able write his own name . a champion so faithful , so trusty to his cause , that i believe all europe is not able to match either his constancy or valour ; a subscription , sir , worthy to be registred in the chronicles of the most bloody warriers to subscribe ones self so long as one is able to subscribe ones self , sir , your servant is vastly more couragious than barely to subscribe ones self , sir , yours till death . having duly admired the observer's so brave resolutions ; we next consider the cliffs , and the lines upon which those powerful words are placed ; concerning which i will give you the best account i can find . that because it would be too distracting to the eye , to have always before it ten or more lines and spaces , which the whole scale did require ; musicians did by assigning a certain note ( which they call'd the cliff-note ) to one line in a staff , shew by consequence which five or six lines they had taken out of the scale for the use of that part , wherein they were concern'd ; which caused all those variations and difficulties i have complained of , and must still have been endured , had there been no remedy found . but since 't is the nature of musick to have a circular as well as progressive motion , which former doth so influence all composition , that 't is impossible to pass seven notes without considering the next seven to lie in the same posture ; i thought it would be worth my while ( that i might save so vast a trouble ) to fix them , according to their own circular nature , always in the same lines and spaces , as you may see in the preceding diagram , where c returns naturally into the lower line , and the half notes ( though you do suppose regular flats and sharps ) stand in the same place in all octaves . and i can at any time take what notes soever are useful to any part , by those two only postulata , which you may see are agreeable to the nature of the thing ; and in answer to the objections , will be further evident . the objections answered . pag. . thus having vindicated my new scale for confusedly dividing it self at every octave ; i proceed to the observer's grand objection . of making the same note or tone to be in several places at the same time ; and this is attended with so great a retinue of observations , that the reader may easily perceive , here lies the stress of the controversie , and that too in the observer's own opinion : immediately adding , and from this i make my exceptions against his whole book . now , sir , do i entirely love the observer , for pointing out this nicking evidence upon which all our business depends : in some loose writers we might have gone hunting and hawking , and only found some scattering objections ; but here my most kind antagonist hath brought it to an head . wherefore stand fast eassayer ! methinks i feel thy pillars tremble , and the whole fabrick of thy hypothesis shake ; but i 'le pull down the observer in my ruin , and crush him with five times the weight of his own objection . that way which requires an absurdity five times over ▪ is much more to be exploded , than that which requires it but once . but the observer's old way does require the same ( condemning ) absurdity , five times , which the essayer's new one requires but on●● ▪ therefore the observ●●●● old way 〈◊〉 much mo●● to 〈…〉 the essayer's new one . the second proposition needs only to be proved , which is done in this following scheam . a scheme to demonstrate , that by the movement of the old cliffs , g sol re ut , a●la mi re , b ▪ fa b mi , c sol fa ut ; are in five different places at the same time the essay allows them but once different when thay stand irregularly upon their leiger lines out of their own octaves as the observer sherveth in this following scheme now with all my power i have endeavoured rightly to understand the observer's chief objection , laid it down in his own words ; and if he gets any thing by it , let him save his lapis calaminaris , and put it in his eye . here i expected he should have quarrel'd me , for placing g sol re ut , in the line , which he does in space : but that appears so natural in the diagram , and i had so pleaded the justice of it , essay p. . that he takes not the least notice of it . if he was angry for setting the same g sol re ut , in the leiger space , which would naturally fall in the line ; he must be extraordinarily commended for his kindness , who out of meer love and tenderness would not mention one tittle of that chief dislike . but those notes upon the leiger lines being exoticks taken in only strangerwise for their trade , and commerce , ( as i answer'd to this almost same objection , essay p. . ) i suppose he was satisfied 't was not considerable . and it seems more compliant with the nature of the thing : for a stranger to wear an unusual garb in a foreign country , does not make him less known but more exposes him to observation . that we may take things in a little more dependant order than he has laid them down , i must consider his excellent contrivance of a double relish , as having some affinity to the grand objection ; but here our observer is become inventer , that if he cannot find things ridiculous he may make some . p. . which , whosoever reviews will without doubt think the observer and all the things in the house stood upon their heads , when he found it out , but the best jest is , it positively contradicts , what he said before , so necessary is it for every man that observes truth , to be ever mindful of what he hath once said ; as the learned lilly of old advised . for if i do allow g sol re ut to stand in two places , why doth he not write the double relish , as 't is in the diagram ? if i do not , then what becomes of his grand objection which supposes it . p. , , , . all that remains is but a small pickaroon with two guns , which are so far from doing any execution , that they do but more clearly discover my method to the readers apprehensions . these i have described as the two only requisites of my hypothesis , in the second figure of the diagram ; and are so far from being objections as that they appear most natural conveniencies . the first , which he mentions , ( p . and . ) , you will find to be according to the very nature of musick ; which having concluded one octave , begins the next , and continues it in the same posture , it did the first . though there is so great assistance given by the leiger lines ; that as occasion is given but very seldom thus to alter the octave in vocal musick so in instrumental , the octaves ( especially upon the harpsechord ) lie so uniform , that 't is done without any trouble . and as it would be easie to instruct a scholar , that after he has proceeded to f in the fourth , by the notice of a new octave letter , he is to go forwards with the first line agen , and the notes in their same former distances ; so this method would be indeed scientifical , and would make him not only practise according to the right rules , but also give him to understand the true nature of musick , which the old scale of gam-ut did in no wise signifie . the observer hath been pleas'd , in this twelfth page , to write his notes with two ascititious lines underneath ; and he might , if he pleas'd , write them with six : but i never take any more liberty to maintain my notes in their constant places , than he requires to his alterations , i. e. one line over or under the five , when occasion is . if it be requisite to proceed very far into another octave , we change the ●●tter , and write ( that which he calls ) the new-found reformed way , but , according to the diagram , appears to be the most easie and natural method of musick . p. , . the other reputed difficulty , he hath contriv'd a canon on purpose to demonstrate ( which is no more than i had a particular cut for to explain ess. p. . ) ; and 't is this , which you may see in the second figure of the diagram , that , if i rise or fall eight notes , i continue the second note in the same place the first stood , only with a different octave letter . and what more natural ? than for two octave notes ; which are so much the same , and have the same equivalent respect to all other notes , should stand in the same place ? and what more easie for the practicioner's eye to apprehend ? certainly 't is far more easie to be known , when the octave-note stands in the same place with the letter prefixt , than when he must count three lines , and three spaces from the first note , where ( according to the observer's way ) its-octave must have been placed . and if he contrive a thousand canons , he can bring me to no other absurdity than these two natural requisites , the conveniency whereof i think more self-evident than any thing in the guidonian scale . p. . for the ten last pages which contained only a canon to shew the necessity of that , which might better be done otherwise . the observer may now be pleased once more to observe , that , as by the postulata in the diagram , we comprehend any part of musick which can be assigned ; so by the assistance which the leiger-lines afford us , it may done without any great incoustancy to the letters of our beloved octaves . for , we may ascend six notes above our octave , viz. from f fa ut , to d la sol re , and descend four from gam ut to double d sol re , without altering the letter ; as you may see in the third figure of the diagram , where every five lines are made capable of two entire octaves . that any man may satisfie himself ( however our observer would gull his implicite readers ) our method is , not only most facile , but also agreeable to musick of the greatest compass ; for in the lute and organ which require two systemes of lines , we have before us as many lines and spaces as will contain four entire diapasons , more notes than are in the whole scale of gamut . if he still grumbles that scholars can't tell which is a contratenor , or lower mean , or the like ; for them that can't understand the nature of the thing , let there be writ over them , this is a cock , and that is a bull ; which i take to be an easier remedy than to learn all the variety of old cliffs . and about the consinement of mi , with the avoiding regular flats and sharps , i have already delivered my judgment in the description of my whirlegig , which i shall not now repeat . p. ● . the next thing which he confutes , is my argument , for proving the hard names of the gam ut useless , viz. that they cannot declare any note to be in a different octave , because those names are not different in every octave . this is false ( saith the observer ) for the cliffs and scale distinguish them , by capital , single , and double italick letters . very good ! the cliffs distinguish them , and therefore we must learn without book , those names which do not distinguish them . sir , 't is as excellently argued as if the observer should prove that all men must wear different shoos , because they are distinguished by their faces . now to allay my hopes of the least success , he here insinuates a question , so very profound and unaccountable , that there be many hungry gapers , who remain seekers , and i ( saith he ) with them . the thing is this , that by beginning my octave with g , i contradict that classical horn-book he learn'd , which began ( when he was a school-boy with great a. now sir , though this was haled in , only for an opportunity to shew his education ; yet rather than my worthy neighbour shall suffer for his suggestion of the dominical letter , i will insert as much as i know of the matter . the reason why i began my octave with g , was , because the general practice of musicians is so to do : which i profess'd never to contradict , but when there were very good advantages to be gained thereby . ( ess p . ) especially mine being a circular way , it was no matter where i began , so long as the letters went round in their own order . but the original i suppose was this , that guido in the year . recovering musick out of its dark ruins , ( which those unhappy times had caus'd ) compil'd that scale which we are now discoursing about : so that the assignment of the alphabetical letters being altogether in his power , he began the tamut with the first great letter of his own name , that he might perpetuate his memory to posterity . which ( if we considet the nature of the thing ) will appear very reasonable ; for though g have the first sound assigned to it , yet a is the first musical interval ; there being nothing of musick , without comparing two sounds together ; that g is in truth only the term from which the sound a arises , as f to g , &c. which may be easily perceived , by the circle in the diagram . i was once tempted to think , that g had been imposed by the greeks themselves , because of its sound and figure in which 't is written ; that they having assign'd the letters to the notes ; as , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which was a long-time their lowest note ; did , when they added the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , impose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to that , because they would not alter their former assignation . but then Γ being the third letter of their alphabet , and not the seventh as in ours , could no way suit the nature and designes of their musick . p. , . the next business is to shew that other design of the Γ am ut words ( for he will not now assert them to demonstrate the place of mi , to which purpose i had prov'd them insufficient ) , they consist of syllables purposely chosen as most proper for opening the mouth , and putting fo●th the voice , &c. though there is nothing more known , than that guido took them accidentally out of the hymn for the service of st. john baptist : and if dum queant laxis had begun that hymn , then the very dum would have been that widening syllable to have open'd the mouth for the first grave tone . but to consider them ; first of all comes the incomparable ut ; which if i try , abruptly forces my tongue against the roof of my mouth , ( as he describes an inconvenient syllable ) but i don't know how 't is with the observer ; perhaps his tongue is hung with the wrong side upward . these ( ut and re ) though some have laid them aside , yet some ( says he ) have not . but i must confess , i hardly know them used by any , but the north-country wagoners , neither do they use them as good to put forth their voice , but to stop their horses . foreigners do indeed still use some fictitious words composed of them , but they are so sensible , how unfit ours are for to express the nature of musick , that they have alter'd the composure , and writ f ut fa , g re sol ut , a mi lare , &c. according to gassendus . mersennus , and others . but he says , it is not the name , but the thing he contends for ; and therefore i would have these insignificant hard names laid aside , that we might the sooner come to the enjoyment of the thing it self . p some unknown misfortune having spoiled our observer's eyes ; he is now resolved for the future to be guided by his seeing ▪ feeling , hearing , and understanding nostrils , which is a most excellent expression to discover a further advancement of his learning : for had he not been promoted from the foresaid hornbook to his accidence , he could never have known those enlightning epithets of a noun substantive . and the first thing his united senses and understanding discover , is ▪ that i begin to learn the monosyllables from an hemitone : strange ! composition begin or end with half a base ! something must be said , though i have often told him , that those syllables are not learn'd for any a●ry pleasantness in themselves , but as rudiments , whereby we may distinguish notes and half notes , both single and united , in greater intervals . for which purpose , there is good reason to think they would be the more serviceable by how much they had the less of ▪ airiness in them ; they would thereby less affect the fancy , but make a much deeper impression upon the judgment , when those notes must be pick'd out of the book by the understanding ; which if they were placed according to his compos'd order , would flow forth like some common tune from an aery apprehension . wherefore it seems rational , not only to begin at mi or fa , but at any radius of the circle , that the voice may set loose , and sing an half note when it pleases , with a flat third , or sharp seventh , or whatsoever comes to pass in the diatonick scale : and this will easily be done , if we begin at each note , and sing the cycle of an octave . in doing of which , it would be very advantagious to sing fa more broad ( like the germans ) that it may naturally form the mouth to a flatter sound than la , which is composed of the same vowel , but is pronounced a whole note . but all of a sudden , our observer is grown so exceeding jovial and merry , one would wonder what happy occurrence had so revived the cockles of his heart ; nay , and lest the extasie should overcome his belief , he says , he is as sure on 't as two two-pences make a groat . well , the joy is this ! madam mi is gone a rambling out of her apartment , and turn'd quean . and as sure as four two-pences make two-groats , let her ramble into all the apartments about town ▪ she shall never want a gentleman-usher so long as the observer continues able to man her . but hear , o ye pupils ! i have reported , you are obliged to learn the distances backwards and forwards . in this ( the observer says ) i am so horribly ●out , that 't is impossible for any flesh to sing , play , or compose without it . this i said , and this the observer says with an impossibility it should be otherwise : so that there is no difference betwixt us , but only he is resolved that i shall be horribly out , though i say the same thing he does . for without doubt a man must be able to count his distances : but the question here is , which is the most difficult or easie way , and which of these two ways is to be chosen and used . p. . the observer can no longer conceal his resentments against any propagating the knowledg of musick ; and because i have but transcribed the page of mr. simpson's compendium ( where he carefully assists the invention , and provides against the lapses of young beginners ) , the observer says , i abuse that person whose memory is precious among good and knowing men . whom indeed i greatly honour , for that double accomplishment of his exemplary life , as well as excellent skill ; and know nothing more necessary , than to commend the former to my observer's imitation ; who would not have had him stained his credit by instructing novices ; which was his crime to do , and my abuse to take notice of . however , i shall still dare to assert , that because the chords in different cliffs were intricate to discern , therefore he interposed the figures ; which are needless , according to my contrivance of octaves , where all notes are situated , in all parts , the same . and though some men may , by long custom and experience , be excused from that trouble ; yet even their apprehension would be much more quick and clear , if they always proceeded in the same united method . but should it not , i have as much as i intended , in the place he cites , viz. that it would be very advantagious for young composers ; which is evident , if it may but be granted , that what remains always the same , is much easier to be known , than what appears in many different positions ; as the notes do according to him , where in every part they are different , and have a different cliff to distinguish them and this is as much to the purpose to perswade a beginner to learn my way , as ( to use his own comparison ) if a mother should teach her child , that a great black b stands for block-head . and so i leave him and his little four-legg'd school-fellow together at their books , one a thumbing , and the other a gnawing them . p. . at length he comes to consider the applying my essay to instrumental-musick . and here 't is worth the while to read over the paragraph , that you may see how he holds his foot in his hand , without being able to determine which way he should take . wherefore he once resolves , that i do not understand the french musick ; that i mistake their placing g in the lower line , which is only for dancing . and indeed , if this was not a mistake enough to make me ridiculous to the whole world , the observer writ his book to little purpose . o hold my sides ! that ever fellow should write an essay , and mistake toes for fingers ! think that intended for the hand , which was only contriv'd for the policy and government of the foot ! certainly never any man , but he whose brains were sunk into his heels , would ever like this mad dancing method . and let this be resolv'd upon as the answer for the violin , though he thinks it fit to strengthen it with one period more ; that though the french musicians have thus debauch'd their treble-musick to dancing ( as i think our observer hath done much worse to ribaldry ) ; yet all other parts they write as we , and the rest of the musical world . and 't was well for me this drop'd from him , or else he had prov'd my whole invention to have been an hundred years old . now , sir , let us caress the loving kindness of our observer , who bethinking the storms and hazards of the sea , will out of his meer goodness contradict himself , that he may save as the labour of a voyage into 〈◊〉 . ●or that which he just now asserted ●o be done there only for dancing , has also ( as he says ) been done at home by dr. tavernor and his contemporaries , so long ago as the very , very time of king henry the th . and sir , i am apt to think , that all those were not dancing-masters , and composers only for the cat and fidle . wherefore if this won't do , he will revenge himself with such a piece of rusty malice , that my reputation must needs fester , gangren , and be quite cut off after it ; for he can produce their compositions with that very individual g in the very same line , where i would make the world believe , i invented it . and this cannot but please him , for so long as an impertinent scholar , a starter of questions , a nibler at solutions , did not invent it , 't is no matter who did ; all 's well , and so well , that i believe my observer can for the future produce some composition in some cliff , in some king's reign or other , that has any letter of his rational alphabet in the lowest line . but how little this is to the purpose , any one may perceive , who considers my design was the perpetual fixing the same letters always in the same lines and spaces , whatsoever they were , though i was more willing to place g in the lower line because it was so before in the base , and conveniency had perswaded many to use it in the treble . so that this is the invention i pretend to , the dividing of musical orthography into octaves , ( which was before parted into clis●s of five notes distance ) that all the notes , in all parts , may stand in the same places , to save the trouble of learning their perplexed variations ; and to give every scholar a propriety in all sorts of musick , that he may play from the writing of any instrument , as if it were his own ; which i have experienc'd before several judicious persons , by playing mutually from the same common character , either upon the lute or harpsechord . and this very thing which our observer so abominates , i do undertake , he shall ( for one pint of wine ) confess reasonable to be done . for if one that has always learn'd in g sol re ut cliff , should beg a dispensation to transcribe some of mr. playford's psalms from the unusual c sol fa ut , into his own domestick g ; that reduction of cliffs ( as they call it ) , would without doubt be granted , upon such a valuable consideration . now all the difference betwixt their reduction of cliffs and my essay , is , that my notes are always ready reduced , and found in the same order , which they are put to the trouble of reducing upon every new occasion ; and they grant it to be done , only to help the infirmities of learners , which i arrogantly deduce from the principles of musick . p. . next comes madam viol : for our observer will needs have her a distressed lady , and prosesses himself able to play nothing , but john come kiss me now ; and if she turn away her head , fortune my foe . for my part , i cannot help his inclinations ; if he should fall in love with the top of a bedstaff ; 't is nothing to me . but though he is not able to enlarge his captivated fancy above those two amorous ayres ; yet i know many persons of good repute , that play excellent suits of lessons , upon this very same ridiculous , plausible , healthy , sickly tuning , as he is pleased to put a parcel of words and likenesses together . and i must tel him , that those foresaid persons play every suit entire of lessons upon the same key ( as i suppose also the observer does upon every instrument but the viol , where he is put beside his byass by the coy lady ) so that there is no need of tuning the strings up and down , as he would make his children and underlings believe . but o sad misfortune , in so great an adventure ! the lady is both pinnion'd and fetter'd . before , she had a fair liberty ; now , she is confined to one. just as if she had all on a sudded married , become honest , and shut the observer out of doors . o sad misfortune indeed ! heretofore you might play upon all keys alike , ( i. e. ) well upon none : for the strings were all ( except one ) tuned fourths asunder ; and whenever struck open , made a horrible discord and jumble . whereas in the consort-lyra tuning propos'd , we have the use of those two most eminent keys g and d ; in the former whereof you may naturally have a greater in the later a lesser third , without so much as the least altering any one string ; which conspiring harmony will ( as i said ) with an unstopt freedom , eccho forth at the end of every lesson , that you may , at the same time , enjoy the melody of the lyra , as well as the intelligence of notes . but i wonder our observer , who never durst so much as pretend to the viol , should so boldly fall upon our publisher , whom he acknowledges a profess'd violist , and whom he may justly reverence , both for his years and knowledg . but attend his words : 't is strange that he should be ignorant of the impossibility , &c. and i think so too , if there had been any : we may assure our selves , that a master of so long experience would never have commended impossibilities to the world . well! 't is no matter for that : here 's an argument , sir , commands attention . the example he sets down was made for children , therefore ( it seems ) the universal character can reach no farther . though this argument had one leg in the parenthesis , and t'other out ; yet i am resolv'd it shall not escape our consideration . but now , sir , we have taken care the argument do not escape us ; our next business is to consider , how we shall escape the argument . i first thought to deny the antecedent , because few men play a greater compass than was contained in that lesson ; but then doubting that cogent illative ( it seems ) , i thought the consequence might be a little lame , especially considering the observer's foresaid hornbook , in which are contain'd those very same letters which constitute the most learned books in the world. which being taken notice of , may save us from any such sudden violent conclusion , as he would make ; that because the rudiments of octaves are advantagious to young beginners , therefore ever after they must be useless , and an hindrance . the next thing is an appendix to his objection le grand , which i have answered in a particular scheme , that demonstrates his way incumbred with five times the same inconveniency . only at the end of it , he entails a small surmise of his own : for whereas i never required or used more than one ascititious line over or under the five ; he will have a speedy commission for the raising of three , four , or more ; as though he was in all haste making a ladder to climb the three-square place of preferment . but at last finding he had made only a little wrangle upon the viol , and being angry the stationer had already sold more of my essays , than his durst venture to print observations upon them ; he humbly supposes the author has bought them all himself . well said colonel coker ! but though the author never bought any of his own books , yet he has several of the observers and given them to his friends , that they might see what sort of arguments th●● great opposer is forced to use , and how exceeding angry he is , by how much he has the less to say . p. ● . rattle bladder rattle . now co●● harps●chord , virginals , organs ; which the observer asserts to be compleat consort if rightly managed . and therefore 't was , sir , i suppose the little gentleman - jack an-apes allowed them two staves of lines , which contain four whole octaves and they are able to fill any blew-bladder in the world . but this is only a little proverbialraillery of the observer's : we will therefore consider the nature of those instruments . and here i must lay down , that except a man hath been given very much to span farthing , he never embraces above eight notes at a time with one hand , and they may be found in less than the same number of lines , which the observer requires . though by the way i must mention the difference ; that sometime his lines and spaces signifie one thing , and sometimes another ; and each hand pester'd with a distracting-difference ; in mine , they are both and ever the same . ay! but good sir ( says the observer ) , you can't carry on your lesson perhaps , without the hopping and skipping of your humble servants bmt upon all occasions . now for the honest bmt , i have commanded them to signifie fopdoodles , fools-caps , saucinesses , or any thing else the observer pleases to have them , except bawdry ; and that , i will in no wise allow them to signifie : which if ever out of compliance with the observer , i should be perswaded to ; yet i charge them that they signifie so only in his own private meditations . here , sir , i must acquaint you in favour of the foresaid honest bmt , that t' other day i met with a curious pair of phanatical harpsechords made by that arch heretick charles haward , which were ready cut out into octaves , ( as i am also told he abusively contrives all his ) in so much that by the least hint of bmt , all the notes were easily found , as lying in the same posture , in every one of their octaves . and that , sir , with this advantage , that so soon as the scholar had learn'd one hand , he understood them both , because the position of the notes were for both the same . i must confess that by reason of so great a distance , i have not yet received my letters from rome and vienna , that i cannot positively assert what signior ●roscobaldi , or froberger have done ; but 't is generally believed that even their organs are disposed after the same heretical manner . but for monsieur samboneer , as being not so far from home , i am fully assured his harpsechord did comply with the octavian bmt ; insomuch that he could never be perswaded in all his life to put a sharp between b and c , or e and f ; but just , in the same position as our whirlegig , he runs round with an half-note , and three whole ones ; with another half-note , and two whole ones ; and then the first circulating half-note again . what a base fellow was this monsieur samboneer ? i am confident this monsieur samboneer shall never agen be put into the catalogue of europaean organists , when the observer next musters them , to give me battle ; which alas ! sir , how should a feeble fssayer withstand , especially when dr. bull is plac'd in the front . yet this the fssayer resolves to assert , and then betake himself to his heels , that these foresaid great men never made any thing in their lives , but might be writ with a clear facility according to the impossible fssay . but perhaps you may look upon this only as a bold assertion ; i must therefore acquaint you , that my stationer , to vindicate us from mr. thetcher's childish lessons ( as the observer calls them ) does intend this long vacation to print one of the best and most difficult suits of lessons he can meet with , according to our contradictory fssay . well , but for all this , the observer knows a thing will do my business for me ; and 't is a thing , sir , so pertinent to the matter in hand , that it requires your serious consideration ; the essayer is naturally of a rubical complexion , and was it ever known that a man of a rubical complexion ever writ good essays ? now , sir , you see what a malicious caviller he is , a vile fellow , to endeavour to spoil my marriage ! perhaps my mistress might never have seen it ; for love ( the poets say ) is blind : or else she might have taken it for a modest blush , but to the very abyss of envy , he tells all the world , i am not capable of blushing . what shall i do in this case ? if i quote dr. lower de sanguine , who says , such persons , by that errancy of the blood , have a greater confluence of spirits to the brains , and therefore may be capable of writing essays ; perhaps he 'l contemn him as too much a scholar , and too little a musician . wherefore to save a further trouble , he may e'en reflect upon himself , and he 'l find good reason to pardon me , since nature is much more excusable , than vice . p. . comes our imperial lute ; in which the observer hath no more reason to be positive , than if he had been treating of the simick or epigonium ; yet thus he enters , alas poor dumb thing ! all that innate sweetness and excellency the essayer talks of , is but as absolute a tale of a tub as ever wanted bottom . nay sir , and this bottom he most maliciously explains to be the very substantial bottom of truth : which is in plain terms to call it a sounder , a flam , or a cokerisin , or whatsoever else he pleases to call it , when he begins his calling agen . now who could expect the poor dumb lute should receive any kind usage from an observer that begins so terribly ? but let us be content , and we shall hear more presently ; for he will open his budget , and draw you forth , that true excellency which is peculiarly hers , which is the making a compleat consort with the stop of one hand only , which he , ( the essayer ) notwithstanding his gay commendations , has absolutely rob'd her of . o brave lute ! 't was well for thee thou was not dead before the observer was born , and without doubt this new reveal'd excellency shall keep thee alive for ever for the future . we will therefore a little understand this treasure of excellency . a lutinist hath commonly upon his left hand four fingers ; all these four are upon great and eminent occasions made to stop a compleat consort . hold it fast , here 's the excellency , which i doubt is something in danger . for the harpsechord pretends to stop twice as many notes with both hands , whilst thou poor dumb thing can use but one hand for that purpose , and the thumb too only becomes an insignificant supporter . nay ▪ and this prating harpsechord will pretend to stop and strike these notes with the same hand , at the same time ▪ which the poor dumb lute cannot do ; but making a compleat consort with the stop of one hand only , remains a poor dumb thing , till 't is struck with the other hand ; and then it becomes a speaking thing , like its imitating gittar , or like the viol or violin : but then , sir , what think you of the dulcimer , which is a speaking thing ▪ without ever being a stopt dumb thing at all ? and if i don't think the dazling glory of this new reveal'd excellency sufficient to confound all my assignment of the notes to the lute , instead of the tableture , and those incomparable advantages , which i shew'd to be their consequence ( and he hath not the least impeach'd ) ; then must it be imputed to my blind stupidity in not perceiving the worth of a new reveal'd excellency . now , sir , the essayer having a mind to be cross , i 'le tell you what he says . that though the observer did prove the harpsechord and organ to be something a greater compass than the lute ▪ and the viol or violin to humour a loud or soft note ▪ which the for●●r were not capable of , the sagbuts and cornets to continue a sound : yet he did not prove , that those excellencies which were separately the credit of other instruments , were not here united into one , to consummate the perfection of the lute : which was my assertion from those various passions it does excite ( essay p. . ) . nay , and that he may be altogether as ill-natur'd as the observer , he suspects that newreveal'd excellency to be only a treacherous discovery of its imperfection . p. . whatsoever the lute gets by the shift , 't is clear the master 's utterly undone . for by my happening upon the pitiful unmasterly arrons gigue , for an example to shew the sailing or rising of an octave , the two notes remaining in the same place with a different letter ( as comes to pass twice in that lesson ) . therefore all people must conclude that same arrons gigue to be the supreamest master-piece which ever the eminent mr. rogers plaid or composed for the lute ; and so mr. rogers is abused and undone . well , sir , but how if people won't conclude so ? then i suppose 't is no abuse , and the observer concludeth nothing to his purpose . but i know something a little more to my purpose ; that this very eminent mr. john rogers can assure the observer , or any man else , that he hath seen a suit of lessons excellent and difficult beyond exception ▪ upon that pleasant tuning proposed in the essay , writ according to the universal character , and from thence play'd upon the lute . which looks a little like that paltry argument whereby zeno confuted the philosopher , that there might be such a thing as motion . thus , sir ▪ i abused mr. rogers , abused the precious memory of mr. simpson : nay , in the very first line of his book , the observer lays down ▪ that the whole universal character was abusiveness in the abstract : but i know one lusty abuse in the concrete ▪ for which i would be loath to exchange all the abuses in my book . that unparallel'd assront committed by the observer in his dedication ; where he makes those gentlemen who are employed in the sacred service of his majesty's chappel , to be patrons of his ribaldry and railing ; whereby he has so far libel'd their reputations , as to make the world b●●●●ve th●se addresses to be most acceptable to them , which were presented in the basest language . certainly it had been more proper for him when he found his stomach so foul , and his gall to overflow , rather to have called for his bason to ease himself , than his ink horn to make a present to persons of such place and ingenuity . and indeed nothing could have abated that true respect i bear for any person that pretends the least service to their s. majesties , but that necessity which now lies upon me in replying to those observations in which the author has so basely abused , not so much me , as his own royal fellow-servants . p. . that which remains , is only a blind business of translating a greek alstedius ; which i must confess not to understand , no more than our observer . does he mean out of greek , or into greek ? neither of which has ever been done yet , that i ken off ; therefore riddle my riddle . and then for that stinking story that savours of some old onion-like fornicator , with his gray-head and green-tail ; i dismiss it as altogether unanswerable . but since the observer hath been so liberal as to bestow two copies of verses upon me , i will borrow one to re-pay him , out of that excellent epigrammatist , val. martial , lib. . epigr. . mentiris juvenem tinctis , lentine capillis tam subitò corvus , qui modo cygnus eras . non omnes fallis , scit te proserpina canum , personam capiti detrahat illa tuo . and therefore how unbecoming such things are , will be an easie consequence ; which if i had the least inclination to poetry , i would translate ; but at present i shall remit the observer to his friend i philips for construction . p. . to conclude ( says he ) , the experience of those young men ( children , long since his majesty's happy restauration ) who have attained to that eminency in musick by our scale ▪ will convince him , there is no necessity of taking up a man's whole life in the drudgery of that science . but sir , i 'le e'en resolve for once , as the observer resolves , that i won't be convinc'd . for these excellent young men before his majesty's happy return , did ( many of them ) perfectly understand the rudiments of musick ; and have for these dozen years since , been constantly encouraged by the favours of a gracious prince's court , assisted by the lively instructions of the most excellent masters , but much more by their own natural ingenies , in that continual employment to which they had dedicated themselves : so that i will not be convinc'd , however these persons are indeed excellent and incomparable , that therefore musick hath been always of very easie attainment to such as take it up only for a recreation or pleasure ; or that there is no drudgery in the principles of this science ; which was my assertion , and ought to have been his consequence , if he would have made his very concluding conclusion any thing to the purpose . there is one scrap of his argument still behind . these gentlemen attained to that eminency in musick by our scale . therefore , sir , i suppose this scale is the causa sine quâ non , of their eminency ▪ 't were pity but this scale was cut in aablaster , and shew'd amongst the tombs . but i am apt to think , they came no more to be eminent for having learn'd this scale , than the macedonian conquered the eastern world , because his name was alexander ; or that any man whose name is alexander , is now able to conquer the world : though 't is probable , that dreadful name is still more like to make the asiaticks run , than the uncouth words of the gamut are to inspire a man with musick . well , sir , i have staid so long upon this argument , till i find it has at last calv'd a parenthesis , and this parenthesis takes after its dam , and is argumentative too . this scale is the only universal character , by which all people , all nations , and religions converse . now , sir , if it were not for the abusiveness of the thing , experiment ; i would lay a suit of lessons of the eminent mr. john rogers , in the character he plays them , before the observer , to be performed upon the organs . but that 's , alas , too abusive . 't is long since that the lute hath abandon'd the difficulties of the scale , and so lost the observer's favour and knowledg . but , sir , if all men learn the gamut , then the gamut is an universal thing , and all men have the gamut . so if all the nations of europe learn abc ▪ &c. then the alphabet is an universal thing ; and so all the nations in europe have abc , &c. and so , and so 't is impossible to prove , that there ever was any confusion at babel , or need of any present agreement , because the rudiments of all nations are the same both for their languages and musick . now i give the world joy of this happy agreement ; for i profess 't was the first time i was well satisfi'd in it . though i still doubt , that the different nations spell various syllables with those universal letters , and have got a confounded trick , to call the same thing by different names , that i can't for my life understand them , unless i put my self to the trouble of learning them all without book . and i am also a little doubtful , that the musicians do take out of their universal scale five different lines for every different part , and so the notes stand in different places , that though i should know their scituation in the mean , yet they would all give me the slip , when i came either to the base or treble . so that all the universality the observer can pretend to , is , that all the world is troubled with universal variations . let us consider , all men hitherto play in f fa ut cliff for the base therefore f fa ut cliff is an universal character ; all men play in c sol fa ut for the mean , therefore c sol fa ut cliff is an universal character , exactly the same ; as , because all english or french-men speak english or french , whether they be in europe or america , therefore english and french are two universal characters . but how absurdly he fetters a different universal character to each particular part of musick , is apparent to any that understand the nature of the thing . as though 't was no matter how great the difference and confusion were , so long as they were universal , and all men agreed them to be universal . which is one of the most slippery quirks i ever met with in my life , to prove , that an universal difference would make an universal character , as well as an universal agreement . that noble design of reconcilin languages , may something discover our intentions , where to all nations one thing must have only one and the same character ; that when any person of what speech soever sees it , he may yet apprehend what is intended thereby , though each man will still call it after the custom of his own countrey . thus if by one harmonious writing we place the notes of every octave and part in the same scituation , each voice and instrument will have a propriety therein ; and by being able to play or sing any one part , we shall be able to play or sing in all parts , as you may see more at large in my essay . and there is very good reason it should be so : for as a tune is the same tune , whether sung in base , mean , or treble ; so in each of them the notes should be all placed upon the same lines and spaces . having now made some particular return to every argument or pretence i could find in each page of the observations , i can't but think how he 'le wince and fling at mathematicks for the future , how he 'le laugh at the nature and reasons of the thing . but the theory and practise of musick are fastned together by so strong a chain of consequences , that i would advise him to consider these following propositions , before he make himself ridiculous . the five propositions . i. that musick consists in proportions , and is subject to arithmetical laws . which all learned musicians in all ages of the would have asserted . ii. that the first and most natural division of musick is into octaves , where the notes and half-notes always circulate in the same order : as is demonstrated by practical experience as well as speculative . iii. that the rudiments of learning musick ought to be agreeable to the nature of the science . wherefore we cast away those insignificant hard words of the gamut , which proceed according to sixths and fourths , retaining only the circular alphabetical letters for every octave , and the monosyllables mi , fa , sol , la , to signifie the proportions . iv. that 't is most easie , as well as most natural ▪ by one perpetual constancy , to place the same notes of every octave , in the same lines and spaces , that the numerous variations of cliffs may be avoided . v. that since in this one universal character of octaves ▪ we may comprehend all parts of musick , 't is needless to engage in those difficulties which encrease our trouble , and confine our knowledg to a lesser compass . i have exposed these propositions to the observer's consideration , out of a grateful requital , because he so generously confess'd the one objection upon which he refused my whole book ; & if he can but confute these pragmatical propositions , i wil be so well satisfied , that he shall not need to answer one word of my vindication besides . but i confess , i do not yet think my self confuted , by his alledging an absurdity , which is five times more considerable his own way ; or by shewing that i make use of two natural phoenomena of musick ; which is all , with a little scurrilous raillery , he pretends to oppose against my whole essay ; where in the contents i had sum'd up so many advantages , which he could not in the least deny to be consequents of it . had i , sir , sooner understood what thoughts the sober and ingenious part of the world entertain'd concerning the observations , i should not have troubled you to read , nor my self to write a vindication from them ; which i have lately received a much better account of from a more honourable hand , and beg your permission to adjoin it . i am , june . . sir , your most humble and most obliged servant , tho : salmon . finis . to mr. t. s. sir , having received considerable advantages from your musical essay , &c. i was much concern'd to see so happy a design so scurrilously traduced . but the abusiveness of the language sufficiently bespeaks his spite to your person , rather than any sober dislike of your essay ; that it is plain his design was not to return an answer , but a libel ; and when he had bark'd , and grin'd , and shew'd his teeth , his fear kept him at a distance , so that though he wrote an answer , yet was afraid to meddle with the controversie . but your credit is too sacred to be be-spatter'd by all his ribaldry ; and by throwing dirt at a person of so unblemish'd fame , he only dirty's his own fingers . i hope you will laugh at , and contemn his malice , and by no means think him worthy a reply . i am confident , there are few that have read both , that expect one ; i am sure they cannot , if they understand either . and as for tapsters and drawers , the great admirers of your worthy adversary ( who think , he hath utterly bafled all your musical essays , out of hudibras and the accidence ) you need not much care for satisfying them ; especially since there is no question , but that a man of an ordinary capacity might so improve himself in one weeks time at billingsgate , as to answer sufficiently his most substantial objections . and , really , some of it is so nasty , that a modest man would be afraid to touch it with a pair of tongs ; and it s nothing but use that hath made himself not ashamed of it ; you may see the same page divided betwixt scripture and ribaldry ; lust got into paradise , and the goat once more upon the sacred altar , as if he had meant to droll religion out of the world , and revive the worship of cotytto's temple . his th page hath words so nasty , one would have thought he had spoken through a clyster-pipe , and like the apocryphal beast , esdr. . . the voice had not come out of his head , but the midst of his body . as for his whole book , he himself confesseth , p. . one third part of it to be nothing to the purpose : and of the poor thirteen leaves that remain , i find upon just account , that they are stuff'd with ii dull copies of verses , xxix merry proverbs , iii scraps of latine , iv sentences of scripture , a bawdy story , a sacred anthem , o bone jesu , &c. mixed in a general heap of nastiness . besides many pretty quiblets and smart rhithms , that come in as luckily , as if he would have cap'd verses with you . he scorns to have one period depend upon another , but will have every sentence set up for it self ; and truly the book is nothing but thrums and shreds , which being stitch'd together with blew thred , look like a taylor 's apron , or a fool 's coat . i find his very first sentence , line ( as well as many other ) to be such pitiful nonsense and false english , that i should have left him , as a very dunce , to the correction of the rod and ferula , had he not told me in the next page , that he understood the degrees of comparison ; yea , and that moreover he had once learn'd the syntax ; and again , p. . that he happily remembred the definition of a noun , to be either seen , felt , heard , or understood : which 't is strange he should pretend to , and yet take falsity , insignificancy , and contradictory , for three noun substantives , p. . which truly may well be , since musick is the only thing , where he can do more than pretend ; though herein his objections are so insignificant , that , were it not for that genuine malice , wherewith he always writes , i should have thought you had hired him to have credited your essay . some of his objections only shew the natural advantages which musick obtains by your design ; others are so contradictory , that they fall together by the ears among themselves , like the fighting-race of cadmus's serpent's teeth ; and you need only look on , for they naturally destroy one another . and really , a short expectation is requisite , and will be sufficient : for , though i scarce know any new thing ever proposed , but it always met with some angry antagonist ; yet the true nature of the thing , and the greatest conveniency , have , in spite of all opposition , at last gain'd a general acceptance . one that has had but a small insight into musick , may easily perceive , how , ever since the days of guido , 't is continually altering into a greater ease , as well as excellency . musicians have not long cast off those perplexed distinctions of mood , time , and prolation , the ligatures of the long notes , with the strict observance which way they wagged their tails ; and many more troubles they are now unwilling to undergo , which you may read more of in mr. morley . but i remember particularly in his second part , p. , he gives a more perspicuous way of pricking canon : and this ( saith he ) i thought good to shew you , not for any curiosity which is in it , but the easiness and commodity which it hath ; because it is better than to prick so , as to make one sit five or six hours beating his brains to find out the following part . but such hath been our manner in many things heretofore , to do things blindly , and to trouble the wits of practitioners . as i know musicians are now more ingenious than those resolute blades whom the good old man had just cause to be angry at ; so i do not know of any persian statute that has be'n since made to forbid them to accept of any thing that shall be proposed for the ease and advancement of musick , which is the present controversie . i am a little more concern'd in that doughty objection , where he destroys your reputation in musick , because you once studied physick . pretty subtle ! packolet's horse had a wooden peg in his head , therefore m. l. must needs have a crack in the place where the peg should have been . i appeal to any sober man , whether this be not as rational a conclusion , as can be drawn from the other in disgrace of your book . for had your adversary read plato , or athenaeus , porphyrie , or jamblious , the excellent physician celsus , or amongst the moderns , paracelsus , &c. he would have met with those that studied musick upon the very account of curing diseases ; and that both consist in making and producing harmony . he might have remembred ( if he had ever known it ) that the ancients were so sensible of this , as to make the one god apollo , patron of both the sciences . but alas ! don quixot and riblais have wrote nothing of the subject , and therefore i hope you will pardon the mistake . so that in good earnest , had this author any such learned design , as i have met with in a pamphlet that was wrote in our late warrs , where the author ingenuously confessed , that he wrote that only to make the number of his books just two-dozen ; or else had he designed to have begg'd the pity of the world , by discovering his nastiness and ignorance , as beggars expose their ulcers to raise compassion ; i say , had either of these been his reason , i should have applauded his design : but for a man , when he raves , to think himself serious and rational ; nay , and to be angry with every body else , that will not think so too , is certainly the grand distemper of bedlam , and too plainly shews , that the poor man wants trepaning in the peg-place . but i 'le tell you what is a great design of his , and which most about london are sensible of , that he takes upon him to be a general confounder of all musical undertakings ; in so much as he never wrote any thing in his life , but in contradiction to some other men , who would fain have known something as well as he ; but he resolves they sha'n't , and therefore whoever pretends , must justly suffer . if any man speak of the theory of musick , have at him ! in his epistle to mr. simpson's compend . he is one of our new lights ( of which this age hath been monstrous fruitful ) . he is a speculator how many hairs-breadths will reach from the top of paul's steeple to the center of a full-moon ; and demonstrate , that the thousandth part of a minute after , there will be so many thousand more hairs necessary , by reason of the earth's or moon 's motion . and hereby he thinks that he has so undone all mathematicks , as no gentleman will ever after study a science which is so despised and droll'd upon . and for practical musicians , he is also in as great a rage at them too , when ever they lye in his way ; witness his little consort , and that fury he was in for his unfortunate musick , april . . where he is so severe upon those gentlemen that were performers of it ( however it suited best with his occasions to commend them in his book against you ) , that he plainly tells them in his printed vindication , that it was not his business to find eyes , ears , or honesty , for any ; or to answer for other mens faults : and then roundly concludes ; in fine , this vindication offers at no more , than denying those to be judges in science , who are ignorant of its principles . thus the dictator . so that whether speculative , or practical , no man must judg but himself ; though how unfit he is to judg of the nature of musick , who understands nothing of a proportion wherein it consists , i leave even himself to judg . i must again renew my entreaties , that since all sorts of persons have hitherto despised his raillery , you would not give him occasion to be proud of an answer ; or have to do with a person who is of such a defiling fancy , that can turn the bare letters of the alphabet into bawdery , and make the most obliging page in your book to be an abuse of some deceased patriot . i have read a story of agamemnon , that he kept his ( otherwise lewd ) queen chast for ten years together , only by the graveness of the odes , he enjoyn'd her to sing and play till he return'd . i have nothing to entreat of your antagonist , but that he would compose some such odes for his own use ; and that you would let him alone in that most necessary employment , since that all persons are satisfied , his design has ever been to discourage musick , yours to advance it . norwich , may . . your friend and servant , n. e. notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a -e [ here insert the diagram . ] a discourse of gravity and gravitation, grounded on experimental observations, presented to the royal society, november . by john wallis ... wallis, john, - . approx. kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from -bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : - (eebo-tcp phase ). a wing w estc r ocm this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons . universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase , no. a ) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set ) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, - ; : ) a discourse of gravity and gravitation, grounded on experimental observations, presented to the royal society, november . by john wallis ... wallis, john, - . royal society (great britain) [ ], p. printed for john martyn ..., london : . reproduction of original in huntington library. created by converting tcp files to tei p using tcp tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between and available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the , texts created during phase of the project have been released into the public domain as of january . anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. % (or pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf- unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p , characters represented either as utf- unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng gravity -- early works to . gravitation -- early works to . physics -- early works to . - tcp assigned for keying and markup - spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images - judith siefring sampled and proofread - judith siefring text and markup reviewed and edited - pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion at a meeting of the council of the royal society , ianuary . / . ordered , that a discourse , made before the royal society , the th of november . by dr. john wallis , concerning gravity and gravitation , grounded on experimental observations , be printed by the printer of the royal society . brouncker , pres. r. s. a discourse of gravity and gravitation , grounded on experimental observations : presented to the royal society , november . . by john wallis , d. d. a member of that society . london , printed for john martyn , printer to the royal society , at the bell in st. pauls church-yard , . a discourse of gravity and gravitation , grounded on experimental observations , presented to the royal society , the th of november , . in compliance with the commands of this royal society , in order to the promoting of experimental philosophy , to present you a philosophical discourse , either grounded on , or leading to , experiments ; the subject i have chosen for this discourse , is that of gravity : the being and effects of which , is no otherwise known to us than by experience , or discourse grounded thereupon . the subject is copious , and therefore i must single out some few experiments out of a great many : and they shall be the most simple and unperplexed in their kind , that the inferences may be the more clear and perspicuous ; and such experiments onely , as are either commonly known , or have already been made before you , or may easily be , whensoever you please . i will not dispute the nature of gravity or gravitation , what or whence it is ; whether from a quality within , or a pressure from above , or a magnetick traction from below : but shall take for granted ( what every days experience testifies ) that there is , ( at least in this our sublunary world ) such a thing as gravity and gravitation ; whereby those we call heavy bodies , have a natural propension to move downwards ( towards the earth , or its center ) if not hindered by some more potent , or at least an equivalent , strength . this motion downward , we call descent ; the endeavour so to move , we call gravitation ; and the principle from whence this endeavor proceeds , we call gravity . and things are said to be more or less heavy , as they have more or less of gravity : which may be understood , either extensively , according to the quantity of it ; as when we say a pound is heavier than an ounce , though that be feathers , and this be lead : or intensively , according to the degree ; as when we say , that lead is heavier than cork , or quick-silver than water ; that is , gradually heavier , proportionably heavier ( bulk for bulk ) or ( as it is now wont to be called ) specifically heavier . i say , the endeavour thus to move , i call gravitation ; though by reason of some impediment , there be not any actual descent . ( and it is allowed me , by those from whom in some other things i differ , that not onely motus , but conatus ad motum , is properly gravitation . ) which i thought necessary thus to define , that i be not misunderstood in the sequel . but i add further , this endeavour of descent , implies an aversness to ascent , with equal force ; and that the one and the other are equally the effects of gravitation . this gravitation , or endeavour to descend , is one kind of strength ; and may be opposed not onely by a contrary gravitation , but by any opposite strength whatsoever ; whether by way of impediment onely , or of contrary force . for , though there be divers kinds of strength ; yet they are all thus far homogeneous , as to be compared each with other , as equal or unequal , greater or less , and that in any proportion . thus the gravitation of the scale a ( in fig. . ) may be opposed , or hindered of its effect , by a contrary gravitation at b , ( supposing all the tackle strong enough ; ) or by a force under it , which thrusts it up ; or by a force above it , which pulls it up , ( or doth at least endeavour so to do ; ) as , for instance , that of a mans hand . every of which , being contrary forces , if equal to that of gravitation at a , will stop its descent ; if less , they will retard it ; if greater , they will force it upwards : not by making it cease to gravitate ; but by defeating the effect of that gravitation . but it is opposed also by the strength and stiffness of the beam ; ( for if that either break or bend , a descends : ) and by the strength , though not the stiffness , of the strings that hold it , ( for if they either break or stretch , the weight will descend , at least in part ; ) or by the hardness , strength , and solidity of the floor or table on which it rests ; which , if strong enough , will support it ; or , if the medium be viscous , this viscosity ( which is a degree of solidity ) will at least retard its descent . all which do oppose it , not as contrary forces , but onely as bare impediments : which , if strong enough , do hinder the descent ; but , though more than so , do not thrust it up . but if the medium be supposed perfectly fluid , in every point , without any aversness to separation ; it may hinder , or retard the descent of a , by a contrary force , or contrary gravitation , ( it self also endeavouring a descent by its own gravity , or at least to preserve its station , against an ascent ; ) but not as a bare impediment from its solidity , firmness , or aversness from separation ; which is supposed to be none . it hath a resistance to motion , not , to separation . and of such heavy fluides , i intend principally to discourse , and of solid consistent bodies , onely with reference unto such . if it be objected , that there be no such perfectly fluid bodies ; but that those which we call fluides , are either made up of very fine , but disunited , atoms , ( each having its own shape and figure , though very small ) as the atomists suppose ; or at least in some degree unctuous and viscous : i will not dispute that point , as not now necessary ; but only express what it is i mean by fluid or liquid bodies ; and the nearer any thing comes to such a condition , the nearer it is to perfect fluidity . and where such viscosity is very little and undiscernable , we consider it as none at all . and even that which is , if it be not stronger than the incumbent weight can break , it doth not wholly hinder the descent , but onely retard it : the weight sinks , though not so fast . now , there is in all heavy bodies ( whether firm or fluid ) and in every part of them a prospensity , not onely to a direct descent , but ( if that cannot be obtained ) to an oblique descent , according to any declivity . ( for a river will run down-hill , and so will a bowl also ; and a sloping pole , if not supported , will fall obliquely . ) which i the rather note , because i find some to put a great stress on the lateral gravitation of fluides , as peculiar to them ; without taking notice , that the same is common to solides also : the difference being but this ; in fluides the parts be separable , but not in solides : but the tendencies are in both the same . now , of fluid bodies it is that i intend principally to speak . of which the first and great phoenomenon is this , that they will ( if undisturbed ) reduce themselves , by their own weight , to a level ; that is , to an horizontal plain , or what as to sense is such ; and will so continue , if either not pressed at all , or equally pressed on all parts . as if the surface , by any means , be undulous , as abab , ( in fig. . ) the prominences at a , will sink to fill up the cavities at b , till all come to the level of le. and this they will do , partly by spreading abroad , and flowing into those cavities as lower places : and partly ( the whole being fluid ) by pressing down what is under a , and pressing up what is under b ( in fig. . ) for though onely the former of these would happen in case all under le ( in fig. . ) were a firm solid surface , ( like as when water overflows the dry ground , and fills up all the furrows ; ) and onely the latter , in case such prominences ( whether one or more ) were contained within solid pipes , ( in fig. . ) so as that they could not flow laterally into the adjacent cavities : yet in the present case , where both occasions happen , both causes will operate . for nature doth not work by election , but ad ultimum virium , and all the ways it can , where one doth not oppose the other . and like as if a vessel have two holes , the one at the side , the other at the bottom ; the water will run out at both : so the prominences at a , being not hindred of either , will partly by lateral fluxion , partly by direct depression , fill up the cavities of b ( in fig. . ) it 's true , that a solid body , having opportunity of both , because ( by reason of the coherence of parts ) it can move but one way , will move that way only which is most declive : but a fluid body , being partible in every point , divides it self every way , as there is opportunity . now , such fluid body being thus reduced to a level , if undisturbed , it will so remain ( in fig. . ) for there be now no prominences , as at a , ( in fig. . ) to sink or flow down ; nor cavities , as at b , to receive them : nor is any part of it more pressed than other , whereby that should sink , or this rise . but if at some part , as at d , ( in fig. . ) by weight or other force , it be pressed , but not in others ; or more at d , than at others ; it will at d subside or be depressed , and rise elsewhere , ( in fig. . ) and what is thus shewed of the level le , holds equally of any other level , as f g. within the fluid , at what depth soever , ( in fig. . ) if all parts of it be equally pressed , it keeps its level ; but if some parts of it be more than others , those will subside , and these rise : because the weaker force must give way to the stronger . the like happens in a syphon inverted , ( in fig. . ) where if the water be higher in the one leg at a , than in the other b , that will sink , and this rise , till they come to a level at le : and when so , it will there rest , if there be no other force to put it in motion . so in an ewer , ( fig. . ) or other vessel with a nose ; the water in the vessel ( if higher ) will sink it self , till that in the nose be raised to the same height ; if that in the nose be higher , this will sink , and that rise , till they come to a level at le. the reason of it ( if we do not study to perplex the phaenomenon ) is very evident : because , while the fluid ( supposing it uniform ) stands at the level le , no part of the same horizontal plain , at what depth soever , is more pressed than other , whereby it should be inabled to thrust any other out of place . upon the same account , that of two scales equally charged , neither can descend , or force up the other ; but do mutually sustain each other in equipois , and are at rest . for though both do ponderate , yet neither doth preponderate . and no power is able to over-bear another power , unless stronger than it . but in case the fluid be higher at a than at b , the parts under a are more pressed than those under b ; and therefore those thrust these away . on the same account , that if the scale a be heavier charged than b , though both press downwards ; yet the heavier prevails , and forceth up the lighter . for , of contrary powers , the greater always over-powers the lesser . it will yet be not amiss , ( that i may not in the sequel be mistaken ) to give notice by the way , that what i have said of this level in heavy fluides , is not so to be understood , as if this level were in all cases mathematically exact : for , though it ought so to be , if nothing else did intervene than what we have hitherto taken into consideration ; yet many times some little accidents do disturb it : as , when a drop of water , on a dry board , keeps a convex figure , either because of some little viscosity therein , or as shunning the contact of that dry surface ; and quick-silver in a glass-pipe , or like vessel , will have a visibly convex surface , as shunning the contact of the glass ; and the like would happen in water , if the glass were greasie . and contrary-wise , the surface of water in such a clean vessel would be rather concave ; and so , i suppose , would be the surface of quick-silver if the glass were guilded within , because of its easie application of it self to gold. it is observable also , that water in very slender pipes , will rise visibly higher than the surface of that in the broad vessel ; because the air can more conveniently apply its pressure on that broader vessel , than in the slender pipe. and fluides will many times , upon motion , retain an undulation , or dancing up and down , sometimes above , sometimes below , the true level , for a considerable time before they rest : upon a like reason , that a pendulum will swing back and forth beyond the perpendicular on either side , not by its weight simply considered , ( which would rest precisely at the perpendicular , without rising on the other side , ) but by reason of its contracted impetus . but these and other little inequalities , which are to be accounted for from divers accidents , we here neglect ; and consider onely , what would be the result of the gravity and fluidity , freed from such other accidents , too copious here to be insisted on . our meaning therefore is , that ( setting aside other accidents ) a fluid body , will , by its gravity , reduce it self to such a level ; and being so reduced , will so by counterpoise preserve it self , if not disturbed by other force . but it is here objected , that water upon water doth not gravitate , ( and the like of other not-springy fluides ; ) because an element ( say they ) doth not gravitate in its own place . and , for instance , they tell us , that a man under water , feels not the weight of the water over him , ( in fig. . ) before i directly answer this objection , i have this to say to the principle they alledge : that the intendment thereof at first , was no more but this ; that the tendency of a heavy body , being to the earths center ; when there it is , its heaviness ( if not otherwise pressed ) will not endeavour any further motion ; ( for , to move further , were to move from the center : ) and accordingly , if the tendency of any other body be to a certain place , as its term ; when there it is , that principle will not endeavour a motion from thence ; ( for , so to do , were to move contrary to its own nature : ) and if it be carried further , it must be from some other cause , ( as when a pendulum swings beyond the perpendicular , it is not from weight simply considered , which would there have stayed ; but from an impetus imnpressed by a precedent motion . ) and thus far that principle is just and good . but the objection perverts it to a sense never intended by the first introducers . next , i would ask ; what is meant by the waters own place ? and particularly , whether water in a pond , artificially contrived on the top of a tower , be in its own place ? if so , then , though a hole were in the bottom , it ought not to run out . if not in its own place , then the reason fails ; for even there a diver shall no more feel the weight of the water , than if in the thames . so that it is not its being in its own place , but somewhat else , that makes the weight not to be felt . to avoid this therefore , and the like instances ; they now explain their meaning to be , that it doth not gravitate on any thing which is not specifically lighter than it self . and to this explication it is that we are to apply our answer . but neither will this hold . for it is manifest ( to use an ordinary instance ) that a vessel pierced near the bottom , ( in fig. , . ) will run with a fuller and stronger stream , than if at the middle , or near the top ; and more when it is full , than when half out , or almost empty . which argues a pressure of the upper parts upon those near the vent . and to say , they press not on the intermediate parts , but onely on the air without ; is a meer evasion . for the remoter parts of the water cannot press that air , but by pressing that which is between ; like as in a crowd , he that is at a distance cannot thrust him that is at the door , but by thrusting those that are between : and , with a pole , we cannot thrust that at the end of it , but by thrusting the pole : nor , with a rope , draw that which is fastened to it , but by drawing the rope . where yet there is a signal difference between trusion and traction . in trusion , it sufficeth , that the thing be contiguous , though there be no connexion ; but in traction there must be a connexion , and that strong enough ; else the string will break , and the weight not follow . and though a heap of sand will suffice to press down the scale ; yet a rope of sand will not serve to draw it up . and therefore mr. line 's funiculus ( in his explication of the torricellian experiment ) must have somewhat of texture ( as well as contiguity ) to give it strength ; without which it will not be able to sustain the weight of the suspended quick-silver . but certainly , if the parts of a fluid be able to draw one another , much more will they be able to thrust one another ; that is , the one to gravitate upon the other . it is therefore much more conceivable ( in the inverted syphon ) how the water at a ( fig. . ) should thrust up that at b , than how the air at e ascending , should draw up the water at b , and thereby draw down that at a. for , in the first case , there needs only a contiguity ; in the latter , there must be a connexion of all the parts . and therefore if we should allow , that mr. line 's funiculus , or rope of sands , if granted , would equally solve the phaenomenon , by way of traction ; yet , since the hypothesis of trusion ( as is acknowledged ) will do it also ; it is much rather to be chosen than that of traction , by a rope of ( sands , shall i call it , or a rope of ) nothings . but further , it is confessed by a very learned author , the author of two treatises ; the one intituled , an essay touching the gravitation or non-gravitation of fluid bodies ; the other , observations touching the torricellian experiment , ( who is pleased to conceal his name ) that defends the funiculus , and denies our hypothesis ; that not onely water , but even oyl in the pipe a , ( fig. . ) will force up the water at b : and if ( the pipe being empty ) oyl were poured on b , it would force up water into the pipe a ; not to a level , but to an equipois ; that is , ( as his own words are ) to such a proportion of height in the tube , as will countervail the weight of a like cylinder of oyl ; and gives the same reason for it , that we do ; the disparity of pressure causing motion or elevation of the water , in that part nor equally pressed . so that here , a lighter body doth gravitate on a heavier ; oyl , upon water : and that not onely ad pondus , but ad motum , as himself admits ; that is , ( in our language ) it doth not onely gravitate , but pregravitate ; not onely weigh , but out-weigh . so that here , the notion of a fluid not gravitating on a heavier than it self , or one as heavy , is quite destroyed . and it is manifest also , that not the level , but the equipois , is that which is here attended . for the surface of the oyl without the pipe , because specifically lighter , will be somewhat higher than that of the water within it ; and just so much as to make up the equipois . and , contrary-wise , if that in the pipe were oyl , and that without it were water ; that within the pipe would be higher , and in such proportion higher . the same would be , if that at b were stagnant quick-silver , and that in the pipe a were oyl or water , or some lighter fluid . a pound of water poured into the pipe , would it self stand higher , ( because it would take up more room ; ) but would raise the stagnant quick-silver just as high , as if a pound of quick-silver had been poured on ; without any respect had to the specifick gravity or levity and a ship laden , ( fig. . ) will draw just as much water , if laden with so many hundred weight of timber , as with so many hundred weight of lead ; though that be lighter , and this heavier , than a like quantity of water and a piece of wood ( fig. . ) though lighter than water , yet doth not float on the very top , but sinks so far into the water , till it possess the place of so much water , as is of equal weight with it self ; that is , till the horizontal plain , passing by the bottom of the wood , be in all places equally pressed , partly with wood , partly with water . which being known experiments , and confessed on all hands , do quite destroy the notion of non-gravitation of fluids on what is not specifically lighter than themselves . and himself grants , ( essay , p. . ) that air in a bladder , doth gravitate on water . to avoid the pressure of these evidences ; it is now alledged , that the oyl or water in the pipe a , ( in fig. . ) though not intrinsecally heavier , yet it s higher position gives it an accidental weight more than that in the vessel ; and hence it comes to pass , that that doth depress this. but he doth not consider , that this doth destroy the whole design of his second chapter ; which is to prove , that c doth not gravitate on d , nor d on e , in fig. ; that is , that the upper parts of the water do not gravitate on the neather . whereas , if meerly a higher position will make it gravitate ; and that not onely ad pondus , but ad motum also ; then must the water be in perpetual motion , ( the upper parts still pressing away the neather , like as , on another account , it happens in boiling water ; i mean when the fire is under it : for , if it be heated by fire above it , the case is much alter'd ; ) which perpetual motion , the said author there urgeth as a great absurdity . yet i am not ignorant , that mr. boyle is indeed of opinion , that in all fluids the minute parts are in continual motion ; ( making this the specifick nature of fluidity , as contradistinct of fixedness ; ) but that is on another account , and concerns not this point at all . it is not therefore safe for our antagonist , to ascribe it onely to the accidental weight of an higher position . nor is it sound so to do . 't is true , that a different position may give to the same weight a different ponderation : as , for instance ; a weight at g , ( in fig. . ) will ponderate more than at h ; not , because higher ; but , because , at g , it is to descend directly ; but , at h , on an oblique plain ; which abates its force , and doth more abate it as it is more oblique . and a weight at rest in f or e , is of less force to move the balance , than when from a it falls to e ; and less there than when it is fallen to f ; and even this less , than if it had been violently thrown down : because , in the latter cse , there is a greater contracted impetus . again , at e or f , it will ponderate more than at i or k ; because those suspended at a , are at a greater distance from the center c , than those suspended at d : the different position , in all these , and many other the like cases , giving to the same weight an accidental additional force . but a higher position , meerly because higher , gives no such advantage at all : the weight at e being but just of the same force , as at f ; and at i , as at k. for the length or shortness of the string on which it hangs , doth not at all alter the weight : as is agreed by all ; and experience testifies . the reason therefore of this phaenomenon is not , because that at a in a higher position , is of a greater weight than a like quantity at b : but , because the parts at c , ( in fig. . ) are more pressed than those at b ; ( as bearing the weight of ca , which b bears not : ) whereby c is pressed down , and b thereby pressed up . but , against this explication , he brings an experiment on w ch he lays great weight . a porringer filled with lead , &c. which in the air , as at a , weighed ounces ; weighed in the water about ½ ounces ; and the same weight it held ( with some inconsiderable difference , which he excuseth ) whether at c , the depth of or inches ; or at d , the depth of but , or scarce inch , ( fig. . ) where he attempts the account of two phaenomena : first , why it weighs less in water than in air ? and secondly , why it weighs alike at several depths in water ? why it should weigh less in water than in air , he ascribes to the resistance and crassitude of the water : and he tells us elsewhere , that , if we strike with our hand the surface of water , we shall find its resistance not much less than if we struck a board . by which , if he mean the viscosity , or resistance to separation , he speaks not to the present purpose : for , as to that , it is to be so far considered as a firm body , not a fluid , which is that we are now speaking of . but if he mean , a resistance to be displaced , and thrust upward , to make way for the porringers descent ; he says just the same thing with us : for such resistance is properly gravitation ; and doth countergravitate to that of the porringer , and take off so much of its praegravitation . just as when the scale b , ( fig. . ) by its gravitation resists the descent of a ; because a cannot descend without the ascent of b , to which by reason of its gravitation it is averse . and because the porringer cannot descend but by thrusting up so much water , the water must needs give so much resistance to this descent , as it gives to its own ascent ; that is , so much as the weight of the water that must ascend ; and hath just the same effect as if so much water were put into the scale b. and just so much , the porringer weighs less in the water than in the air. and as to what he says of the great resistance which the hand finds , when we strike hard on the water ; we are to consider , not onely the weight of the water , but the swiftness requisite to make way for the hand moving so fast : like as if a weight of pounds hang in the air by a thread ; the least touch of the finger will move it , slowly : but , to move it times so fast , will require a force times as strong : and , if you strike it hard with a swift stroke of the hand ; that which made very little resistance to a gentle touch , will considerably withstand the stroke of a swift hand : not , because the weight is times heavier than before , or doth times as much resist motion ; but because it doth times as much resist a motion times as swift . now , so much strength as is requisite to move so much water with so much swiftness as is necessary to make way for so swift a motion of the hand ; so much resistance must the water give to such a stroke , from its own gravity , without the assistance of the supposed crassitude or viscosity . but when in the present case we consider , how much the porringer weighs in water ; we consider onely , whether it remove so much weight , though never so slowly ; not , with what swiftness it will remove it ; and , as to that , a very little weight more than what it moves will suffice . but his main objection lyes in the other point , that the porringer weighs as heavy at d , the depth of or but of inch ; as at c , the depth of or inches , ( fig. . ) and just so , say i , it ought to be . for every thing weighs in water just so much as its weight is heavier than so much water . as , for instance , if the plain δδ , ( fig. . ) be in all parts equally pressed ; it is , confessedly , the same as if not pressed at all : ( for , so long , there is no reason why one part should rise , rather than another : ) and so it would be if d were just as heavy as so much water . but if d be heavier , then is that part of it over-charged , just so much as d is heavier than so much waters as would fill the place if this were absent : and therefore , if not relieved by so much weight in the scale b , it will sink . and just so much will serve at c ; that is , it must weigh equally , whether at the depth of c , or d , or any other depth . but , saith he , if the incumbent water do gravitate on d , it will more gravitate on c , because at a greater depth . true , it doth so : but , as the pressure at c is greater than at d ; so is the counter-pressure at χ more than at δ ; and just so much more . so that whatever was the pregravitation at d , must be the pregravitation at c also . ( and it is the pregravitation onely , that is weighed . ) just as when the scale a outweighs b by ounces , and into each scale you put pounds ; it will yet outweigh , but just ounces , as it did before . so that his argument from this experiment , will not hold against us . and the solution he gives , will hold as little . it is ( saith he ) because the porringer drives up no more water out of its place at the one station , than at the other . but this is a mistake . for while the pillar α c , ( fig. . ) to make room for the porringer , drives away the water from c to χ , that at χ thrusts up all above it as high as α , to make room for it self ; as α d doth all that over δ : so that the water displaced , is not the same in both . and therefore the porrigner , if not assisted by the incumbent water , would not equally weigh in different depths ; contrary to his own experiment . which therefore makes against himself . but the great plausible objection is , that a man under water feels not the weight of it . and why ( saith he ) but because mans body being heavier than so much water , the water doth not gravitate on it . but this reason is ( as the schools speak ) non causa pro causa . if the question were , why the water doth not raise the body , ( as it would do so much wood ; ) the reason had been good ; because so much water doth not press downward more than the body doth ; and therefore is not able to press it away . but when the question is , why a man doth not feel it ; that is , why he is not hurt by it , or put to pain ; the answer , because specifically lighter , will not serve . for , . a man , by this reason , should not feel the weight of wood , because proportionably lighter than himself : yet we find a man will as much sink under a load of wood , as a load of lead , if of equal weight . and if it be said , this is , because , though the man be not , yet the air about him , is lighter than that wood : i say , it is so ; but this should therefore cause onely a lateral pressure on that air , not a direct pressure on the man. and , though a man stood up to the neck in water , he should yet find the burden of the wood laid on his shoulder ; notwithstanding that both the man , and all about him , be proportionably heavier than wood. and he shall equally feel it , as if it were an equal weight of lead , if both be above the water . so that the circumjacent air , is not that which makes the wood weigh upon the man. . though the whole man be heavier than so much water ; yet many parts of him are lighter ; and would , of themselves , swim in water , ( though , by their connexion with some heavier , they be made to sink ; like wood tyed to a piece of lead : ) now all these parts , at least , ought to feel pain , if the specifick gravity were the onely cause of indolency : but do not . . a man immersed in quick-silver , which is a heavier fluid , though he would thereby be boyed up , yet would he no more feel the incumbent weight , than a like weight of water . and , though the experiment cannot so conveniently be made in quick-silver as in water ; yet as to part it may be made , by thrusting the hand into quick-silver , which shall no more be pressed by it , than if thrust into an equivalent depth of water ; that is , about times as deep . and flyes , or other small animals , immersed in quick-silver , are not thereby pressed to death , but do safely emerge to the top. so that it is but a fansie to think , that onely the proportional or specifick lightness of the water , is the cause of that indolence , since liquids proportionably heavier , if not positively heavier , will be felt as little . . let us suppose an inverted syphon , ( fig. . ) filled from a to b with quick-silver ; from thence to c with water , so high as to ballance the quick-silver at a. if now oyl ( which is lighter than either ) be poured on a ; i ask , whether the quick-silver at a will not be thereby depressed , and that at b and c raised ? certainly it will. but why ? the oyl cannot ( by their principles ) gravitate on ab , because this is quick-silver : nor yet ( as they speak ) mediately upon bc , for even this is water , and therefore heavier than oyl : no , nor on the air above c ; for the oyl at da is already lower than it , and therefore cannot affect to possess its place . it should therefore , by their principles , not gravitate at all , since there is nothing below it lighter than it self , on which it should gravitate : yet gravitate ( we see ) it will , and thrust out of place that whole body abc ; notwithstanding ( if that be considerable ) the higher position of c , and its greater specifick heaviness . and all this while the animal in bc shall remain unhurt , notwithstanding there be not onely gravitatio ad pondus , but gravitatio ad motum too . so that the notion of non-gravitation on a fluid not specifically lighter than it self , is quite out of doors . and the truth is , supposing abc to be in equipoise , the superfusion of ad will equally depress a , whatever the liquor be , if the weight be equal . and ounce weight , will still be an ounce weight ; and an ounce weight will just so much depress the quick-silver , whether it be an ounce of wine , water , oyl , or quick-silver ; ( that is , just so much as to thrust half that weight , out of the leg af , fig. . into the leg fc ; ) without any regard had to the specifick gravity or levity of the liquor ad , which , as to this point , is of no consideration at all . and if the higher position of d above a be thought of moment ; the higher position of c above both must be so too . and there will be nothing steady to fix upon , but , that the positive weight of df being ( at least in proportion to the bigness of the pipe ) more than that of fc ; that will thrust this away , till they come to an equipoise . it 's true , that , if the specifick gravity of the liquor ad , were greater than that of the quick-silver in ab ; there would , upon another account , have been some difference : because then , the heavier liquor being upmost , it would not onely press upon , but press into , the body of the lighter ; and they would by little and little shift places ; ( as when water is poured upon wine , that will by little and little sink to the bottom , and this rise : ) because , by such descent , each particle thrusts up a lighter body than it self . but , if the upper be lighter ; though it press on the hevier , it cannot press into the heavier , without thrusting up a heavier body than it self . and this , i suppose , if they will consider their own notion , is that they mean , when they say , a lighter body doth not gravitate on a heavier . and if so much oyl were poured on a , as to thrust the quick-silver beyond f ; some of that oyl would pass by it , into the other leg , as high as c. and , in such cases as these , the specifick gravity or levity is considerable : but not as to the case in hand ; where an ounce of oyl poured on a , shall depress it just as much as an ounce of quick-silver would do ; and thrust up c just as high. beside this , ( of non-gravitation on a heavier body ; ) the same learned author hath two expedients for salving the indolence of a man under water , or his not feeling pain by the weight of it . the first is this : supposing a brick-work , as in fig. . but without mortar ; if some few bricks were taken out of the bottom , there would not hereupon sink a pillar of that base , but onely a kind of pyramid ; the rest being , in manner of an arch , mutually supported . and thence he supposeth , that those middle bricks did not bear the weight of a column , but onely of a pyramid . which pyramid if taken away , the rest would not gravitate upon that cavity . and in like manner he supposeth it must be , if , for bricks , were grains of wheat ; yea , of sand ; and , consequently , of lesser particles ; and , even those of water ; which he supposeth would thus support each other , without gravitating on those under them . but he proceeds upon several mistakes . first , he supposeth , that , because those middle bricks being taken away the rest do not fall ; therefore , when they were there , they bore nothing of that weight . which is just as if he should argue , because , when a beam ( in fig. . ) is supported by three posts , if the middle post be removed , it will not fall ; therefore , while it was there , it did bear nothing of the beams weight : or , because a table , ( in fig. . ) supported by five or six legs , will stand , though any one of them be taken away ; therefore that leg did bear nothing : and consequently , ( because that leg is any leg ) therefore none of them did bear any weight : whereas , while all were there , each did bear its part , and thereby ease the rest ; which , in the absence of one , must now bear the more . and if the whole space under it were filled up with such supports , ( or , which would be equivalent , an intire body of that breadth , ) each would bear ( without any considerable difference ) just so much as what is just over it . and such is the case of fluids . onely this i add , that if one of the legs should be too weak to bear its proportional part , yet if the rest be as much more than able to bear their ; that weak one will not break , being relieved by the rest . secondly , admitting that in brik-work it would so be ; yet it is onely upon this account , because those parts of the bricks which hang over , are coherent with the parts supported , and cannot fall without breaking the brick : but , if they were as easily separable part from part , as brick from brick , ( which is the case of fluids ; ) those parts would fall , as well as the middle bricks : and consequently , not a pyramid , but a column , or rather more . again , thirdly , whereas he argues , from bricks to grains of wheat , and from thence , to sands , the consequence will not hold . for the shorter his bricks are , the less will hang over in each layer . as if now , for instance , each brick lye two inches over ; if the bricks were but half so long , each would lye over but one inch ; and consequently ( supposing their thickness the same , ) the pyramid on that base would be twice as great ( because twice as tall ; ) and still , as the over-hangings decrease , that pyramid increaseth ; till at length , when those over-hangings come to nothing ( which is the case of fluids , ) the pyramid becomes a column , or even more than so . and if , in a heap of wheat , fig. . ( as here in a pile of bricks , ) he remove so much of the bottom ; he will find , that instead of a pyramid on that base , there will fall down more than a column ( part of an inverted pyramid : ) and the more such heaps approach to the nature of fluids ; the more will it be so . so that , by this argument ( if there were not another expedient , of which i shall speak by and by , ) the lower parts must bear , not less , but more , than the column incumbent on them . and , if he found it otherwise in a tube filled with moist calice-sand ; this was not , because that above did not gravitate ; but because it was so wedged in , that it could not fall . which , in perfect fluids , we are not to suppose . lastly , he doth , by this explication , destroy his own hypothesis . for he grants , in a pail of water ( for instance , ) that all the parts , as well upper as lower , do gravitate on the bottom , though not each on other : whereas , if those upper parts be so supported ( as in his brick-arch ) as not to gravitate on the cavity ; much less will they gravitate on the bottom , under that cavity . and if , as he supposeth , a great heap of wheat would not break an empty egg-shell ; it is not , because the wheat wants weight , or gravitation ; but because the grains are so intangled as not to fall right down , ( like as in a heap of bushes , one would bear up another , though all do gravitate : ) but in liquids it is otherwise ; which we suppose partible in every point . but however , this of the egg-shell happen to prove ; it serves not his hypothesis at all . for , the air in the egg-shell , being lighter than the wheat that lyes on it ; this ought to gravitate ( by his own principles , ) and to break the egg-shell . if , by arch-work , the egg-shell be defended ; this is not for want of gravitation ; but because that gravitation is surmounted by a greater strength . like as when a great weight hangs on a strong tack ; or a heavy scale , supported by as great a weight in the other , or by a support underneath ; and a thousand other the like accidents . his other expedient is , from the lateral pressure which he supposeth all fluids to have ; whereby he supposeth the perpendicular pressure to be abated . but here he proceeds upon a mistake also . for , though it be very true , that water will flow upon a declivity ; yet not as fluid , but as heavy . for we see a bowl runs down a hill , though not a fluid , but a solid , body . and a broad solid , lying on a narrow pillar , ( in fig. . ) hath in every part a lateral pressure as well as water ; and , if it be cut in the middest , will fall off on either side , as water would do . and , when it doth not ; the reason is not a want of propension , but because this lateral propension is checked or impeded by a greater strength of cohesion ; like as its perpendicular propension is checked by that greater strength of the pillar . and like as the pillar , if too weak , will break under the perpendicular weight ; so , if the strength of cohesion be less than its lateral propension , the solid will divide as a fluid would do . as when a solid breaks by its own weight , ( in fig. . ) on the contrary ; water in a pail ( or other vessel , ) though a fluid , hath its lateral propension restrained by the sides of the vessel ( as by a greater strength , ) but doth not lose it ; and , if the sides chance not to be strong enough , will break through ; doth at least endeavor it , though they be strong enough . so that , both in solids and fluids , each particle hath its lateral propension , as well as perpendicular ; though it be sometimes restrained , or over-powered ; there , by the cohesion of parts ; here , by the strength of the sides : but ( in both cases ) if those strengths be too weak , that propension prevails . now , as this lateral propension of fluids , is kept in by the sides of the vessel , as to the utmost parts of it ; so , as to the inner parts of it , they keep in each other . the lateral pressure of a , ( fig. . ) is sustained by that of b ; and this by that ; not as by greater , but as by equal strengths . for a cannot thrust away b , without thrusting up a body as heavy as it self ; nor b thrust away a. so that , the lateral pressure of the parts being mutually sustained each by other , and the perpendicular pressure by the parts under it ; hence it comes to pass , that those under-parts bear onely the pressure of a column , and no more ; ( which is the expedient that i intimated but now . ) and therefore , in the heap of wheat , but now mentioned , though , upon an aperture in the bottom , more fall down than such a pillar , ( because , when that is gone , the lateral pressure of the rest doth operate , ) yet , while that pillar was there , that part of the bottom did bear no more but it . but if these expedients of his do not serve ; what is the reason ( you will ask ) that the man under water , feels not the weight of it ? i would answer , first , that it is not agreed , that , at a great depth , a man shall feel no pain at all . and i hear , that mr. gratrix having contrived a way of taking breath , at a great depth under water , through long pipes reaching to the top of it ; yet found his breast there so compressed by the water , that he could not draw breath . but , in small depths of water , i do not deny but that a man may remain for some time without any considerable pain . the reason , i judge , is this ; because the man incompassed by a fluid , ( whether specifically heavier or lighter than himself , it makes no matter , ) is equally pressed on all sides ; and thereby suffers no luxation of parts ; and , consequently , no sense of pain . but upon the luxation or laceration of any part , especially a nervous part , pain ariseth . hence it is , that our flesh feels not the hardness of our bones , because so fitted thereunto as to suffer no luxation or laceration by it : but , if the bone be broken or dislocated , we shall then find it to hurt us ; and feel it hard and sharp . and though the body , by such compression , may be contracted into a less room , by reason of the air , blood , and other springy liquids ; yet these being all uniformly pressed , without any tearing of the nervous parts , he suffers nothing of pain from it . and hence it is , that the egg-shell , ( but now mentioned , ) though pressed by a body specifically heavier than it self , ( by which therefore , according to their principles , it ought to be crushed , ) receives no prejudice , because equally pressed on all sides : which it doth the more easily sustain by reason of its round form , in the nature of a continued arch. and we find , in experience , that a round glass , though but of equal thickness , will bear a much greater pressure from without , than from within ; and more than if it were flat-sided ; and more , if the pressure be of all sides , than if but in some onely . all which concur in the egg-shell so situated : but if pressed onely upon one side , a less pressure would break it . i add also , that though in perfect fluids there be no such arching ; yet in a heap of solids ( as that of wheat ) something there is of that nature ; and the more , as those grains be bigger , and conveniently shaped ; and may therefore help to bear the burden : like as or legs , in the table we mentioned , if strong enough , will supply the defect of one weak one ; which therefore is not broken , though not strong enough of it self to bear its part . but the more any such heap approacheth to the nature of a fluid , the less is there room for such arching ; and , in perfect fluids , none at all . hence it is also , that a spunge , though lighter than water , and flaccid also , will not yet ( though fastened to the bottom of a vessel ) be crushed together by the weight of the incumbent water ; because the water within its pores doth bear out the sides with as great a strength , as that without would press them in . and the like we see , when the lungs , taken out of animals , are immersed in water . and the same account serves , for the pressure of air on animals . the air within , pressing as strongly outward ( by its spring , ) as that without , presseth inward ; there is no hurt to the animal at all . and , contrary-wise , the pressure of the air into the mouth and throat , doth not break open his brest or belly , because ballanced with as great a pressure without . but if a hand or arm , be put into the air-pump , and the air about it pumped out , that there be a failure of the outward compression to ballance that within the arm ; the spring of that within it , will put the arm to a great torture , ( as divers of this society have found by experience . ) and many animals , by that means , have been killed within the same pneumatick engine , in a much shorter time , than would have been for want of respiration onely . the like is seen in the breaking of glass bubbles hermetically sealed , and of lambs bladders , in the same pneumatick engine , upon the subtraction of the ambient air ; as also the boiling of warm water , and the strange expansion of blood into bubbles , upon such subtraction of air ; and many the like experiments , made by mr. boyle ( an honourable member of this society ) in that pneumatick engine of his invention . but while i name these , i do anticipate what i am next to handle ; which is the compression of springy bodies . we have been hitherto discoursing of such fluids principally as water is supposed to be ; that is , fluids uncapable of compression , because not elastical or springy . but springy fluids , such as we suppose the air to be , may by an incumbent weight , not onely suffer a trusion ( as water may ) into another place , ( as from a to b and e , in an open pipe , in fig. : ) but a compression , into a less place . as for instance , if the pipe be close stopped at c , ( or hermetically sealed , ) so as ab be water , and bc air , or other springy fluid ; a superfusion or addition of the weight ad ( whether fluid or solid , ) will raise b to e , and contract the air bc into the space ec ; that is , so much as till the spring in cb , ( which was a strength equivalent to the pressure of ab , ) becomes ( by this contraction ) equivalent to the pressure of db. and if more yet be superfused on d , ce will be yet more contracted , and so onwards ; the strength of the spring being still made equivalent to the pressure of the weight . for , while the spring cb is too weak ; the weight ( being a greater strength ) will thrust it closer : and , if ce be too strong , it will ( as a greater strength ) thrust away that pressure : and can never rest , but when the strength of the spring is just equivalent to the pressure . so in solids : if ( for instance ) a room or vessel be filled with wool as high as bb , ( fig. . ) and more wool or other weight ( whether heavier or lighter than wool ) be laid on , as to aa ; the wool shall be depressed to le ; and more yet , if more weight be laid on . and in like manner , if bcb be air , and this pressed , either by the incumbent air ab ( supposing air to be heavy , ) or by a solid weight or force , so close on all sides , as that the air cannot pass by or through it . and , this being granted ; the torricellian experiment ( with others of the same nature ) is , confessedly , solved by the pressure of the air ; which was anciently thought to be by a fuga vacui . for , if the air be heavy , it must gravitate ; that is , endeavour a descent ( as other heavy bodies do , ) and actually effect it , if not opposed by at least as great a strength . and the spring of the air ( allowing it to have a spring ) must always be of such a texture , as is equivalent to the weight or force which it bears . now , as to the weight of air , or its positive gravity , the peripatetick philosophy doth not acknowledge it ; but takes it to be positively light , and consequently to endeavour an ascent . and some others say the same , not onely as to air , but as to all heavy bodies . and whereas we suppose in them a positive gravity ; and that what we call levity is but comparatively so , being onely gravity in a less degree ; they take levity to be positive , and gravity to be but a less degree of levity ; and , consequently , those heavy bodies , not to affect a descent , but to be thrust down by bodies more light , which more strongly affect a higher place . but against these ( the one and the other ) i apprehend ( as to philosophy ) these inconveniences ; which , to me , seem cogent arguments . if this motion up-ward be natural ; it must be either an aversness from the center , as the terminus à quo ; or a propension to some other place , as the terminus ad quem . if they say the former ; it is true , that then b ought to move from c , in perpendicular lines , as cba , ( fig. ; ) and the phaenomenon doth not contradict it . but if the first intendmnent of nature be , not to be here ; without any positive tendency , where to be ; it seems much more intelligible , that somewhat should thrust it thence , ( by somewhat more forcibly pressing between , ) than that it should fly thence , without affectation of any other place . but if they say , ( as seems more rational , if levity be the positive principle , ) that it is an affectation of some higher place , suppose a : while b is just between c and a , the motion ( 't is true ) would be in the perpendicular cba , ( as the streightest way thither : ) but if it were any where else , as at d ; then its motion to a would not be in dce the perpendicular , but in da an oblique line . which is contrary to all experience : for the same light body , where-ever it be , moves upward in a perpendicular ; as well as a heavy body , in a perpendicular downward . and if , to avoid this , they would say , that it moves not to a certain place , as a or e , determinately ; but to that place , whatever it be , that is just over it : i say , this is not properly the moving to a place , ( if it be indifferent whether to a or to e ; ) but rather a moving from a place ; that is , to be as far from c as it can : which is the former branch of the supposition , and against which we did before urge the former inconvenience . which makes it not likely , that there is any such thing as positive lightness at all ; since it will be hard to assign , what shall be the terminus ad quem , which such a mover aims at . but waving this argument from philosophy at large ; i shall argue from experiment , ( as to the air , ) thus : suppose we air in the bladder aa , ( fig. . ) of the same tensure with the external air ; and therefore such as will not ( as they speak ) gravitate , or ( as i would rather say ) praegravitate thereon ; nor yet praelevitate ; ( being of the same specifical gravity or levity with it : ) if this be compressed into a less room , as bb ; it will then retain the same quantity of gravity or levity as before , ( since all that air is still here , with all its positive quality : ) but ( because now within less dimensions ) it will be gradually , or ( as now the language is ) specifically , more than before , heavier or lighter , according as that positive quality was gravity or levity . ( for , as the same quantity of heat , in lesser space , makes the subject intensively hotter ; so the same quantity of heaviness , in a less room , makes it intensively heavier ; and , of lightness , lighter . ) but experience testifies ( as is confessed ) that compressed air is intensively heavier , or ( as we now speak ) specifically heavier , ( and on the ballance is found so to be ; ) not lighter , than before . therefore its positive quality was heaviness , not lightness . the positive gravity of the air being thus evinced ; and , consequently , that the air ascends , onely because it is thrust up by bodies more heavy ; ( like as water riseth upon the casting in of earth , or other heavier bodies ; ) the torricellian experiment , with other the like phaenomena , are easily solved from statical principles , without having recourse to a fuga vacui . for , admitting ( as before ) that ( in a vessel with a nose ; or a syphon inverted , fig. , . ) the fluid at a , by sinking it self , will raise that at b , to the level le ; then , in case the nose at b be not so high , the liquor ( if not otherwise stopped ) must needs run over . and , if any should say , the reason hereof is , because the air at b flies away ( by its levity ) and the water follows to avoid a vacuity ; he would hardly be assented to by those , who see a visible weight or force at a , to over-press it , and thrust it out . and , for the same reason , if the nose or pipe , before it comes to the height of e , be recurvate , ( fig. , . ) and turned down to o ; that which would have run over at b ; will now run out at o ; being thrust up to b , by the weight of a , and falling down from thence , by its own weight . but in case a be lower than b , fig. . ( and the fluid uniformly heavy ; ) a will not be able to drive it up to b , much less make it there run over , or turn about to o : but , contrary-wise , if it were full to b , this would praeponderate , and raise that at a. yet , if ac were a heavier fluid , suppose quick-silver ; & cb a lighter , as wine or water ; the effect would follow as before ; till the greater height of cb , do countervail the greater heaviness of ac . and , contrary-wise , if ac be specifically lighter than cb , ( fig. . ) suppose that water , and this quick-silver ; then must that be in such proportion higher than this , or else it will not rise to b , nor run out at o. but , if ac be higher than in such proportion ; the effect will follow , from the praegravitation of a , without having recourse to a fuga vacui . and thus far the ancients would agree with us . for they never flye to a fuga vacui , so long as there is visible weight or force to thrust up the fluid . but that which gave occasion to introduce this notion of fuga vacui , were but these two experiments , ( and such as are reducible thereunto ; ) wherein , for want of a force to raise liquids by way of trusion , they had recourse to this of traction , ne detur vacuum . the first that of suction , in pumps , syringes , and other the like occasions . the other is that of a syphon , whereby liquors are carried over considerable heights above their level . for if the nose of a syringe be immersed in water , as at b , ( fig. . ) and the handle or embolus be drawn back ; the water or other fluid will follow it , from b into d : which being contrary to the nature of a heavy body , and no other force appearing to thrust it up ; it was imagined , that nature abhorred a vacuum , and this made the liquor rise contrary to its particular propension . to which fuga vacui ( as it was wont to be called , ) linus of late ( and some others after him ) have given the name funiculus . and the like is to be said of all sorts of pumps , and other the like engines , which draw water by way of suction . and as to the syphon ; if the end c be immersed in water , or other liquor , ( fig. . ) though b , the top of the syphon , be much higher than a , the surface of the liquor ; yet , if o be lower than a , though it will not of it self begin to run ; yet , if by suction or otherwise , it be set a running , this current will continue , till either a be sunk so low as to let in air at c , or be lower than the outward orifice o. the reason whereof , say they , ( since there appears not any force to thrust it up , ) must needs be this ; bo flowing out by its own weight , if cb did not follow it ( contrary to the propension of its own gravity , ) a vacuum must needs ensue ; which therefore , they suppose , nature doth abhor . for answer , i say , first , there being no other foundation in nature to prove this abhorrence , but onely these experiments ; and this not otherwise known , but being onely invented as an expedient to serve a turn : if we can otherwise solve the phaenomenon , and shew a force which they did not think of ; there will be no need of this expedient at all . and this abhorrence must be either gratis dictum , without any cogent proof ; or some other evidence must be shewed for it , than those who did introduce it were aware of . for all the subsidiary proofs of late invented , were not the grounds of introducing the opinion . and therefore , without disputing , whether nature can or cannot admit a vacuum ; i shall onely shew , that there is no need of that notion as to this business . next ; that this fuga vacui is not the cause of water thus rising in a pump or syphon , i thus argue . for , if so , it ought to hold to any height whatever . a pump ( for instance ) must draw water an hundred foot high ; and a syphon convey water over the highest hills or towers . for , the argument equally holds , whether the height of b , be two foot , or two hundred foot ; if bo flow out , and cb not follow , a vacuum must insue equally in either case . and the consequence of this argument is so clear , that , in confidence thereof , the ancients did not doubt but that it would be so . none ( that we know of , ) till galilaeo's time , having ever questioned it ; or assigned any determinate height beyond which a pump would not draw water , or over which a syphon would not convey it . and it was a surprising discovery , and wholly unexpected , when ( about the end of the last century ) it was first found out by experience , that water could not thus be drawn higher than about foot. i say , about foot ( not just so much ) because that alters with the temperature of the air. when the air is very light , it will not much exceed foot ; when very heavy , it may reach foot. which experiment alone did evidently evince , that the supposed fuga vacui , was not of an infinite , but of a determinate , strength . which put galilaeo upon the inquiry , whether it were not from some other cause than fuga vacui , that it would be drawn so high , but not higher . and he happily lighted on this hypothesis , of the counter-gravitation of the incumbent air. the same hath been since improved by torricellio ( and others after him , ) who rationally argued , that if such counter-gravitation of the air , would countervail the weight of foot of water ; it ought in lighter liquors countervail a greater height ; and a less height in heavier . and found , upon experiment , that so it was : ( if some little difference chance to be sometime discovered ; it is to be accounted for , from some different constitution of the air about us , or other little accidents , too many to be here recounted : ) and particularly , that , as water would be so raised about foot ; so quicksilver , to the height of about inches and no more : ( i mean , , or , as the airs temperature doth vary . ) which agrees with the proportion of the specifick weight of those liquids . ( quick-silver being near upon times as heavy as water . ) and , from him , the torricellian experiment takes its name . the experiment is thus administred , ( in fig. . ) a glass-pipe closed at the bottom , being filled with quick-silver , and then inverted ; the orifice being stopped ( with the finger or otherwise ) till it be immersed in a vessel of stagnant quick-silver , and then opened ; if the height of the pipe ( above the stagnant quick-silver ) be not more than inches , or thereabouts , it will remain full . the cause hereof , say they , is , ne detur vacuum : for if the quick-silver should sink , there being no way for the air to enter , there would ensue a vacuum , which nature abhors . the cause , say we , is , because the weight of the incumbent air on a , ( which we have already proved to be heavy , ) is equivalent to the weight of inches of quick-silver : which therefore , being defended by the closed glass ( which we suppose otherwise to be held firm , ) from any other pressure than its own weight , is by that counter-pressure sustained . but further : if the height of the pipe above the stagnant quick-silver be more than about inches ; that in the pipe will sink to that height , as at e , leaving space above it in the glass , void of quick-silver : ( but , whether filled by any other imperceptible fluid , we dispute not . ) the reason why it so sinks , our ancestors have not assigned ; because they were not at all aware of this phaenomenon ; but thought , that ( ne detur vacuum ) it would remain full , whatever the height of the tube were . some moderns ( with des cartes ) that they might avoid a vacuum , do imagine , that a materia subtilis ( of which no sense can make any dicovery ) piercing the pores of the glass , supplies that place . but , if it will so supply the place above e , and give the quick-silver leave to sink so low ; why it might not as well come-in to relieve the rest , and so give it leave to sink to a , i do not find . others ( with linus ) imagine , that the weight of inches of quick-silver doth stretch some part of its upper surface into a subtile matter , very thin , yet so as to fill that seemingly void space ; but , because a less weight will not serve so to stretch it , it falls no lower ; which stretched matter , like a funiculus , holds up the rest , ne detur vacuum . but , why this weight should stretch some very small part of it , so prodigiously thin , and not stretch the rest at all , rather than give some moderate tensure to the whole ; they do not ( that i remember ) assign any reason . others , suppose this funiculus to be made , not by stretching the upper part of the quick-silver ; but by squeezing out the more subtil parts from the whole body of it , which like a vapour fills that seemingly void space ; but that less than such a weight would not so squeeze it , and therefore it falls no lower . but , why it should so fall out , that all liquors whatever , of never so different texture , should by the same weight be thus dissolvable ; and not rather some require a greater , some a lesser weight thus to resolve or squeeze them ; they assign no reason : yet we find so it is , since that the lighter the liquor is , the greater height must be allowed , and in such proportion greater , to make up an equivalent weight . but the cause is , say we , ( and it seems the most simple and unforced account , ) because the counter-pressure of the air , being equivalent to that of about inches , so much it is able to sustain but no more ; and just so much weight it will sustain whatever the liquor be , whether specifically lighter or heavier , and whether of a more firm or a looser texture ; and therefore to such a height it sinks , but no lower . and had the ancients been aware of what we find ; that the air hath a positive gravity ; and , consequently , though it be but small in proportion to that of other bodies , yet a great height of air may countervail a lesser height of a heavier liquor ; ( like as we see that a greater height of water will countervail a lesser height of quick-silver : ) they would not , i presume , have troubled themselves with a fuga vacui ; but said roundly , that the weight of the air at its full height , is equivalent to that of water at the height of about foot , and of quick-silver , at about , inches , and proportionably of other fluids . and consequently , when ( in the pump or syringe ) d by the embolus or sucker is defended from the airs pressure , but a exposed to it ( in fig. . ) this pressure on a , will raise , over b , so much weight of water , quick-silver , or other fluid , as is equivalent to that pressure . in the same manner as ( if a and e were equally exposed to the airs pressure ) a quantity of oyl , poured on a , would have raised a weight of water or quick-silver equivalent thereunto . the like account we give of the syphon . the pressure on a , ( in fig. . ) will raise the fluid to the height of b , if not greater than what is before described ; and from thence to o , it falls by its own weight : yet so , that if o were higher than a , the airs pressure at o , would thrust up o to b ( supposing the pipe not so big , as that the air could conveniently pass by the liquor into the pipe , ) and it would fall down to a by its own weight . for now bo would less gravitate than ba ; while yet the airs pressure would be much the same on both . there is yet a considerable objection to be removed , viz. that air in a closed vessel , though of no great height , pressing on a the surface of the stagnant quick-silver , ( fig. . ) will sustain as high a pillar thereof in a closed tube , suppose ae , as if a were exposed to the open air : whereas yet the weight of ad within the vessel , ( defended by the vessel from the pressure of the incumbent air , ) cannot be of equal weight as if it had the whole height of the atmosphere . but the reason of this is , from the airs spring ; which is always equivalent to the pressure lying upon it : and consequently , the spring of the air in its ordinary constitution with us , must be equivalent to the weight of the incumbent air. ( for , if it were less , the air incumbent would yet press it closer ; if it were more , the spring would relax it self , by thrusting away what presseth it . ) which being so ; the air included with such a spring , must therefore press with as great a strength as is equivalent to such a weight . like as , in other springs , if acb ( in fig. . ) be pressed by the weight d to such a tensure as to bear it ; and then , this spring so remaining , the weight were taken away , and our hand put in the place of it ; it would press as hard against the hand , as before it did to sustain the weight ; that is , with a force equal to that of the weight it sustained : and if , thus bowed , it were put in a vessel , ( in fig. . ) it would , with just the same force , press against the sides of it . and just so it is in the present case ; where the air so included doth press by its spring , just with the same force as was that of the incumbent air which gave it this tensure . it is yet the more evident , because if ( by the air-pump ) part of this air be pumped out , and thereby the rest less compressed ; the quick-silver in the tube , ( in fig. . ) will sink from e to a lower station , as to f or g ; and so lower and lower , as more and more air is pumped out , and the spring thereby relaxed : that is , as the spring grows weaker , so it is less able to support the weight . and this quite destroys the evasions but now mentioned ; that the seeming void space is filled by a thin substance , which can by the weight of inches of quick-silver , or foot of water , but not by less , be stretched to that fineness ; and that therefore it will sink to that height , but not lower . for , by this last experiment , when the air is included with its ordinary tensure , it sustains the quick-silver at the height of inches ; as if less than that weight were too little to stretch the quick-silver into that supposed fine substance : but , when that air , by pumping , is weakned ; it will sink to , , , yea less than inch of height ; as if now less than the weight of inch were enough so to stretch it , as less than inches would not do before . yet is no alteration , all this while , made in the texture of the quick-silver ; but in the tensure of the air onely . 't is therefore from this different tensure or spring of the air , not from any difference in the quick-silver , that it stands sometime at a higher , sometime at a lower station . and what hath been thus said of this torricellian experiment , is easily applicable to others of like nature . and it is confessed , that , as the notion of fuga vacui , or that of the airs pressure , doth stand or fall as to this experiment ; so must it do as to the others also . i content my self therefore , to have shewed it in this ; without expatiating to other particulars . finis . a fifth letter, concerning the sacred trinity in answer to what is entituled, the arians vindication of himself against dr. wallis's fourth letter on the trinity / by john wallis ... wallis, john, - . approx. kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from -bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : - (eebo-tcp phase ). a wing w estc r ocm this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons . universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase , no. a ) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set ) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, - ; : ) a fifth letter, concerning the sacred trinity in answer to what is entituled, the arians vindication of himself against dr. wallis's fourth letter on the trinity / by john wallis ... wallis, john, - . [ ], , [ ] p. printed for tho. parkhurst ..., london : . reproduction of original in huntington library. advertisement: p. [ ] at end. created by converting tcp files to tei p using tcp tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between and available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the , texts created during phase of the project have been released into the public domain as of january . anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. % (or pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf- unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p , characters represented either as utf- unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng freke, william, - . -- arians vindication of himself against dr. wallis's fourth letter on the trinity. trinity -- early works to . - tcp assigned for keying and markup - apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images - olivia bottum sampled and proofread - olivia bottum text and markup reviewed and edited - pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a fifth letter , concerning the sacred trinity ; in answer to what is entituled , the arians vindication of himself against d r wallis's fourth letter on the trinity . by iohn wallis , d. d. london : printed for tho. parkhurst , at the bible and three crowns , in cheapside , . a fifth letter concerning the sacred trinity . sir , i have met with an answer to my fourth letter . it is not long , and my reply shall be but short . there is very little in it concerning the merits of the cause , ( save that he resolves to hold the conclusion : ) and as to personal reflections , or disdainful expressions , i do not think fit to trouble the reader with a long reply . for those , i think , do not hurt me so much , as him that useth them . he is not pleased , pag. . that i said , i had argued calmly , without scurrillous language , or reproachful terms . and i appeal to the reader , whether it be not so . nor doth he deny it . and if his language were so too , he needed not to have made the reader an apology , to excuse his expressions , that he might avoid the character of a common railer , p. . but , he says , abating the little subtilties and artifices , incomparably witty , there is not the least grain of weight in my letter . of this the reader is to be judge , both as to the weight , and as to the wit. he says , it seems , a socinian wrote against me . ( true. and it seems he knew it : for he cites him . ) and that himself wrote as an arian . i think he should rather have said , he wrote , first as a socinian ( in his first ten pages , ) and then as an arian , ( in the other ten. ) for i do not find any thing , till toward the end of his tenth page , whereby i could judge him other than a direct socinian . and i think it will so appear to any other reader . he takes to himself the name of unitarian ; by which i do not find the arians were wont to be called . but it is a new name which the socinians have taken up , to distinguish themselves both from us , and from the arians . for the arians are rather pluritarians , as holding more gods than one. and the book to which himself refers us , p. . is intituled , the history of the unitarians , otherwise called socinians . and , in p. . where he first mentions the arians , he doth introduce it with a preface , minding me , that i write against arians as well as socinians : as having , till then , spoke for the socinians only , not for the arians . and even in his tenth page , ( toward the beginning of it ) what had been said of the socinians by name , and of socinus in particular , he takes to himself , as if one of that party . he seems ( saith he of me ) to insinuate an aspersion on us , that we believe not angels . he tells us now , p. . he doth believe them ; and i will suppose also , that he doth believe the soul's immortality . but , when he there says , that i bring a world of arguments to prove the immortality of the soul ; he mistakes again . for those arguments were brought against socinus , not to prove the soul's immortality ; but , that the soul , in its separate condition , was capable of pain or pleasure : which socinus denied . for requital to this , he tells me , he had a good mind to prove the existence of a deity , for that he had heard of some men of the profession of the church of england , that have almost been atheists at the heart . and truly if he should do so , i should not think it much amiss : for i have heard , the same suspected of some socinians . he now tells me , p. . he never was a socinian in his life . of what he had been in the former part of his life , i had said nothing . ( for i knew no more what it was , than who he is . ) but ( p. . ) of what he was in the beginning of his discourse . and 't is plain he there writes like a direct socinian ( as was shewed but now , ) though as an arian some time after . he tells me ( p. . ) that he is neither the socinian , nor his friend , who assisted in his first book . neither did i say , that he is : but , that he might be for ought i knew . but whether he be or not , 't is the same thing to me ; for i am yet to fight in the dark with i know not whom . he says , he is not concerned to defend socinus , or any man who hath dropt imprudent words . nor did i require it of him . and , whether he were , or were not the same man who wrote before ; yet , since here he acts another person , i left it free for him ( p. , . ) to decline , if he pleased , what was said before ; to grant what was there denied , or deny what was there granted . but then , he thinks , p. . i should not charge him with writing contradictions , because such things may possibly be found in the others answer . nor do i. ( this is only a piece of his wonted artifice of mis-reciting me . ) i tell him indeed , it is hard to please them both , when they do not agree amongst themselves ? and i did observe , ( and argue from it ) what he grants , though the other had denied it . but i never charge him with what the other had said . and ( if he look it over again ) he will find , that i did not confront him ( to shew thence a contradiction ) with what the other had said : but did confront what himself had said in his ten first pages , with what he says in the other ten . and 't is manifest , that in the first ten , he acts the socinian ; and in the latter ten , the arian . but , in whether of the twain he acts his own part , it was not easie to determine ; till he now tells us , he is an arian . he had argued , p. , . that the trinity are persons , as really , and as properly , and fully personally distinct , as three angels . and each person ( both son and holy-ghost by name ) compleat and intire in himself , with as compleat personal distinction as that in men and angels . from whence when i inferred his owning the personality of the holy-ghost : he fearing , it seems , he had over-shot himself , now tells us , p. . just as much as becomes on arian . but if he own him to be as much a person , as a man , or angel is a person : it is as much , or perhaps more , than we need contend for in this point . i had charged him also with mis-reciting me in many other things . as when i am introduced ( very often ) as talking of two gods , three gods , personal gods , of adding several persons to our one god , and the like ; ( according as here also , he says , p. . that i say , you your self own two gods , and why may not i then three ? ) when he knows very well , this is not my language ; nor is any thing of all this said by me . to this he now says , p. . 't is true enough he doth so ; but that he doth it by inference . but he should then speak it as his inference , not cite it as my words . i might have taken notice ( amongst a great many gross mistakes , ) that where i had mentioned , the lords and commons of england , declaring the prince of orange , to be king of england , france and ireland ; he mis-recites it , p. . king of england , scotland , and france ; as if the parliament of england , had taken upon them to dispose of the kingdom of scotland , and not that of ireland . but of this , and a many more , i passed over , without reflecting on it . because , in his language , he is so very negligent and careless , ( and otherwise obnotions ) that it were endless to reflect on all . but i was obliged to take notice ( because it quite alters my argument ) of what he says , p. . that i say , three sides make one cube , &c. which is neither true , nor are they my words . i argued not from three sides , but from the three dimensions of a cube . this he calls trifling ; and would perswade us that side and dimension , differ no more than muting and — his other word , which is fitter for his mouth than mine . but though he perhaps know-no difference between them ; yet he should not have cited it as my words ( and say , that i say so , when i did not . ) for i ought to know better ; and that a cube hath six sides , though but three dimensions . nor did i argue from the six sides , but from the three dimensions . yet i can forgive him this ( rather than when he doth it willfully ) though it mis-recite my argument : because i believe it to be out of pure ignorance , not of malice . he doth not like , p. . either this , or any other simile's ; and would have me no more to insist upon them . ( but he must excuse me from taking his advice herein , unless he understood it better , than , by what was now said , he seems to do . ) because , if he be not mistaken ( as i think he is ) they are very far from my purpose . that is , he thinks , they do not prove the trinity . true : these , alone , do not prove it ( nor was it intended they should . ) but they prove ( what they were brought to prove ) that it is not a contradiction , or inconsistent with reason , that there may be three somewhats ( which we call persons ) that are but one god. and thus much he had before granted , and doth now again confirm it , p. , . 't is true indeed ( he says ) i cannot say that there is a contradiction in holding that there may be three persons in god. for , saith he , there be two sorts of contradictions ; the one express , the other implyed . i cannot say , there is a contradiction in holding it : because i have not the definition of the word god so exact , as to raise an implied contradiction : and , for an express contradiction , i do not pretend to it . if therefore there be no contradiction , either express , or implied : it is what i was to prove . but , saith he , the dispute shall not end here . he will be allowed the privilege ( and no body doth deny it him , ) to fetch in the first commandment , to define the word god. with all my heart . i was never against it . ( for what he says , more than once , p. , . that i meanly cry , he flies to scripture , is but another piece of his wonted art of mis-reciting . there is nothing to that purpose in any thing of mine . ) i do sometime blame him for changing the state of the question : as , when he would have me prove by reason , that it is so : i tell him , that is not the question , ( nor is that to be proved by reason : ) the question is , whether there is any thing in reason , why it cannot be so . now , let him keep to the question ; and then , if he think he can prove , from scripture , that it is inconsistent with reason , for three somewhats to be one god ; or , that it is a contradiction , for god the creator , and god the redeemer , and god the sanctifier , to be the same god ; or , that it is impossible for the god of abraham , and the god of isaac , and the god of iacob , to be one and the same god : let him try his skill . and , let him make what use he can of the first commandment , to define the word god , so as to prove this a contradiction . but , when he had claimed this privilege , ( and no body doth deny it ) he makes no use of it for any such definition . the truth is , i had already granted him , from that commandment , ( p. , , , , . ) more than he was willing i should grant : that we are to have no other god ( great or little , equal or unequal , ) but the lord god of israel . yes , says he ; there is one supreme god , another creature-god ; but that this is not to have two personal gods. how so ? if these be two gods , and each of them a person , ( compleat and entire of himself ; as really , and properly , and fully , and personally distinct , as a man or angel , as he had before told us at p. . . ) they must needs be two personal gods. but we , according to the first commandment , acknowledge but one god ; and those three somewhats ( whom in a metaphorical sense we call persons ) not so to be distinct as to become three gods. he hopes however to avoid the first commandment , by saying that , though they be two gods , they are not two gods co-equal , p. . and that they worship the son , not : with supreme worship ; with mediation , not adoration , p. . what he means by his two worships ; of mediation , and adoration ; i do not well understand : unless they be new names for doulia and latria . nor do i remember , that i have before heard of a worship of mediation . that christ is our mediator , i know ; but did not know that he is our worshipper . and what doth he think of the israelites , when they worshipped the golden calf ? surely they did not think this calf to be co-equal with the supreme god. nor did they think it to be ( deus natus ) a god by nature ; but ( deus factus ) a made god : ( for themselves had made it , just before : ) yet i never knew , that this did excuse them from idolatry . he doth not own christ to be the true god , ( for such there is but one , the only true god , ) nor yet a false god ; but a mean between both , p. . now 't is true , the heathen had ( their deos medioxumos ) their middling gods : but i never knew that we could worship such , without idolatry . thou shalt worship the lord thy god ( the supreme god ) and him only shalt thou serve , was our saviour's doctrine , mat. . . and st. iohn expresly calls him the true god , joh. . . ( not a middling god , between true and false ) and therefore the same god with the father , the only true god. to that character of christ , rev. . , . i am alpha and omega , the beginning and the end , ( the first and the last ) saith the lord , which is and was and is to come , the almighty . he says , this stile is given him in opposition to gods simpler one , i am. but he should have observed , that the same title is , at ver . . given to god , in contradistinction to christ , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. and if it were there a character of the supreme god , it is so here . and if he think the simpler term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , i am , to be more expressive of the supreme god ; we have that also emphatically given to christ , rom. . . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , he which is , or the being , over all ; the supreme being . to what further i had brought , p. , , , . to prove him to be the supreme god , the same god with the father , ( not a middling , or titular god , ) he makes no reply : which therefore stands as it was ; nor need i repeat it , because it may be read there . and it is so full and clear , that i need add no more to it . to what i had said of ioh. . . to know thee ( not thee only , or only thee , ) the only true god. he saith , he hath answered already . and i have already replied ; nor need i repeat it . their argument from thence is just in this form : the god of abraham is the only true god ; therefore , not the god of isaac , or the god of iacob . yes , say i , the god of isaac , and the god of israel , is the same god , but under another consideration . so here ; god the creator ( or god the father ) is the only true god ; therefore not god the redeemer , nor god the sanctifier . yes ; god the redeemer , and god the sanctifier , is the same god , the only true god. in like manner , ier. . , . it shall no more be said , the lord liveth that brought up the children of israel out of the land of egypt ; but , the lord liveth , that brought up the children of israel out of the north country . now , saith the first commandment , i am the lord thy god , which brought thee out of the land of egypt ; thou shalt have no other god but me : therefore not the god which brought them out of the north country . yes , say i , even this god also . which is not another god ; but the same god ; though considered as the author of another benefit . there be many other things , both in his first and second paper ( his answer and his vindication ) which lie very open to be reflected on , if it were worth the while : but i think , i have said enough already ; and , he thinks , too much , ( that i have been too stiff , too hard with him , p. . ) which things i shall therefore omit , to save my self , and the reader , the labour . but three things he calls me to account for omitting ; his reproof of my false idea of the personality of god , the impossibility and blasphemy of his incarnation , and of the death of god , p. . now when i had proved the things to be true ; i thought that had been a sufficient answer , to his calling them false , impossible , and blasphemous . for they are never the more so , for his calling them so . and i know not what further answer he should expect , unless he would have me say , 't is foul-mouthed blasphemy in him , to call it blasphemy . but if i should answer him all along at this rate , according as his language deserves ; we should , instead of disputing fall to right down railing ; which is the character he was afraid of , pag. . however ( to gratify him once more , ) that by the word , joh. . is meant , christ , himself owns : and , that this word was god from the beginning ; that he made the world , and all things ; and that without him was not any thing made which was made ; ( and therefore , say i , himself was not made ; unless our arian would have us think , he made himself ) that this god , is the supreme god , we have proved at large , ( if he deny it to be proved , we must leave it to the reader to judge of the arguments : ) and this word was made flesh. ( i hope i need not tell him , that to be made flesh , and to be incarnate , is all one ; for every one understands this who know that caro carnis is latin for flesh. ) therefore this is no blasphemy . again ; that god in christ suffered and died ; and that we are redeemed by the blood of god , he had before told us , p. , . that this is the true god , we have proved at large ( as was but now said ; ) therefore the death of god ( that is , of him that was god as well as man , ) is no blasphemy . yet again ; i do not take his reproof ( as he calls it ) to be a proof , that my idea of personality is false . and therefore i did not think it deserved an answer ; having proved the thing before . yet i thought i had answered it ( as much as it need to be answered ) when ( at my pag. . ) i told him ( nor doth he deny it ) that he seemed well pleased at his p. . that i owned the word person to be but metaphorical ; though at his p. . ( which is the reproof he means ) he did not like it . for tid after pag. . he acted the socinian , and did not come to act the arian , till afterward ; and then he seemed , at p. . to like it well enough . i shall yet add somewhat more upon that point , which if it may not satisfy him , ( who seems to intimate p. . that he will not be satisfied , ) may give some further satisfaction to the reader . the word person ( persona ) is originally a latin word ; and doth not properly signify a man ( so as that another person must needs imply another man , ) for then the word homo would have served , and they needed not have taken in the word persona : but rather , one so circumstantiated . and the same man , if considered in other circumstances ( considerably different , ) is reputed another person . and that this is the true notion of the word person , appears by those noted phrases , personam induere , personam deponere , personam agere , personam sustinere , sustineo unus tres personas , and many the like in approved latin authors . thus the same man may at once sustain the person of a king and of a father ; if he be invested both with regal and paternal authority . now because the king , and the father , are for the most part not only different persons but different men also ( and the like in other cases ) hence it comes to pass , that another person is sometimes supposed to imply another man : but not always , nor is that the proper sense of the word . it is englished in our dictionaries , by the state , quality , or condition , whereby one man differs from another : and so , as the condition alters , the person alters , though the man be the same . our school-men of later ages , do sometimes apply the word persona to angels as well as men ; but even that is but metaphorical ; nor do i find that it ever was so used , in approved latin authors , either for angels , genii , or their heathen gods ; but for the different state or condition of men only . now when the same man doth thus sustain two persons , as that of a king , and that of a father ; he may as to one thing act as a king , by his regal authority ; as to another thing as a father , by his paternal authority . and these authorities , may be in subordination one to the other , though the man be the same . and what is done in either capacity , may indifferently be said to be done by the man , or by the king : ( as that david , or the king , pardoned absolom ; ) and in like manner , by the man , or by the father . this being the true and proper notion of the word person , we are next to consider what it is to signify in the present case . where we are to consider , that the word person is not applied in scripture to these three so called : it is not there said , these three persons are one , but only these three are one . 't is but the church's usage that gives to these three somewhats , the name of persons . and therefore our arian was much mistaken , when he tells us , p. . that the word person is the hinge of the controversy . the hinge of the controversy , is that notion concerning these three somewhats , which the fathers ( who first used it ) did intend to design by the name person . so that we are not from the word person to determine what was that notion ; but , from that notion which they would express , to determine in what sense the word person is here used . and if the word person do not well fit that sense ; all that can be thence inferred , is no more , but that they have made use of an unfit name to express their notion . it is no more but as if a cruel pope take the name of clement ; or a wicked one the name of pius ; or if a man be named willson , whose father's name was thomas . and in all such cases , certitudo rei tollit errorem nominis . and if we know who is the man designed by such a name , 't is a ridiculous exception , to say , this is not the man , because that name doth well agree with his nature . now two of these three being represented in scripture , as father and son ; and this father said to beget the son , and all these in a sense metaphorical ; ( not in such sense as those words do properly signifie amongst men ; ) they thought it not unfit ( in continuation of the same metaphor ) to call them persons . because as the word person doth properly agree to the relations of father and son in a proper sense ; so doth the word person in a metaphorical sense , to the father and son so taken metaphorically ; and the word beget , by a like metaphor . when therefore it is certain , that the notion which the ancient fathers had concerning these three , which in a metaphorical sense they called person , was this , that there is a distinction between them , greater than that of the divine attributes , but not so great as to make them three gods : it is manifest that they took the metaphor , not from that abusive sense of the word person , when ( amongst us ) it is put for man ; but from that proper sense of the word persona , wherein it signifies the state , condition , office , or relation of a man , as variously circumstantiated with reference to others ; whereof the same man may sustain more than one. as when david , was the son of iesse , the father of solomon , and the king of israel . so if we say of any , that he is a person of honour , a person of worth , and a person of interest : that same man may be all this , without becoming three men. now this our arian may call this ( if he please ) a quirk , a criticism , an undermining the very idea of the word person , as he did in his , p. , , . ( or may neglect it , if he pleases : ) but the sober reader ( who understands it better ) will have better thoughts of it . and therefore i shall not take his advice , p. , . to say that god is the name of an office , that so he might know how to attack me , ( as he says , ) which while i talk so warily , he knows not how to do . i say , god is the name of the nature ; but if he will have christ to be the name of an office ( the mediatory office , ) and the comforter , or even the creator , the redeemer , the sanctifier , to be names of work or office , it will not be much amiss . now , when i had said this doctrine of ours is as old at least as the new testament , ( because i can prove it from thence ; ) he will have it ( p. . ) no older than the disputes of alexander and athanasius ; which the primitive church knew nothing of . but he barrs quotations all along . and therefore i must not prove it ( to be known to the church before that time , ) but leave it to the judgment of readers versed in church-history , whose word must pass in this case ; his or mine . to his question , p. . did the iews ever hear of it before christianity ? i think they had some intimations of it , as they had of the resurrection : but not so clearly ( either of them ) as to be generally understood of all ; nor so fully as in the new testament . and i think it was from those notices of it amongst the jews , that not only plato derived much of his philosophy , but other heathens also much of their mythology ; though they did much disguise , and sometimes ridicule the notices they had thence , as our arian now doth that of the trinity . but this is not the business now before us . toward the close , he is so kind as not to desire arianism to be imposed on others , any more than trinitarianism on him , p. . but neither is this business before us ; who are but disputants , not law-makers . but so constant he means to be to his cause , that he will be content to be perswaded out of his name with his opinion . ( i think there is reason why he should change his opinion , but as to the changing of his name , he may use his discretion . ) but having said much ( that he might not be thought to desert it ) he thinks it advisable to drop the cause . which he may , if he please , and leave it to the reader to judge of what is said . i conclude as he doth ; it is impossible but offences will come ; but wo unto him through whom they come . it were better for him that a mill-stone , &c. febr. . / . yours , &c. i. wallis . advertisement . the life of faith , in two sermons to the university of oxford , at st. mary's christ-church , oxford ; on ianuary . frac ; , and iune . following : by the same author , dr. iohn wallis . sold by tho. parkhurst at the bible and three crowns in cheapside . an answer to three papers of mr. hobs lately published in the months of august, and this present september, . wallis, john, - . approx. kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from -bit group-iv tiff page image. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : - (eebo-tcp phase ). a wing w estc r this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons . universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase , no. a ) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set ) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, - ; : ) an answer to three papers of mr. hobs lately published in the months of august, and this present september, . wallis, john, - . sheet ([ ] p.) s.n., [london : ] by john wallis. imprint from wing. a reply to: hobbes, thomas. three papers presented to the royal society against dr. wallis. reproduction of the original in the bodleian library. created by converting tcp files to tei p using tcp tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between and available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the , texts created during phase of the project have been released into the public domain as of january . anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. % (or pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf- unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p , characters represented either as utf- unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng hobbes, thomas, - . -- three papers presented to the royal society against dr. wallis. - tcp assigned for keying and markup - spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images - melanie sanders sampled and proofread - melanie sanders text and markup reviewed and edited - pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion an answer to three papers of mr. hobs , lately published in the months of august , and this present september , . in the former part of his first paper ; by reason of a proposition of dr. wallis ( prop. . cap. . de motu ) to this purpose ( for he doth not repeat it verbatim : ) if there be supposed a row of quantities infinitely many , increasing according to the natural order of numbers , , , , &c. or their squares , , , , &c. or their cubes , , , , &c. whereof the last is given . it will be to a row of as many , equal to the l●st , in the first case , as to ; in the second case , as to ; in the third ▪ as to , &c. ( where all that is affirmed , is but ; if we svppose that , this will follow. which consequence mr. hobs doth not deny : and therefore all that he saith to it , is but cavelling . ) mr. hobs moves these questions , ( and proposeth them to the royal society , as not requiring any skil in geometry , logick , or latin , to resolve them : ) . whether there can be understood ( he should rather have said , supposed ) an infinite row of quantities , whereof the last can be given . . whether a finite quantity can be divided into an infinite number of lesser quantities , or a finite quantity consist of an infinite number of parts . . whether there be any quantity greater than infinite . . whether there be any finite magnitude of which there is no center of gravity . . whether there be any number infinite . . whether the arithmetick of infinites be of any use , for the confirming or confuting any doctrine . in particular , therefore , to his quaere's , i answer , . there may be supposed a row of quantiti●s infinitely many , and continually increasing , ( as the supposed parallels in the triangle abc , reckoning downwards from a to bc , ) whereof the last ( bc ) is given . . a finite quantity ( as ab ) may be supposed ( by such continual bisections ) divisible into a number of parts infinitely many ( or , more than any finite number assignable : ) for there is no stint beyond which such division may not be supposed to be continued ; ( for still the last , how small soever , will have two halves ; ) and , all those parts were in the undivided whole ; ( else , where should they be had ? ) . of supposed infinites , one may be supposed greater than another . as a , supposed , infinite number of men , may be supposed to have a greater number of eyes . . a surface , or solid , may be supposed so constituted , as to be infinitely long , but finitely great , ( the breadth continually decreasing in greater proportion than the length increaseth , ) and so as to have no center of gravity . such is toricellio's solidum hyperbolicum acutum ; and others innumerable , discovered by dr. wallis , monsieur format , and others . but to determine this , requires more of geometry , and logick ( whatever it do of the latin tongue ) than mr. hobs is master of . . there may be supposed a number infinite ; that is , greater than any assignable finite : as the supposed number of parts , arising from a supposed section infinitely continued . . there is therefore no reason , on this account , why the doctrin of euclide , cavallerius , or dr. wallis , should be rejected as of no use . but having solved these quaere's , i have some for mr. hobs to answer , which will not so easily be dispatched by him . for though supposed infinites will serve the mathematicians well enough : yet , howsoever he please to prevaricate ( which , he saith , is for his exercise , ) mr. hobs himself is more concerned than they , to solve such quaere's . let him ask himself therefore , if he be still of opinion , that there is no argument in nature to prove , the world had a beginning : . whether , in case it had not , there must not have passed an infinite number of years before mr. hobs was born . ( for , if but finite , how many soever , it must have begun so many years before . ) . whether , now , there have not passed more ; that is , more than that infinite number . . whether , in that infinite ( or more than infinite ) number of years , there have not been a greater number of days and hours : and , of which hitherto , the last is given . . whether , if this be an absurdity , we have not then ( contrary to what mr. hobs would perswade us ) an argument in nature to prove the world had a beginning : nor are we beholden to mr. hobs for this argument ; for it was an argument in use before mr. hobs was born . nor can he serve himself ( as the mathematicians do ) with supposed infinites ; for his infinites , and more than infinites of years , days , and hours , already past , must be real infinites , and which have actually existed , and whereof the last is given ; ( and yet there are more to follow . ) mr. hobs shall do well ( for his exercise ) to solve these , before he propose more quaere's of infinites . in the latter part of his first paper , he gives us ( out of his roset . prop. . ) this attempt of squaring the circle . suppose dt be ● dc , and dr a mean proportional between dc and dt : the semidiameter dc will be equal to the quadrantal arc rs , and dr to tv. that the thing is false , is already shewed in the latin confutation of his rosetum , published in the philosophical transactions for july last past . as it is now in the english ; his demonstration is peccant in these words , ( col. . lin . , , . ) therefore - the arc on tv , the arc on rs , the arc on ca , cannot be in continual proportion ; ( with all that follows : ) there being no ground for such consequence . but ( which is the common fault of mr. hobs's demonstration ) if this demonstration were ●ood , it would serve as well for any proportion as that for which he brings it . for if , instead of ● , he had said , 〈…〉 , or what else he pleased ; the demonstration had been just as good as now it is , without chan●ing one syllable : that is , it will equally prove the proport●on of the semidiameter to the quadrantal arc , to be , what yu please . in his second paper . he pretends to confute a theorem , which hath a long time passed for truth ; ( and therefore doth no more con●ern dr. wallis , than other men . ) and 't is this , the four sides ●f a square being divided into any number of equal parts , for ex●mple , into ; and streight lines drawn through the opposite ●oints , which will divide the square into lesser squares : the received opinion ( saith he ) and which dr. wallis commonly ●seth , is , that the root of those , namely , is the side of the whole square . which to confute , he tells us , the root is a number of squares , whereof the whole contains ; and therefore the root of squares is of those squares , and not the s●de of any square ; because the side of a square is not a super●cies , but a line . for answer ; i say , that 't is neither the opinion of doctor wallis , nor ( that i know ) of any other ( so far is it from being a received opinion , which master hobs insinuates as such ) that is the root of squares ( for surely a bare number cannot be the side of a square figure : ) nor yet ( as master hobs would have it ) that squares is the root of squares : but that lengths is the root of squares . 't is true that the number is the root of the number , but not , of a squares : and , that squares is the root ( not of squares , but ) of squared squares : like as dousen is the root , not of dousen , but of dousen dousen , or squares of a dousen . and , as , there , you must multiply not only into , but dousen into dousen , to have the square of dousen ; so here , into ( which makes ) and length into length ( which makes a square ) to obtain the square of lengths , which is therefore squares , and lengths the root or side of it . but , says he , the root of soldiers , is soldiers . answer . no such matter : for soldiers is not the product of soldiers into soldiers , but of soldiers into the number : and therefore neither , nor soldiers , the root of it . so lengths into the number , makes no square , but lengths ; but lengths into lengths makes ( not lengths , but ) squares . so in all other proportions : as , if the number of lengths in the square side be ; the number of squares in the plain will be twice two , ( because there will be two rows of two in a row : ) if the number of lengths in the side , be ; the number of squares in the plain , will be times , or the square of : if that be , this will be times : and so in all other proportions . of which , if any one doubt he may believe his own eyes . his third paper , which came out just as the answer to the two former was going to the press , contains , for substance , the same with his second , and the latter part of the first : and so needs no farther answer . only i cannot but take notice of his usual trade of contradicting himself . his second paper says , the side of a square is not a superficies , but a line : his third says the quite contrary , ( prop. . ) a square root ( speaking of quantity ) is not a line , but a rectangle . other faults , falsities , and contradictions , there are a great many ; which i omit , as too gross to need an answer . and this is what i thought fit to say to mr. hobs's three papers ( rather to satisfie the importunity of others , than because i thought them worth answering : ) and submit the whole , with all respects , to the royal society , to whom mr. hobs makes his appeal . a fourth letter concerning the sacred trinity in reply to what is entituled an answer to dr. wallis's three letters / by john wallis ... wallis, john, - . approx. kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from -bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : - (eebo-tcp phase ). a wing w estc r ocm this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons . universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase , no. a ) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set ) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, - ; : ) a fourth letter concerning the sacred trinity in reply to what is entituled an answer to dr. wallis's three letters / by john wallis ... wallis, john, - . [ ], p. printed for tho. parkhurst ..., london : . reply to stephen nye--nuc pre- imprints. imperfect: pages stained and with print show-through. reproduction of original in the huntington library. created by converting tcp files to tei p using tcp tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between and available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the , texts created during phase of the project have been released into the public domain as of january . anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. % (or pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf- unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p , characters represented either as utf- unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng nye, stephen, ?- . -- answer to dr. wallis's three letters. trinity. theology, doctrinal. - tcp assigned for keying and markup - apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images - judith siefring sampled and proofread - judith siefring text and markup reviewed and edited - pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a fourth letter , concerning the sacred trinity ; in reply to what is entituled , an answer , to d r wallis's three letters . by john wallis , d. d. london : printed for tho. parkhurst , at the bible and three crowns , in cheapside , . a fourth letter , concerning the sacred trinity . sir , in a former answer ( from i know not whom ) to my first and second letter ; we had two persons ( a friend and his neighbour ) in one man. of which i have given account in my third letter . we have now an answer to that also . but whether from the friend , or the neighbour , or from a third person , he doth not tell me . yet all the three persons , may ( for ought i know ) be the same man. however , whether it be , or be not , the same man , it is not amiss for him to act a third person ( as of an adversary ) , as being thereby not obliged to insist upon , and maintain what was before said ; but may fairly decline it if he please . the one may grant what the other denies , and deny what the other grants : and still , as the scene changes , the man may act another person . and so i find it is . as for instance : the former answerer , takes it unkindly , and would have it thought a calumny , that i charged it on some of the socinians , that how clear soever the expressions of scripture be for our purpose , they will not believe it , as being inconsistent with natural reason : and though they do not think fit to give us a bare-faced rejection of scripture , yet they do ( and must , they tell us ) put such a forced sense on the words , as to make them signify somewhat else . therefore , to shew that this is not a calumny , but a clear truth , i cited their own words , and quoted the places where they are to be found , wherein themselves say the same things , in as full expressions as any that i had charged them with ; that every one is to interpret the scripture according to his own sense ; and what so seems grateful to him , he is to imbrace and maintain , though the whole world be against it : that he is not to heed what men teach or think , or have at any time taught or thought , whoever they be , or have been , or how many soever : that though , even in the sacred monuments , it be found written , not once only , but many times ; he should not yet for all that believe it so to be : that what plainly appears cannot be ( or , as was before explained , what he thinks so , though all the world beside think otherwise , ) is not to be admitted ; even though in the sacred oracles it appear to be expresly affirmed : but those sacred words are to be interpreted , ( though it be by unusual ways or tropes , ) to some other sense than what they speak : that ( because it seems to him absurd ) he must ( with augustine's good leave , and of the rest who think as he doth ) put a force ( how great soever ) upon paul's words , rather than to admit such sense . that , if our reason dictate to us ought otherwise than the scripture doth ; it is an errour to say , that in such case we are rather to believe the scripture . now our new answerer ( though he would still have it to be a calumny ) shuffles it off with this , he is not concerned , that socinus , or any other author , has dropt imprudent words , and leaves it to the socinian to answer , pag. . ( for he is now to act the arian , pag. , , , , . ) this point therefore i look upon as yielded ; concerning the slight opinion which ( some of ) the socinians have of scripture , in competition with humane reason . again ; when i had spoken of our immortal soul , in its separate existence after death , as of an intellectual being ; ( but , with an if at lest those who deny the blessed trinity will allow that there are such beings : ) to shew the suspicion intimated , was not groundless ; i cited socinus's own words , where he expresly tells us , that the soul after death doth not subsist ; nor doth so live as to be then in a capacity of being rewarded or punished , ( that is , in effect , it is no more alive , than is the dead body , not sensible of pain or pleasure . ) which i think is ground enough for such a suspicion , without being uncharitable . nor doth this new answerer clear socinus , or himself , from this suspicion . onely tells us ( pag. . ) it is an insinuation , as if they believe not angels . which is nothing to the purpose of the soul 's separate existence , ( which is that i insisted on ) nor doth he so much as tell us , that he doth believe angels ( much less that he doth believe the souls separate existence , ) so that the ground of suspicion still remains . i had shewed him how different socinus's opinion is , from that of st. paul ; when he desired to be dissolved , or to depart hence , and to be with christ , as much better for him , than to abide in the flesh , phil. . , . and , to be absent from the body ( which must be after death , and before the resurrection ) and to be present with the lord , cor. . . and this new answerer , though he takes notice of the charge , doth not so much as tell us , that he is not of socinus's opinion herein . which ( if it be so ) he might reasonably have told us upon this occasion . i might have added that of christ , mat. . . fear not those who kill the body , but are not able to kill the soul : whereas , if the soul after death be as insensible as the body , that is as much killed as this. and that of christ to the converted thief on the cross , luk. . . this day shalt thou be with me in paradise . for surely by paradise he did not mean purgatory ; nor yet , that he should be with him in hell , amongst the devils and the damned ; nor that his soul should be in a condition as senseless as his body : for paradise doth not sound like any of these . i might have added also that of lazarus and the rich glutton , luk. . , , , . for though parables are not strongly argumentative , as to all the punctilio's of them ; yet , as to the main scope of them , they are : ( else , to what purpose are they used . ) now here we have that glutton represented as tormented in hell , and lazarus at rest in abraham's bosom ; and there comforted , while the other is tormented : and all this , while yet he had brethren upon earth , to whom he desires lazarus might be sent . all which is not agreeable to a condition not capable of reward or punishment . and upon the whole , we have reason to suspect , that socinians may have some other odd tenents , which they think fit rather to conceal , than to deny . so that i look upon this point as gained also ; that socinus ( uncontrouled by this answerer ) doth deny the subsistence of the soul after death , as then capable of reward or punishment . another point which i look upon as granted , is concerning that place , joh. . in the beginning was the word ; and the word was with god ; and the word was god ; and the word was made flesh , and dwelt amongst us . concerning this place , we were come to this issue with our former answerer , ( at his p. . ) if by word be meant a person , ( pre-existent to christs incarnation by the virgin mary ; ) and , by god , be meant the true god , or god almighty ; then this place is to our purpose ; for else ( he tells us ) st. john writes nonsense . now , that st. john writes non-sense , i suppose he will not say ( whatever he thinks ) because he pretends a great reverence for scriptures ( and doth not take it kindly that i should suspect the contrary . ) whether of the other two points he would stick to , he did not think fit to tell us ; for indeed his business was not to tell us what he would have , but what he would not have ; and concludes nothing thereupon , but that the place is obscure ( he knows not how to make it serve his turn ; ) and ( that it may so seem ) he indeavours to cast what dust he can into the spring , and then to say , the water is not clear . i have given him my reasons ( and i think they be cogent ) why i judge the place clear enough , as to both points . and should i admit ( as i think i may ) that , by word , is meant somewhat else ( as he tells us ) in forty other places : this is nothing to the purpose . for we are not here enquiring , what by the word logos is meant in aristotle , or what in plato , or what in forty other places ; but what is meant , by the word , in this place : nor what , by gods , is meant in psal. . , . i have said ye are gods , but ye shall die like men ; but what by god is here meant , where it is said , the word was with god , and the word was god. nor is here any need of a rhetorick lecture , to inquire , by what trope , or figure , or with what allusion , christ is here called the word ; it is enough that 't is christ who is here so called . and , after all his toil , i do not find , that himself hath the confidence to deny ( though he doth not think fit to grant it ) but that here , by the word , is meant christ ; and that god here mentioned , is god almighty ; and consequently , if st. john do not write non-sense ( as he is pleased to phrase it ) the place is to our purpose . now our new answerer , seems to me , to quit the first of these points ; and chooseth rather to act the arian , than the socinian , as taking that to be more defensible , pag. , , . and doth admit that , by the word here , is meant the person of christ ; and pre-existent to his incarnation ; as by whom the world was made , at least as by an instrument ; and doth allow him to be god , though not the same god ; but that the father and the word are two gods ; ( p. . ) and can allow him the character of being over all , god blessed for ever ; and can so be as liberal of the title of god , to christ , as any trinitarian whatever ; p. . so that now the dispute is reduced to this ; when it is said , the word ( meaning christ ) was with god , and the word was god ; whether by god , be meant the true god , god almighty . of which we are to say more anon . another grant we have , pag. . where he doth admit , that a thing may be unum and tres ( one and three ) in several respects : and that 't is true indeed , he cannot say , that there is a contradiction in holding , that there may be three persons in god. and , in granting this , he grants what i undertook to prove . for he knows very well , that the business which i undertook , was not , to discourse the whole controversy at large ; but so stated the question , as to confine it to this single point , whether it be an impossibility , or inconsistence with reason , that there may be three somewhats ( which we call persons ) which are but one god ? and when he grants me , that there is in it no contradiction , or inconsistence with reason ; all the rest is beside the question . i know very well , that both this and the former answerer have made it their business to change the state of the question : and if what i bring to prove what i undertake , do not prove the task they set me ; they glory as if they had the better . but the lawyers tell us , that , when issue is once joined ; if we prove the thing in issue , we carry the cause ; and what is more than so , is over and above , or to spare . and a mathematician , if he prove what he proposeth , concludes with quod erat demonstrandum , ( he hath proved what he undertook to prove ; ) if he prove more than so ; 't is more than he was obliged to do . and if a logician prove ( propositionem negatam ) the proposition which is incumbent on him to prove , he hath done his work ; and if he prove more than so , it is more than he need to do . and accordingly , when this answerer doth acknowledge that i have proved what i undertake to prove , ( that there is no impossibility , there is no contradiction , nor inconsistence with reason , that three somewhats may be one god ) he ought to acquiesce therein , and acknowledge that i have done my work. for when the controversy was divided into two branches , whether the thing be true , and whether it be possible ; and it was the latter of the two that i undertook : if i have shewed , it is not impossible , ( which this answerer doth grant that i have done , ) i have done the work that i undertook . and if this be once agreed , it goes a great way as to the other branch , that the thing is true. for i find the last result of our adversaries , ( when they are close pressed , ) is commonly this , it is impossible , it is absurd , it is non-sense , it is inconsistent with reason , and therefore it cannot be true. and that therefore a force , no matter how great , must be put upon the words which do , how expresly soever , affirm it ( to make them signify somewhat else than what they plainly do signify ) then to admit it . and if i have ( as is now confessed ) destroyed this last reserve , let them press this point no more . or , if they will retract this grant , let the next answerer keep to this point , to prove it impossible , or inconsistent with reason , and not ramble out into other discourses , which are nothing to the purpose of what i proposed to prove . amongst his other concessions , i shall reckon that in pag. . where he argues from joh. . . that there is between the father , son , and holy ghost , a distinction so great , as that they may not unfitly be called three persons ( where i observe also , that he owns the personality of the holy-ghost , as of the father , and of the son. 't is true indeed , he seems to make the distinction between them , greater than i do . but i thus far agree with him , that there is , in truth , a distinction ; and that more than imaginary , or what depends only upon our imagination ; and greater than that of what we call the divine attributes . and therefore we reckon the persons to be but three ; but the attributes to be more . and we do admit , amongst the persons , a certain order or oeconomy ; such as in the scripture we find assigned to them . but do not own the distinction so great as to make them three gods. and that also of p. , . where he argues , that christ is indeed god , ( not only a dignified man : ) that god in christ was tempted , suffered , and died ; not man only . that the merits thereof are founded on the godhead . in plain terms , ( saith he ) if christ were only a man , extraordinarily assisted by god , and thereupon merited by his sufferings and death : 't was the man redeemed us by his blood , and not god. and p. . the like from rom. . . of whom , as concerning the flesh , christ came ; who is over all ; god blessed for ever . and asks , if i ever knew an unitarian , especially an arian , deny him that character ? and from heb. . . to the son he saith , thy throne , o god , endureth for ever ; a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of thy kingdom , &c. he argues , that it is not the humanity of christ that is here spoken of . for what ! is the humanity of christ called god ? is the humanity preferred before angels ? or did the humanity frame the world ? indeed ( he says ) they are apt to clog it with a limitation , ( as not acknowledging him co-equal with the father . ) but under that restriction , they can be as liberal of the title of god to christ as any trinitarian whatever . where i take what he grants : and , as to the co-equality , shall discourse it afterwards . more of this kind i shall have occasion to mention afterward . yet do not blame him for taking this advantage ( of shifting the person ) where he sees cause to grant what was before denied . but our new answerer hath yet another art. when he seems to cite what i say ; he takes the liberty very often to vary therein ( according as he thinks fit ) both from my words , and from my sense . and therefore i desire the reader not to take all as mine , which seems to be cited as such ; but so much only as he finds to be truly cited . it would be too long to mention all the places where i am so used . i shall only give instance in some of them . he tells us , pag. . that i indeavour to illustrate the trinity by an example in a cube , or die : and so far he says true . but not so in what follows , where three sides , he says , make one cube ; and which cube , he says , is not to be made without all the three sides . but certainly he can no where find these to be my words . i confess i am no great gamester at that sport : but i always thought ( till now ) that a die had six sides , and not only three . i have said indeed , that in a cube , or die , there be three dimensions , ( length , breadth , and thickness ; ) but i never called these , the three sides of a cube ; nor have i any where said , that a cube hath but three sides . i am represented , pag. , , , . as maintaining three personal gods. but he knows very well this is not my language ; but , that the three persons are one god ; not three gods , nor a council of gods , as he calls it . so , where he would ask the doctor , p. . whether these two gods , to wit , the father and the word , be one . he knows my answer must be , that these two , ( not , these two gods , ) are one god. and that i do no where call them two gods , but one and the same god ; according to that of christ himself ; i and the father are one. so , where he talks of adding several persons to our one god , pag. , . for he knows , that is not my language , but these three are god ; not that they are added to god : much less that bacchus and venus &c. may be thrust into the number . and p. . one of your gods : we have but one god. 't is he and his arian , that own two gods , p. . not we . another there is which runs through most part of his whole discourse ; wherein he willfully mistakes the state of the question : and then , what is brought to prove one thing , he mis-applies as brought to prove another ; and then makes a great out-cry , that it doth not prove , what it was never brought to prove . and this he calls cross purposes . he knows very well , that the question was by me clearly stated ( not as to the whole doctrine of the trinity at large , but ) as to the possibility . that ( whatever the socinians pretend ) there is no impossibility , non-sense , or inconsistence with reason , that three somewhats ( which we call persons ) may be one god. and this he owns to be the state of the question , p. . to prove the same agreeable to the common notions of humane reason . and it is done by shewing that , according to the common notions of humane reason , nothing is more common than that what in one consideration are three , or many , is yet in another consideration but one. thus in one cube there be three dimensions ; length , breadth , and thickness . so the understanding , will , and memory , in one soul. so the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a power to know , to will , and to doe , in the same intelligent agent ; and the like . 't is therefore not inconsistent with reason ( and this answerer doth allow it ) for one to be three ; nor is it non-sense to say , these three are one ; or i and the father are one ; or that three somewhats may be one god. the former answerer complains of these resemblances , as impossible to be apprehended by the common people ; and desires some more familiar parallel ( than that of a cube , or die ) that the tankard-bearer may apprehend ( in his p. , . ) yet i believe his tankard-bearer is not so dull of apprehension , as he would have us think . for if he have ever seen a die ( as most of them have , ) or shall now be shewed one , he may be able to apprehend , ( without a metaphysick , or mathematick lecture ) that in a die , there is length , breadth , and thickness , ( and that it is as broad as it is long , and as thick as either ; ) and yet it is not three dies , but one die. however , to gratify his request , i have given him some other ; as that the same man , may have three dignities , or three kingdoms , and sustain three persons , or three relations , without thereby becoming three men ; with other like . with this , our new answerer is not pleased . he is ashamed , he doth blush for me , &c. ( how much am i obliged for this his great compassion ! ) but all this is but banter , ( it is not argument , ) and no sober man will be more of his opinion for this language : and much less for that of st. john's writing non-sense , of a lying revelation , of a three-headed monster , p. , . and other such indecent language of god and the scripture . but , why so displeased with these simile's ? these are too mean , too familiar ; he expected somewhat higher , somewhat more distinct , p. . ( i see it is as hard a matter to please my two answerers , as to serve two masters . the one complains my simile's are not familiar enough ; the other that they are too familiar ; he expected somewhat more sublime ▪ ) these do not prove , that a trinity in unity is necessary to the perfection of the godhead , p. . true : these alone do not prove that there is a trinity in unity in the godhead ; much less do they prove , that a trinity in unity is necessary to the perfection of the godhead . nor were they brought to prove it . they were brought to prove , there is no inconsistence , but that there may be a trinity in the unity of the godhead . and if they prove thus much , ( he perhaps may have cause to be ashamed , but ) i see no reason why i should be ashamed , ( or any one for me . ) now , that they prove thus much ; he hath already granted , that a thing may be one and three , in divers respects : and that 't is no contradiction , to hold , that there may be three persons in god. they have proved therefore , what they were brought to prove . but , says he , p. . our debate is not , whether there may be three persons in god. yes ; our debate is , whether there may be . not , whether there be. and he knows the question was so stated by me ; and so acknowledg'd by himself ; upon this single point , whether there be any impossibility in it . ( and so owned by himself , p. . ) not whether it be so ( for this , i had before said , was not to be argued upon the topick of reason alone ; ) but whether it be agreeable to the common notions of humane reason , that it may be so . and if this were the question , ( as he owns ; ) and this be proved ( as he owns also ; ) then i have proved , what i undertook to prove . and have no reason to be ashamed , either of the undertaking , or of the proof . 't is our new answerer ( who doth wittingly and willingly mis-state the question ) that is at cross purposes ; while he applies those arguments to one point , which he knows were brought to prove another , ( which point himself grants to be proved ; he cannot say , there is a contradiction in it , pag. . ) and then complains , that they ( alone ) do not prove what they were never brought to prove . of like nature is that other point ; where he tells us , that we do now venture , to prove it to be agreeable to the common notions of humane reason ; that is , not inconsistent with it . and we do so . but he would have it thought , that it is but now of late that any have presumed to this confidence , pag. , . and would have us content , modestly to acknowledge it a meer mystery ; and to rely upon the authority of the church , and tradition ; without pretending , that it is agreeable to reason . now , that there is in it a mystery , we readily grant , ( and so there is in the whole doctrine of our redemption ; god manifested in the flesh , &c. tim. . . ) as that which , without revelation , we could not have found out by meer reason ; and , that it is above reason , ( that is , more than what reason alone could have taught us : ) but not that it is against reason , or inconsistent with it . this is not the doctrine of the trinitarians ; nor ever was that i know of . nor is it tradition only , or the church's authority ; but the authority of scripture that we rely upon ▪ which is a true , not a lying revelation . nor is it ( as he pretends ) a new doctrine ▪ not raised till several hundred years after christ , ( as if the doctrine were to be dated from the time of penning the athanasian creed ; ) but ( as old at least as the new testament ; ) and never contested ( that i know of ) till several hundred years after christ , when the arians arose . but here again my answerers are not agreed : ( so hard it is to please them both ; ) while one complains , 't is but of late ; the other tells me , 't is old-fashioned , ( in his p. ▪ thus dr. wallis may see , that his notions concerning the trinity are old-fashioned ; not of a new mode . ) and truly i take him to be more in the right ; that 't is not a new quirk , but old-fashioned doctrine ▪ and i like it never the worse for being so . as to what i have said of joh. . . it is more than forty years , ( and well towards fifty , ) since i first preached it in london , on that text , ( as i have since done , there and elsewhere , more than once ; ) and i did not then take it to be new , but what i had been always taught . and as to that of the three dimensions in a cube , it is forty years or more , since i first discoursed it at oxford , with dr. ward , then astronomy-professor there , and since bishop of salisbury ; and as to the doctrine in general , ( of three persons in one god , ) it is no newer , than the new testament . but here again our answerer forsakes the question : for the question is not , whether it be a new , or old , adventure : but whether it be inconsistent with reason , that three may be one : or ( as he words it , p. . ) that a trinity in unity is absurd . another piece of the same art it is , where my word of personality is by him changed for personation , p. , . for which i would not have quarrelled with him , if by changing the word , he had not meant to change the sense also . for to personate a man , ( he tells us , p. . ) is but to compose ones actions in likeness of him ; and that one cannot personate three together , but one after another . but my personality ( he knows ) is more than this personation . it is not only acting a person , but being a person . a man may successively personate , or act the person of , a king , and a father ; without being either this or that : but when the same man is both a king and a father ( which he may be at the same time , as well as successively , ) this is more than only to act them . and if by personation he mean no more than acting a person , i wonder how he can tell us , p. . that personation is the greatest perfection of being ; and that he never could apprehend any other real unity but personation . what ? no real unity but acting a person by imitation ? sure there is . the bottom , and top , and middle of a mountain , are one mountain : yet i do not take mount atlas to be a person , or to act a person ; much less to become one mountain by personation , or acting a person ▪ of like nature is it , where ( to do me a kindness ) he will state my cube more to my purpose ; p. . ( meaning the contrary . ) but how ? in a marble cube may be two accidents , hardness , and coldness . there may be so . but what then ? then , ( he says , ) here are three cubes more for me . he would have it thought , i suppose , that i had before discoursed of three cubes ( whereas i spoke but of one cube , under three dimensions ; ) and he will now help me to another three . but he is out again . for the cold cube , the hard cube , and the marble cube , are but one cube , not three cubes . 't is the same cube that is cold , and hard , and marble . it would have been much the same , if , instead of a cube , he had taken a marble bowl , or ball ; and then told me , 't is cold , and hard , and round . true. and yet it is but one bowl , not three bowls : one ball , not three balls . and what is there in all this of inconsistent absurdity ? it seems to me very consistent ; not absurd : and it suits my notion very well . but , says he , p. . not to suppose the simile altogether impertinent , ( very well ! ) yet it is in our case . why in our case ? for our debate ( he says ) is not , whether there may not be three persons in god. yes : that is our debate : and the true state of the question . all his other excursions are beside the question . but the simile , though not impertinent , is yet ( he says ) most absurd , because not adequate ; and it is a general rule with him ( p. . ) where he brings a simile , to have it adequate , that it may really prove the matter designed . now that my simile's are not adequate ( so as to prove all that is to be said of god , or the blessed trinity ) i had told him at first , and more than once ; and that they were not intended so to be ; ( and i tell him now , that i did purposely make choice of such as were a great way off , that it might not seem as if i would have them thought to be adequate , as to all that is to be said of the trinity . ) and as to the rule he goes by ; perhaps it may be his method , where much is to be proved , to prove it all at once , ( and take all arguments to be absurd , which do not at once prove all. ) but we who are conversant in cubes and demonstrations ( as he phraseth it ) think fit sometimes to use another method : and , where much is to be proved , to proceed by steps . we first propose one thing , and prove that : then another , and prove that : and so on . and if what be brought to prove the first step , do prove what it is brought to prove ; we do not say , the argument is absurd , because it doth not prove all at once : but , that it is a good argument so far . and , i think , ( if he will here give me leave to use a simile which is not adequate , ) it is a method used by other men , as well as mathematicians . for , if a man be to mount a pair of stairs ; we do not say , the first step is absurd , because that alone doth not bring him to the top : or , if to go a journey , that the first step is absurd , because it doth not bring him to his journeys end : but the first step brings him so far ; and the second , somewhat farther ; and so on , till ( step by step ) he comes to the top , or to his journeys end. now , there being divers points concerned in the doctrine of the trinity ; i stated my question , not so as to prove all at once ; but singled out this one point , that it is not inconsistent with reason ( or , to use his own words ; it is agreeable to the common notions of humane reasoning , ) that what in one consideration are three , may in another consideration be one ; and , that there may be three somewhat 's , which are one god. but , whether indeed there be so , is another step ; and whether these somewhat 's may fitly be called persons , is yet another . now , if i have made good my first step ; my argument or simile , is not only not altogether impertinent , but neither is it most absurd , yea not absurd at all ; because it proves what it was brought to prove . and , that so it doth , himself allows ; and tells us plainly , p. . he cannot say , there is a contradiction , in holding , that there may be three persons in god. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . but i find , he would fain be upon another point , p. . and draw me to it . a point not to be argued upon the topick of reason only , ( for , reason alone , can go no further than to prove it possible , or not inconsistent ; ) but to be argued from scripture , and divine revelations , whether indeed there are three somewhats ( which we call persons ) that are but one god. but this , i have told him already , is beside the question which i undertook . and , in this , it is he that is the aggressor , not i : and i only upon the defence . yet , because he is so desirous of it , i am content to go somewhat out of my way , to wait on him ; and to hear what he hath to say , why we should think that is not , which he confesseth may be without any contradiction to natural reason . and i shall take notice as i go along , what it is wherein we agree , as well as wherein we differ : that so we may not quarrel about what is agreed between us . he begins with the first commandment , p. , , , . and seems mightily to dread the guilt of idolatry , in admitting more gods than one : ( our case is , we are afraid of idolatry , p. . ) contrary to this commandment , of having no other god. ( and so i would have him be . but we shall find this fear will be over with him by and by . ) what ( says he ) was that commandment made for ? what! to prevent polytheism . why , how is that to be done ? by denying many gods. if it be not made to deny personal gods , 't is made to no purpose . and soon after ( with some indignation . ) what! is the divinity of christ implied in the new testament ? 't is denied in the first commandment . and , p. . pray , what scripture shall we regard , in competition with this commandment , written by the finger of god , and one of the only precepts he himself immediately delivered ? now i am so far from disliking his zeal for the first commandment ; that i do perfectly agree with what i find in that commandment ; i am the lord thy god ( the lord god of israel ) thou shalt have no other god but me. ( and this i shall desire him to remember by and by . ) he may add that of deut. , . ( for in this i agree also ) hear , o israel , the lord our god ( the lord god of israel ) is one lord. and that of mat. . . thou shalt worship the lord thy god ( the lord god of israel , ) and him only shalt thou serve . and that of cor. . . to us there is but one god. ( and as many more places , as he pleases , to that purpose . ) and from all these i do agree , that we are to have but one god and no more ; ( not two gods. ) no other god than the lord god of israel : that we are to worship him alone , and none else ; ( not sathan , not the god of ekron , not any god , or man , or angel , who is not the lord god of israel . ) for all this i grant to be there fully taught . and i am willing to put as great weight upon this solemn set precept of the first commandment , as he doth , ( and perhaps more . ) he would have us shew ( if we can ) p. . where this commandment is abrogated . i say , no where . it was never abrogated : never repealed : it remains ( i grant ) still in its full force . and therefore we own no other god , but the lord god of israel . and this lord god of israel , we say is one lord , one god , and no more gods than one. we say indeed , there is a wise god , a powerful god , an almighty god , an eternal god , a just god , a merciful god , god the creator , god the redeemer , god the sanctifier ; a god who in the beginning created the heaven and the earth , a god who in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth , and the heavens are the work of his hands , a god of abraham , a god of isaac , a god of jacob , a god who brought the children of israel out of egypt , a god who brought them out of the north country , a god who is our mighty redeemer , a god who is a saviour of all that trust in him , a god who doth create in us a clean heart , and doth renew a right spirit within us , a god who gives us a heart of flesh , a god who gives us a new heart , who putteth his fear in our hearts , who writes his law in our inward parts , a god who searcheth the heart and trieth the reins , a god who hath visited and redeemed his people , and hath raised up a mighty salvation for us . but we say , the lord god of israel is all this ; and , in being all this , he is but one god ; and , that there is no other god but one. and we grant , that whoever owns any other god as a true god , or worships a false god , breaks this commandment . i do not know what he would have us grant more upon this commandment . i wish he do not think we have granted too much . he says , p. . we vitiate this commandment , by bringing in new persons , by adding several persons to our one god. no : we add no persons to our god ; we say , that god the creator , god the redeemer , god the sanctifier , ( or , in other words , the father , son , and holy-ghost , ) are this one god ; not added to him . nor are they new persons added to god ; but , are god ; and ever were so . he would have us think , p. . that the father only , ( and not the son , or holy-ghost ) is the only true god ; because of joh. . . the words are these , this is life eternal , to know thee ( not only thee ) the only true god ( to be that god , beside which there is no other true god , ) and jesus christ whom thou hast sent . and we say the same that is here said . the father is the only true god ( the lord god of israel , beside whom there is no other true god ; ) the son is also , not another god , ( as the arians say , and this answerer , p. . ) but the same only true god ( the lord god of israel ; and he is expresly so called , luk. . , . ) and the holy-ghost likewise , ( for these three are one , ▪ joh. . . ) and the words ( without any force put upon them ) may be thus read , to know thee ( and whom thou hast sent , jesus christ ) to be the only true god. for the word only is not a restrictive to thee , but to the true god. and this is not only a new querk or criticism ( which is the only answer he gives to this defence , ) but is the true sense of the place . for the same writer doth ▪ in another place , say the very same thing of god the son , joh. . . we are in him that is true , even in his son jesus christ ; this is the true god , and eternal life . now if scripture must interpret scripture , ( as he tells us , p. . ) certainly s. john in his epistle ( ▪ joh. . . ) understood what himself said in his gospel ( joh. . . ) and that , what he said of the father's being the only true god , was not exclusive of the son ; to whom himself gives the same title , this is the true god , and this is eternal life . and this i think is a full answer to what he would urge from this place ; or from ( what he joins with it ) cor. . , , . to us there is but one god. which is no more express to his purpose , than this is : nor doth he pretend that it is ; but puts them both together , p. . there is one place more , which comes under consideration , which ( because he finds it pinch ) he would fain shake off , p. . it is that of joh. . , , , . in the beginning was the word ; and the word was with god , and the word was god ; the world was made by him ; all things were made by him ; and without him was not any thing made which was made ; and the word was made flesh , and dwelt amongst us . the former answerer would fain shuffle off this place ( in his p. . ) upon one of these three points ; ( for , otherwise , he grants , it is for our purpose ; ) either that by the word is not meant christ ; or , by god , not the true god ; or else that s. john writes non-sense . now the last of the three , i suppose our new answerer will not say ; because he pretends a great reverence for scriptures . the first he quits ; and doth admit ( according to the arian sense , which he looks upon as more defensible than that of the socinians ) that , by the word , is here meant the person of christ ( who was afterward incarnate of the virgin mary ; ) and that he was pre-existent to his incarnation ; as by whom the world was made , at lest as by an instrument . and that he was with god ( the true god ) at least in the beginning of the world ( if not sooner ; ) and that he was god. all the doubt is , whether these two gods ( for so he calls them ) to wit the father and the word , be one , p. . now , if he be god ; he must be either a true god , or a false god. that he is a false god , methinks they should not say . and , if he be a true god , he must be the same god with the father ; who is the only true god , joh. . . that he is to be worshipped with religious worship ; both the arians and the socinians do allow . and if he be god ( as the arians and this answerer do affirm , ) this worship , must be divine worship . and he must be then the lord god of israel ; or else they break that precept , thou shalt worship the lord thy god ( the lord god of israel and him only shalt thou serve , mat. . . if he be the lord god of israel , but not the same lord god of israel : how doth this agree with that , deut. . . hear , o israel ) the lord our god is one lord ? and if he be another god ( whether true or false ) then do they break the great and first commandment , thou shalt have no other god but me ; ( no other god , true or false , great or little , equal or unequal ; but the lord god of israel . ) on which commandment this answerer doth ( deservedly ) lay so great a stress ; as we heard before . what was it made for , if not to prevent polytheism ? how shall it be done , but by denying many gods ? if not to deny personal gods ; it is made to no purpose . how is it consistent with that first commandment , ( that solemn and set precept of the first commandment , that was delivered by god himself ; written by the finger of god ; and never abrogated ; ) to bring in new persons ; to add persons ( one or more ) to this only god , though particularly prohibited , and not break it ? what! is the divinity of christ implied in the new testament ? it is denied in the first commandment ( if he be not the same god who is there meant : ) and pray , what scripture shall we regard in competition with this commandment ? with more to the same purpose . whether he will make use of the popish distinction of latria and doulia , ( for his two gods , not co-equal ) i cannot tell . but the commandment says expresly , thou shalt have no other god , but me , equal or unequal . nor doth this error end here ( as he proceeds : ) for our adversaries are not always so lucky as to see consequences . for should some revelation ( such as , he says , is not impossible ) deify more men than ever the heathen did ; here 's no fence left . ( here 's room enough to thrust in his jupiter , bacchus , venus , &c. of which he tells us , p. . ) and 't is in vain ( he tells us ) in such a case , to pretend that the number would be of offence to us : for if we consider aright , there is no more reason for one number than another . and he thinks , that if there be more than one , it is more honourable they should be infinites ; because all between one and infinite , is imperfect . with much more of like nature . of all which i know not what better to think , than that he had forgot all this , when afterwards ( at p. . ) he will have these two gods ( as he calls them ) to wit , the father and the word , not to be one , but two and separate . nor will it excuse the matter to say , that this other god , is not co-equal with the father . for , at this rate , the polytheism , or many gods of the heathen , would be excused , as out of the reach of this commandment . for they did not make all their gods co-equal to their great jupiter ( nor perhaps any of them equal to our god. ) but jupiter was their god paramount , and the rest were either middling gods , or lesser gods. but yet this did not excuse them from polytheism and idolatry , within the reach of the first commandment . for that commandment ( that unrepealed law ) forbids all other gods , whether equal or unequal : the leeks and onions in egypt ( which are said to have been there worshipped ) as well as the calves at dan and bethel . nor is it less idolatry , nor less within the reach of this commandment , to worship the god of ekron , because not co-equal to the god of israel . we therefore chuse to say , that christ is indeed god ( as he is expresly called , joh. . . the word was with god , and the word was god ; and hebr. . . thy throne , o god , endureth for ever : and in many other places : ) and not only a man , extraordinarily assisted by god , ( as this answerer grants also , at p. . ) that he was in the beginning , and in the beginning was with god ; joh. . , . ( and therefore was pre-existent before his incarnation ; and did not then begin to be. ) that he was in the beginning , and all things were made by him , and without him was not any thing made that was made ; that the world was made by him ; joh. . . . ( and is therefore the same god , who in the beginning created the heaven and the earth , gen. . . ) that of him it is said , thou , lord , in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth , and the heavens are the works of thy hands , heb. . , . cited out of psal. . . ( and is therefore the same god , to whom that long prayer , psal. . was made ; and of whom so many great things are there said ▪ and which cannot belong to any but the supreme god : ) and no doubt but , when this was there said by the psalmist , he meant it of that god , who in the beginning created the heaven and the earth , gen. . . that he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the being above all things ( or the supreme being , ) god blessed for ever ( or , the ever-blessed god ) rom. . . ( which are titles too high for any lower than the supreme god. ) that what is said of god indefinitely ( as contra-distinguished from christ in particular ) rev. . . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , from him which is , and which was , and which is to come ( or which shall be ) and from jesus christ , &c. ; is particularly applied to jesus christ as his character , ver. . i am alpha and omega , the beginning and the ending , saith the lord , ( he that liveth , and was dead , and liveth for evermore , ver. . ) which is , and was , and is to come ; the almighty . that he is the true god , joh. . . ( and therefore the same god with the father ; who is the only true god , joh. . . and no other true god but what he is . ) that he and the father are one , joh. . . that the father , and the word , and the spirit , these three are one , joh. . . and christ , not another god , but the same god , manifested in the flesh , justified in the spirit , seen of angels , preached unto the gentiles , believed on in the world , received up into glory , . tim. . . now i know not well , what could be said more ( at least , what more need be said ) to make the point clear : or , what character he can reasonably desire more , by which to describe the almighty supreme god ; and the same god with the father . he is god ; the true god ; the only true god , ( for there can be but one god , that is the only true god ; ) one with the father ; one with the father and holy-ghost ; the eternal god , ( who is , and was , and shall be ; who , when the heavens and the earth shall wax-●old as a garment , he is the same and his years shall not fail ; ) the almighty ; the mighty god ; the eternal father ; the god who in the beginning made the world ; who made all things ; and without whom not any thing was made that was made ; who in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth , and the heavens are the works of his hands ; who is the son of god , the begotten of the father ; the only-begotten of the father , ( and therefore of the same nature with the father , however not the same person , or not under that consideration . ) nor can he say , this is impossible , a contradiction , or inconsistent with reason , and that therefore , though the words be clear and plain , yet we must seek out some other sence to be forced upon them : for this point is already gained ; and he doth confess it , p. . that there is no contradiction , in holding that there may be three persons in god. and , if there be no contradiction in it , why should we be afraid to say , what in scripture is said so plainly ? or , why should we set up two gods where one will serve , and when the scripture says , there is but one ? he 'll say perhaps , god made the world by christ. and we say so too . but not as by a tool or instrument , ( as he would have it , p. . ) but rather as by his power or wisdom . but the power and wisdom of god , are not things diverse from god himself ; but are himself . ( much less are they different gods from god himself . ) and , even amongst us , the power and wisdom of a man , are not things distinct from the man ; ( in that sense wherein the words thing and mode are contra-distinguished ; ) much less are they distinct men from the man whose power and wisdom they are . the man and his wisdom ; the man and his power ; are not distinguished ut res & res , ( as the schools speak ) but ut res & modus . and power and wisdom ( in the same man ) ut modus & modus . for though a man may subsist without wisdom ( but god cannot ; ) yet wisdom cannot subsist without somewhat that is wise ; nor this man's wisdom without the man ; and therefore this wisdom ( according to the school-distinction ) must be modus ▪ and not res. ( and the like of power . ) so that if we say , that christ is the power of god ; or the wisdom of god ( as he is called cor. . . ) and that god , by his power and wisdom , made the world ; it doth not follow , that this power , or wisdom of god , is another god from god himself : but god and his wisdom , or god and his power , are god himself . consonant to this it is , where it is said , col. . . in him are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge . and perhaps it is this divine wisdom , who tells us , prov. . , ▪ . the lord possessed me in the beginning of his ways ; i was from everlasting , from the beginning ; when he prepared the heavens , i was there ; and much more to the same purpose . so the holy ghost is called the power of god , luk. . . the holy-ghost shall come upon thee , and the power of the highest shall over-shadow thee . now shall we say , ▪ because god is wise in heart , and mighty in strength , job . . or because by his wisdom and power he made the world ; therefore his wisdom and his power are distinct gods from himself ? or if we should say , that god as the fountain of being , may be called the father ; and the same god , as the fountain of wisdom , be called the son ; and , as the fountain of power , be called the holy-ghost : there is nothing of this that is inconsistent with reason , but very agreeable with the common notions of humane reasoning ; and yet all these ( however under divers considerations ) are but one god. but here i must caution again ( for i find people are willing to mistake , or mis-apply what i say . ) that i do not set down this as the adequate distinction between the three persons ( for this i do not pretend throughly to understand ; ) but only that it is not inconsistent with reason , that it may be so : and that there is no necessity , upon this account , to set up another god ▪ or we may say ( much to the same purpose ) that god by his word , and spirit , made the world ; and yet that his word , and his spirit , are not therefore distinct gods from himself . and we have them all mentioned in the story of the creation . god created the heaven and the earth , gen. . . the spirit of god moved upon the face of the waters , ver . . and god said , ( or spake the word ) let there be light , &c. ver. , , , , , , . and ver. . let us make man. and psal. . , . by the word of the lord were the heavens made ; and all the host of them by the spirit , or breath of his mouth : he spake and it was done , he commanded and it stood fast . ( and to the like purpose , psal. . . job . . ) yet are they not three gods ; but rather three somewhats which are but one god. i have insisted the longer on this ; because i do not know , but that ( through the grace of god ) such a discourse as this , may have a like effect on him ( or some of his party ) as that of wittichius had on his friend sandius . and i have argued it calmly . i have used no scurrillous language ; nor given any reproachful terms . i do not oppress him with the authority of fathers , or councils ; but with scripture only ▪ and plain reason . and it seems to me so clear , that if they cannot see it ; it is from some other reason than from want of clearness . as to what i have said for explication of the athanasian creed ( though i cannot expect he should approve of that creed , while he retains his opinion , ) i do not find that he takes any great exceptions to what i say of it . he doth not like the words trinity in unity , as foreign and unscriptural , p. . he may ▪ ( if that will please him better ) put it into plainer english , and call it three in one : and then the words are scriptural ▪ these three are one. the possibility of gods being incarnate , he doth not deny . only he likes the arian incarnation better than ours . he seems well pleased , p. , . that i do not possitively affirm , this creed to be written by athanasius : that i do not anathematize the greek church : that i do not damn all children , fools , madmen , and all before christ ; ( as , he tells us , some rigid irinitarians , i know not who , have done too often : ) that i own the word person to be but metaphorical , ( which at p. . he did not like : ) which , i will not disoblige him , by unsaying . where it is that i have blamed the fathers , i do not remember . for i think the fathers do concur in this ; that there is a distinction between the three ( which we call ) persons ; greater than that between the divine attributes ; but not such as to make them three gods : and , that by calling them persons , they mean no more . and i say the same . i shall conclude with this observation upon the whole . he was at the beginning of his discourse , a direct socinian ; dreading the guilt of idolatry in having more gods than one ; as contrary to the first commandment : ( and therein i agree with him : ) but denied the divinity of christ ; as the socinians do . and thus he continues till toward the end of p. . but then begins ( silently ) to tack about ; and , after a while ▪ doth with as much earnestness affirm the divinity of christ , as he had before denied it ; that christ was god from the beginning , before the world was ; that he was afterward incarnate and became man ; and , as god and man , redeemed us , &c. ) and here he is orthodox again . but then tells us , that this god is not the same god , or co-equal with the father , but another god. and at length tells us plainly , that there are , at least , two gods , to wit the father and the word : ( for now the fear of having more gods than one , is over with him : ) and is by this time a perfect arian . and he who , from a socinian , is thus turn'd arian , may at the next turn ( for ought i know ) turn orthodox . in order to which , i would advise him to keep to the sound part of his first opinion , while he was a socinian , namely , that we ought to acknowledge and worship but one god : and the sound part of his second opinion when he was turned arian ; namely , that christ ( the word ) was god , from the beginning , ( before the world was ; ) that he was afterward incarnate , and so became god and man ; that , as such , he suffered , died ▪ and wrought out our redemption ▪ ; that the merits of his sufferings are founded on his godhead ; which otherwise would not have been meritorious , if he were only a man ▪ however extraordinarily assisted by god. and when he hath so joined these two together , as to make them consistent : he will be therein orthodox . and if , to these two , he add a third ( which he owns also ) namely , that there is no contradiction , in holding , there may be three persons in god : he will then be able to answer all the cavils which either the arian or the socinian shall bring against it . finis . a proposal to perform musick in perfect and mathematical proportions containing i. the state of musick in general, ii. the principles of present practice ..., iii. the tables of proportions, calculated for the viol ... / by thomas salmon ... ; with large remarks upon this whole treatise by the reverend and learned john wallis ... salmon, thomas, - . approx. kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from -bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : - (eebo-tcp phase ). a wing s estc r ocm this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons . universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase , no. a ) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set ) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, - ; : ) a proposal to perform musick in perfect and mathematical proportions containing i. the state of musick in general, ii. the principles of present practice ..., iii. the tables of proportions, calculated for the viol ... / by thomas salmon ... ; with large remarks upon this whole treatise by the reverend and learned john wallis ... salmon, thomas, - . wallis, john, - . [ ], , [ ] p., leaves of plates : ill. printed for john lawrence ..., london : . errata: p. [ ]. advertisement: p. [ ] and p. [ ]-[ ] at end. reproduction of original in library of congress. created by converting tcp files to tei p using tcp tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between and available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the , texts created during phase of the project have been released into the public domain as of january . anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. % (or pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf- unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p , characters represented either as utf- unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng musical temperament. - tcp assigned for keying and markup - spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images - mona logarbo sampled and proofread - mona logarbo text and markup reviewed and edited - pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a proposal to perform musick , in perfect and mathematical proportions . containing , i. the state of musick in general . ii. the principles of present practice ; according to which are , iii. the tables of proportions , calculated for the viol , and capable of being accommodated to all sorts of musick . by thomas salmon , rector of mepsal in the county of bedford . — exemplaria graeca nocturnâ versate manu , versate diurnâ . hor. de art . poet. approved by both the mathematick professors of the vniversity of oxford . with large remarks upon this whole treatise , by the reverend and learned john wallis d. d. imprimatur . gilb. ironside . vicecancel . acad. oxon. london : printed for john lawrence , at the angel in the poultrey . . to the valiant and learned john cutts esq adjutant general in the service of his imperial majesty . this , sir , is so far from the common road of dedications , that at first sight it will appear neither fit for me to give , nor you to receive . shall a person so publickly employed in the greatest attempts , and most victorious successes , which the world has seen for these many ages , have leisure for philosophical speculations , or divert to a science proper for ease and pleasure ? or should one consecrated to the divine service , so laboriously search into the intrigues of nature , and assist in the advancement of an art , which with its airy pleasures often captivates the soul to sensual things , and makes it more devoted to the world , that is to be conquered with another sort of victory than your arms can obtain ? all this i have thought on , yet still find so much in this affair , as not only to excuse me , but to make it acceptable to you . this mathematical discourse is indeed the anatomy of musick , wherein the infinite wisdom of the great creator appears : how delightfully and wonderfully is it made ! marvellous are thy works , o lord , and that my soul knows right well . all the best proportions , are the best chords of musick , and strike the ear with a pleasure agreeable to the dignity of their numbers . the effects of this the sensualist is satisfied with , and desires to seek no further . but is it not grateful to every gentleman , who is ennobled with such a soul as yours , to know the divine harmony of the pleasure he enjoys ? is it not the duty and felicity of a rational being , to consider how the whole system of the world is framed in consort ? how musical instruments observe their arithmetical laws , all the little meanders of the ear faithfully conveying the organiz'd sounds , and the soul of man made to receive the delight , before he himself knows from whence it comes ? how great is this ! how mean am i , to set forth such a divine subject ! however charming this still voice may be , yet no body will believe it can be heard amongst drums and trumpets : why should these papers hope for acceptance in the camp ? i must confess i should think them unseasonable , had not you , my excellent friend , told me that your most renowned general lorain does in all the intervals of action govern his army like a colledge , and allow time for the repose of the mind , as well as for the over-running subdued countries . you may then reflect upon the great creator and governour of the world , who gave you being , and now preserves you in the most eminent hazards ; these shall help you to contemplate the infinite wisdom , and shall be of the greatest advantage to you , since piety is the best support of courage , and gives a refreshing ease amidst the rage of war. but the design of war is peace , and your friends here long for the return of those cool hours , wherein you may not only have leisure for these theoretical studies , but advance true practical wisdom ; which you have already represented to us in the most advantageous dress , and enflamed our desires to have her interest promoted to greater heights . i know the glory of the field is very tempting , but still you retain as great a passion for learning ; this hath ever found a place in the noblest breasts : the first great conqueror of this island is as glorious for his pen as his sword , and by his commentaries perpetuated his victories . we have incomparably more of athens here in england , than your confederates the venetians this year got possession of : that ancient treasury was long ago rifled , and its jewels brought into the western part of europe : this the learned proprietors were very sensible of . when cicero return'd home from greece by rhodes , the famous orator there apollonius begg'd the favour of a declamation : all the company were amazed , and strove with the highest expressions to acknowledge the obligation ; but apollonius sate sad and silent : which when he perceived cicero took amiss , he said , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . i value and admire you , o cicero ; but in the mean time i must pity the fortune of greece , since those excellent goods , learning and eloquence , ( which were all that was left ) are now by you brought over to the romans . plutarch , in the life of cicero . the offers made in these papers , are the musical spoils and relicks of athens , a long time buried in obscurity ; and though some years ago published to the world in their own language , yet never known to those whose greatest concern it was to be acquainted with them . and indeed musick now very much wants such patrons as you are , whose reverence to antiquity and learning , may give preheminence to the nobler part ; which would at once both advance and regulate the practick pleasures . it must be acknowledged that this divine science has a great while sunk with the devotion of churches , it has been little learned and little regarded by the religious ; so that the angelical praises , which we have the honour to communicate in upon earth , are faintly and unfrequently celebrated : this celestial accomplishment , which god ordained to enliven our dull affections , is every-where wanting ; that the pleasure is as low as the skill of performing this most grateful part of worship . hence has musick of late sought its principal glory in theatres , and sensual entertainments , too mean a service to be reckoned the designe of such an excellent art : the infinite wisdom created it for better purposes . and when god shall please to bless the world with greater degrees of love , and a better adoration of himself , he will raise up men and means thus to promote his glory . which directs me now to seek your patronage to the endeavours of , sir , your most humble and most affectionate servant , thomas salmon . mepsal , nov. . . advertisement to the reader . i would not suffer this proposal to be published , till i had first communicated it to the most eminent professors of this science , because having omitted the demonstrations i rely upon , the reader might be satisfied in their testimonies . i know it is not fair to offer any thing in mathematicks , without giving the demonstration with it as we go along ; but i considered that the principles of this science are very little known , and would not have been much regarded by gentlemen , till they first had seen the use and necessity of them . as i thought this the best course , so it has proved much better than i expected : for the most experienced professor in this part of learning , hath sent me not only his approbation , but his demonstration of my principles ; from whence the more inquisitive reader may receive a compleat satisfaction . errata . page . — line . for intension read intention . . — penult . for six read sixth . . — . for there read these . . — antepenult . insert the word add . . — . for numb . iii. read numb . iiii. . — . insert the word cross . ult. — ult . two iota's subscripts are wanting . a proposal to perform musick , in perfect and mathematical proportions . chapter i. of the state of musick in general . when the great empires of the world , were in the height of their glory , especially the grecian and roman , ( whose authors have left us lasting monuments of their excellency ) then did all sorts of learning flourish in the greatest perfection : the arms of the conquerors ever carrying along with them arts and civility . but to bring about a fatal period , did the north swarm with barbarous multitudes , who came down like a mighty torrent , and subdued the best nations of the world ; which were forc'd to become rude and illiterate , because their new masters and inhabitants were such . amidst these calamities , no wonder that musick perished : all learning lay in the dust , especially that which was proper to the times of peace . but this darkness was not perpetual ; the ages at last clear'd up ; and from the ruines of antiquity , brought forth some broken pieces , which were by degrees set together ; and by this time of day are arriv'd near their ancient glory . guido has been refining above six hundred years . two things are chiefly conducing to this restoration : the great genius of the age we live in , and the great diligence in searching after antiquity : the excellent editions of the best authors , and the most laborious comments upon them , abundantly testifie the truth of this . in both these felicities , musick has had as great a share as any ; aristoxenus , euclide , nichomachus , alypius , bacchius , gaudentius , aristides , martian , have been with a great deal of diligence , set forth by marcus meibomius , at amsterdam , in the year . and above all , is , claudius ptolomaeus , who corrected and reconciled the pythagoreans , and aristoxeneans , the speculative and practical parties : this author was published by dr. wallis , at oxford , in the year , who added an appendix , comparing the ancient and modern harmony ; which is as the key to all our speculations , and without which the former authors were hardly intelligible . nor are we less beholding to the excellent genius of our modern musicians : there are , indeed , only two fragments ( as i know of ) remaining of the ancient grecian compositions ; one of pindar's , found by kircher , at messana in sicily ; the other of dionysius's , rescued by dr. bernard , from lying hid amongst some papers of arch-bishop vsher's ; both published with chilmeads notes in the end of aratus , at the oxford theatre : these are very short , and very imperfect , and therefore we cannot make any judgment of their songs or lessons . but by all that we can discern from their harmonical treatises , there never was such regularity in the designing of keys , such a pleasing sweetness of air , such a various contexture of chords , as the practical musicians are at this day masters of . it may seem now , that there remains nothing to be added , or to be learn'd out of those eminent authors i have here recited ; and the mighty power of musick , recorded by the most grave and authentick historians , may be lookt upon as romance , since all the excellencies now perform'd , cannot conquer the soul , and subdue the passions as has been done of old. but before we quit the testimonies of what musick has done , and despair of any further advancement ; let us enquire whether there be not something very considerable still wanting , something fundamental very much amiss , even that which the forementioned philosophers were likely to be most excellent at , when the learned and practical part were met in the same persons : whether this be not the accurate observation of proportions , which the soul is from heaven inform'd to judge of , and the body in union with it , must submit to . surely , i need not prove , that all musick consists in proportion ; that the more exact the proportions , the more excellent the musick : this is that , all the world is agreed in . for this , i have every man of my side , that except the voice , the instrument be well in tune , the best composition that was ever made , will never please ; and what is it to be in tune , but for every note to bear a due proportion to one another ? indeed , the proportions of musick are twofold ; first , in respect of tune , and second , in respect of time : the latter of these , which dr. vossius contends so much about , is certainly very considerable ; that the musick should agree with the poetical prosodia ; that all the variety of rythmical feet should have their proper movements . then would the sense be favoured by such measures , as were most fit to excite or allay the passions aim'd at ; and the words of a song would be capable of a more easie and intelligible pronunciation . since musicians have not undert●ken to be poets , and poets have left off being musicians ; this now disjoynted work , of making words , and setting tunes to them , has not been so exactly done as formerly , when the same authour perform'd both . but were it never so well done for time , and the proportions of tune neglected ; it could signifie nothing : none will pretend to make musick by playing good time , except the instrument and voice be in tune . however , till both these fundamental points be observed with such exactness and excellency , as the ancients took care of ; we must not say we do all they did , or that they could not prevail more than we can ; all the modern excellencies may be rendred ineffectual , by tolerating so many unproportionate imperfections , as are every where found amongst us . i shall not here give an account of all those accurate proportions , which the ancients contended for , nor their little enharmonical distances , whereof their more curious musick did consist ; but only of what is now practised amongst us , that the certain knowledge of our fundamental principles may produce performances , much more exact and powerful . chap. ii. the present practice of musick . the hours of study are tedious to some and precious to others : i cannot therefore suppose any man will search into the demonstrative reasons , or acquaint himself with the mathematical operations belonging to this proposal , till he be first assured of the truth and usefulness of it . so that what is purely speculative shall be reserv'd at present : this offers nothing but the principles of continual practice , whereby the reader may be lead into the knowledge of what he is always to design ; and taking the string of any instrument , may give his eye , and his ear , and his reason , an immediate satisfaction , in all that is here dictated to him . before we compose or perform any musick , two things must be provided for . i. that we have some little gradual notes , which may ( whilst the voice rises or falls ) succeed one another in the best proportions possible ; whereof ( as of so many alphabetical elements ) the whole musick must consist . ii. these gradual notes must be placed in such order , that the greater intervals ( compounded of them ) may in the best proportions possible arise out of them , and be come at with the greatest conveniency : that in all the points , where the single notes determine , there the larger chords may be exactly coincident ; if it was not for this , there could be no consort-musick . to set forth this , we may as well use the first seven letters of the alphabet , as all the hard names of guido's gamut ; because they were framed long before musick was brought into that good order wherein it now stands , and the first intension of them is not agreeable to the present practise . only this will be worth our observation , that whereas in the scale of musick , there are three octaves , ( besides the double notes and notes in alt ) viz. the base , mean , and treble , we may use three sizes of letters in a greater , middle and lesser character : as will be found in the tables of proportions . for understanding the two things pre-required , we suppose the proportion of one gradual note to be contained between a and b , then between b and c the proportion of another gradual note , though much lesser ; these two single proportions , viz. that of a b , and that of b c being added together , must exactly constitute a lesser third ; the proportions of the two gradual notes must determine in that point , where the compounded interval may be coincident with them . to proceed , if we add another gradual proportion from c to d , then must arise the exact proportion of a fourth , from the first given a to the note d : if one more be added from d to e , there must be found the exact proportion of a fifth , from a to e , and of a greater third from c to e. thus must the gradual notes be contrived to be exactly subservient to the greater intervals thorough all the octaves : and if at any time this cannot be ( as may happen in two or three instances ) such particular chords must be esteem'd inconcinnous and inconvenient , but they are very few , and lye much out of the way . if we settle one octave , the whole work is as good as done ; all the rest is only repetition of the same notes in a larger or more minute figure : for the eight notes which are used in constant practise , proceeding gradually , take up just half the string , from the sound open to the middle of it : and if we have occasion to go further , 't is but just the same over again . the great concern is in what order our gradual notes ( which are of different sizes ) must stand , from the key or sound given , till we arrive at the octave ; for there will be a great variety , according as the lesser gradual notes are placed sooner or later : this must be lookt upon as the internal constitution of an octave , which practical musicians commonly understand by their flat or sharp , that is , their greater or lesser third . but as much as i can observe from the compositions of the most eminent masters for these last twenty years , this internal constitution of an octave is but twofold : either with a greater third , sixth and seventh ; or a lesser third , six and seventh : in the same composition all are lesser , or all greater . there needs then only this twofold constitution of the octave to be considered by us , the two keys a and c : all the rest serve only to render the same series of notes in different pitches ; which is demonstrable by transposing tunes from one key to another : the tune remains the same , only the compass of the voice or instrument is better accommodated . these two keys a and c are called natural , because the proportions , originally assigned to each letter , keep those proper places , which either guido the first restorer or immemorial custom hath allotted to them ; whereas by taking other keys , as suppose g for a , the proportions or different sizes of the gradual notes are forced to shift their quarters , and by flats or sharps to straiten or widen their usual distances . 't is sufficient demonstration for all this , that when any tune is transposed into a or c , it wants nor flats nor sharps , whatever it did before . i shall in the first place give you the natural order of the gradual notes as they stand in the key a , where we have a lesser third sixth and seventh , exactly coincident with the third sixth and seventh gradual note . you have between every letter , that part or proportion of the string assigned which each gradual note requires : underneath you have the proportion of each compounded interval , what part of the string it 's stop must be when compared with the whole string open from the nut to the bridge . the constitution of the key a.   a. . b. . c. . d. . e. . f. . g. . a . a lesser third               a fourth               a fifth               a lesser sixth           /     a lesser seventh             /   an eighth               the experiment must be thus : you are to take any one string , and suppose it to be the key a , when it is open : then measure the th part of it , you will have b or one gradual note . not that the first fret must stand there , but the second ; for we are not reckning according to tableture , but notes specified by the first letters of their hard names : the half notes shall be considered afterwards . from the place of b measure the th part of the remaining string , there will be c , the least gradual note : and there you will arrive at the th part of the whole string , which is the proportion of the lesser third ; and the ear will acknowledge it to be so . from the place of c take the th part of the remaining string , there will be d , another gradual note , much wider than the last , between b and c , but something less than the first between a and b. at the place of d , you will arrive at the th part of the whole string , which is the proportion of a practical fourth . here , to prevent all perplexity and mis-understanding , the reader must carefully distinguish in the terms of art : the practical musician reckons how many gradual notes he has gone over from his key or sound given , and accordingly calls his intervals a third , fourth , and fifth , as having so many gradual notes contained in them ; but the mathematician regards only the parts of the string , what proportion the part stopped bears to the string open . here indeed the practical and mathematical terms are the same , a fourth part of the string mathematically measured , is a practical fourth ; but in all other chords they differ , as we have seen a lesser third to be the sixth part of a string . from the place of d take the th part of the remaining string , ( which is a gradual note of the same proportion with the first , between a and b ; ) here will be e : and here you will find you are arrived at the third part of a string , which is the grateful proportion of a practical fifth . the proportions of the lesser sixth and seventh , viz. ⅜ and / , are of a different sort from the rest ; the former chords arise from the natural division of an octave or duple proportion , there are formed by an artificial addition of a second or a third to the fifth : the former proportions are called by arithmeticians super-particular , these are super-partient . i believe the reader will not desire to be troubled with the nature of them here , but only to be informed how to measure them for his present satisfaction : he is to know then , that he must not take the upper number of / for the third part of the whole string , for then a lesser sixth would be the same as a fifth ; but he is to devide the whole string into eight parts , as the lower number specifies , and then where three of those parts determine from the nut , there will be a lesser sixth . this is the addition of the th part of the remaining string from e to f : for a open to e was the third part of the string , that is a practical fifth ; from a open to f will be three parts of the whole string divided into eight parts , which is a practical lesser sixth . a lesser seventh is produced by taking a th part of the remaining string from f to g , which is a lesser third above e , this will be found to determine at when the whole string is divided into parts , and therefore is the proportion / . from g take a th part of the remaining string , you will arrive at a , the precise middle of the whole string , so that an octave is a duple proportion ; the fullest and most perfect satisfaction that can be given to the ear. and by this is the whole proceeding demonstrated to be right , because not only by the way , every interval was exactly found in its proper place , but at last this chord , the sum total of all musick , does just contain all its particulars . after the same manner may the internal-constitution of an octave in the key c be demonstrated : i shall set it down without any explication , because the experiment and reason of both are alike . the constitution of the key c.   c. . d. . e. . f. . g . . a . . b . . c . a greater third               a fourth               a fifth               a greater sixth           /     a greater seventh             /   an eighth               though we have all along supposed a monochord or single string , to make this demonstration more evident , and to shew that all the gradual notes of an octave put together , arrive just at the middle of the string ; yet the progress of the proportions is the same , when we take some of them upon one string , some upon another . for each string is tuned unison to some part of that which went before ; so that 't is all one whither the proportions go along upon the same string , or go on to the next , when we come at the place of tuning unisons . as suppose upon the viol the fourth string be c open , when you come to e , or the fourth fret , you have a greater third ; then 't is all one whether you take the th part of the same string to make f at the fifth fret , or the th part of the next whole string to make f upon the first fret : 't is all one , because the third string open is tuned unison to e , or the fourth fret upon the fourth string . as i would avoid troubling my reader with needless difficulties , so i would not omit any thing of necessary information ; this last consideration makes me here add a discourse of seconds , which is the name whereby the gradual notes are commonly called : for reckning inclusively in musick , one interval , which must needs be contain'd between two sounds , is term'd a second . it is best to treat of them in that method , which our authors used in the classical times , because 't is their perfection we are now aiming at : they divided their musick into three sorts , diatonick , chromatick , enharmonick , which was so diversified by those several sorts of seconds or gradual proportions they used therein . . in diatonick musick , the foregoing constitution of an octave discovers three several sizes of seconds , viz. the th part of a string , the th part , and the th part . i would satisfie the reader in this variety , because he will think much to enter upon an observation , not yet received , except he knows some necessity for it . we must have the proportion of the th part of the string between b and c , as also between e and f , or we cannot bring our gradual notes into the form of an octave , into the compass of a duple proportion ; this is already acknowledged both by speculation and practice : no one ever yet pretended to rise or fall eight notes one after another , all of the same size . to this th part we must a th part , or we can never have an exact lesser third , which is the th part of the whole string ; but if we add another note of the same size , viz. a th part to make up that lesser third a fourth , we shall find that we have a great way over-shot the fourth part of the string , and without taking the th part , we can never hit it ; as will appear by the former demonstrations upon the monochord , in many instances . i must confess , this is so contrary to the common opinion of practical musicians , that i would not insist upon it , did not necessity compel me , did not the greatest reason and authority assure me , that it will not be hereafter denied : of these three sizes of seconds does the whole progress , from the key to the octave , consist in the forementioned order , being all along exactly coincident with the larger intervals . my authorities are cartes's musick , gassendus's introduction , wallis's appendix , and all other learned men , who have in this last age reviewed the harmonical concerns . 't is time certainly to receive into practice those improvements , which the greatest modern philosophers in the world have afforded musick . and indeed 't is in vain to stand out , nature always acknowledged and received them ; a good voice performing by it self , a faithful hand guided by a good ear upon an unfretted unconfined instrument , exactly observes them : all that i contend for is , that the practiser may know what he does , and may always make that his design , which is his excellency . when we have thus much granted , then may the last chapter of this proposal be very acceptable ; which puts into his hands the tables of proportions calculated for every key , that he may perform them upon those instruments , which have not hitherto been capable thereof . but to pursue our present subject . . chromatick musick is that which ascends and descends gradually by half notes . i don't mean such as is commonly call'd the half note in diatonick musick , the th part of the string , the proportion assigned between b and c , between e and f : these are self-subsistent , and reckned as two compleat steps , as well as any of the rest . and if we consider the value of their proportions , deserve rather to be reputed three-quarter than half-notes . chromatick half notes arise by the division of diatonick whole notes into the two best proportions , so that they will follow one another , and be all along coincident with the greater intervals . but those two vulgar half notes in the diatonick scale will not do so ; 't would make mad work , to place two or three of these ( viz. th parts ) one after another , you would neither have true thirds , fourths , nor fifths , in your whole octave ; you could not maintain any coincidence with other intervals . a chromatick half note is truly made by placing the fret exactly in the middle between the two frets of the diatonick whole note : this i first learn'd by the mathematical division of an octave or duple proportion into its natural parts ; then i was confirmed in it by aristides , lib. . pag. . who requires such a fund for the enharmonical dieses , and since upon tryal i find practical musicians very much satisfied in the experiment of such a division as fully answering their expectations . i think only this last age , ever since musick has began to revive , has aspired after these chromatick hemitones , and now they are used three , four , or five of them , in immediate sequence one after another ; if their proportions be truly given them , they are certainly the most charming musick we have : but whereas a natural genius easily runs into the diatonick intervals , these are not perform'd without a great deal of art and practice . . enharmonick musick is that which ascends and descends gradually by quarter notes , which the ancients called dieses : i don't mean that the whole octave , either in this or the chromatick musick , did consist only of these ; but after having used some of them , they took wider steps and larger intervals afterwards to compleat the fourth and fifth . i could here add an account of the true enharmonical quarter-notes ; the same mathematical operations produce their proportions : the grecian authors ( particularly aristides in the fore-cited place ) determine and record them , and they may become practical again ; but i resolve to propose nothing here , but what is of present practice . this i must say , that those invented for the harpsichord , are nothing to the ancient purpose : the harpsichord quarter-notes are designed only for playing more perfectly in several keys , with lesser bearings , which are never used in sequence , so as to hit four or five of them one after another ; but the true enharmonick scale offer'd its dieses , as gradual notes , whereby musick stole into the affections , and with little insinuating attempts got access , when the bold diatonick would not be admitted . chap. iii. an account of the tables of proportions . it is very possible , that those , who are devoted only to the pleasures of musick , may not care to trouble themselves with the foregoing considerations : 't is not every mans delight to be diving into the principles of a science , and to be enquiring after those causes which produce an entertainment for his senses ; 't is satisfaction enough to the greatest part of the world , that they find them gratified . and indeed the delights of practical musick enter the ear , without acquainting the understanding , from what proportions they arise , or even so much , as that proportion is the cause of them : this the philosopher observes from reason and experience , and the mechanick must be taught , for the framing instruments ; but the practiser has no necessity to study , except he desires the learning as well as the pleasure of his art. i have therefore so calculated my tables , that a man may without thinking perform his musick in perfect proportions ; the mechanical workman shall make them ready to his hand , so that he need only shift the upper part of his finger-board as the key requires . this i have tried , and found very convenient ; i shall therefore give a table of proportions in every key , that the mechanick may accordingly make a sett of finger-boards for each instrument , according to its particular length ; the proportions ever remaining the same , though the size be various . it is evident that one fret quite cross the neck of the instrument , cannot render the proportions perfect upon every string ; because sometimes a greater note is required from the nut or string open , sometimes a lesser : if then the fret stands true for one , 't will be false for the other ; if it stands between both , it will be perfect in neither . as for example : take the viol tuned note-ways , ( which is ever the same ) if you look back to the natural constitution in the former chapter , you will find that from the string d open , you must take the th part of the string ; from the string g open , you must take the th ●art of the string : accordingly the first fret from d ( which is the chromatick or just half the space of the whole note ) must be a great deal sharper , than the first fret of the string g. and the first fret of the string e being the least diatonick note to f , must be a great deal sharper than that which belonged to the string d , or g. so that every string must have its particular fret , whose proportions are here given to the mechanick , and he is to make use of them to the best advantage : not that i would confine him to the way of shifting finger-boards ; 't is possible the makers of instruments may find out some other way much more convenient : their great excellency and industry in making organs and harpsichords , proves them sufficient to accommodate the designs of musick : i only proposed what i had made use of , to shew that the experiment is practicable , which is enough for a scholar to do , whose province lies only in the rational part . as i here inform the mechanick , what proportions he is to set upon every string , so i must inform the practiser what keys he may play in , which is absolutely necessary ; for no man can set about performing any thing in musick , without knowing his key . this deserves to be consider'd , that the writers of musick may more certainly know where to fix their flats and sharps at the beginning of a lesson or song , and the number of them that is requisite : for as in vocal musick 't is a vast trouble in sol-fa-ing to put mi in a wrong place , so it is in instrumental musick , to have an information renewed in several places thorough the whole lesson by a flat or a sharp , which might have been known at first , once for all . as for instance , c key is now often chosen for a lesser third ; there is no doubt but the composer would have a lesser sixth as well as a lesser third , ( as appears by the interspersed flats ) ; if so , there ought to have been three flats prefixed , that a might be flat as well as e. i shall in this catalogue of keys offer you the variety of fourteen ; seven with a greater third , sixth , and seventh , the other seven with all these intervals lesser . but for these fourteen keys , you need to have only seven finger-boards ; for when the proportions are lodged between the same letters , then there will need no shifting : so that though the key be different , yet the instrument must be disposed in the same manner . as for instance , in the two natural keys a and c , the same finger-board will serve ; you begin indeed in two different places , the key a is a lesser third before c , but the series of proportions required , will be found exactly the same for both , according to the forementioned internal constitution . you may take this following catalogue of keys , with the due proportions assigned between each letter . i. a. . b. . c. . d. . e. . f. . g. .a. . b. .c. ii. one flat . d. . e. . f. . g. . a. . b ♭ . c. .d. .e. .f . iii. one sharp . e. . f ♯ . g. . a. . b. . c. . d. .e. .f . ♯ . g . iv. two flats . g. . a. . b ♭ . c. . d. . e ♭ . f. .g. .a. .b ♭ . v. two sharps . b. . c ♯ . d. . e. . f ♯ . . g. . a. .b. .c ♯ . .d . vi. three flats . c. . d. . e ♭ . f. . g. . a ♭ . b ♭ . c. .d. .e ♭ . vii . three sharps . f ♯ . g ♯ . a. . b. . c ♯ . d. . e. .f . ♯ . g ♯ . a . by this may we understand what a key is , and observe a series of notes in their just proportions passing on from the sound first given to the octave : the keys with lesser thirds have always in the first place a th part of the string , then a th part , and so on till you come to the same letter again in a lesser character : the keys with greater thirds have always in the first place a th part , then a th and so on till you come to the same letter again ; but the three last letters are in a lesser character , to shew , that as you began a lesser third short of the other , so you go a lesser third beyond it . thus you have as many keys provided for you , as need be used ; some things indeed have been set with four flats , but they are very difficult to the practiser , and i never saw any of them published ; but if it were requisite , other finger-boards might also be made for them , by the same rule as these are calculated . i know the keys b and f ♯ with lesser thirds are seldom used , but d and a with greater thirds are : now because the same finger-boards that serve for the two later , serve also for the two former , and the practiser may have them into the bargain , i thought it better to give these also , than to omit any thing that might easily be useful . when the composer finds that the instrument goes well in tune upon these keys , he will not hereafter be so much afraid of them . this calculation in the tables is but for one length , viz. of inches from the nut to the bridge , and but for one tuning upon the viol ; but the workman may be directed from these proportions given to fit them to the length of any instrument : and from the key given in any lyra tuning , for any sort of fretted instruments , he may find out what proportions fall upon every string . indeed harpsichords and organs , and such instruments , where frets are not used , cannot be accommodated the same way ; but the proportions and order of the notes , are the same in them : they have something that makes the different gravity and acuteness of their sounds , which may be so rectified , as also to render their musick in a mathematical perfection ; but this is left to the ingenuity of the artificer . i shall now observe something particularly of the tables of proportions , according to the numbers of the forementioned keys , which you will find prefixed at the head of each of them , as they are annexed to the end of this treatise . you will find , number i. that a and c will not allow the sixth base and treble-string to have their fifth frets upon the fourth part of the string , which makes a true practical fourth to the string open : for besides the least diatonick note , there falling two greater notes upon the strings d open , the stop g at the fifth fret falls a pretty deal sharper ; and accordingly the fifth and sixth bases will not be a good fourth to one another , but the fifth base must be tuned unison at that place where the table is marked . i have upon every plate marked where the exact th and th and th part of the string falls , that you may see when the gradual notes are not coincident with those larger intervals , as in the forementioned case . old mr. theodore stefkins , ( though he knew not the mathematical reason ) yet to make some allowance for this , was wont to direct the tuning of those strings sharper than ordinary ; by this table you will find exactly how much sharper the tuning and the stops must be . numb . ii. in d and f with one flat , you will find the same accident upon the fifth base , where the same care must be taken , and all the proportions will fall perfect . numb . iii. in g and b ♭ with two flats , you have another affair to be consider'd ; which is the tuning the third string to the chromatick note at the fourth fret of the fourth string , which causes those two strings not to be a true greater third to one another . the reason is , because e , to which the third string is commonly tuned , does not in these keys ( g and b ♭ with two flats ) fall upon the fourth , but the third fret of the fourth string , which is e flat ; so that the fourth fret is now the chromatick division between e flat and f : hence it follows also , that the first fret upon the third string , which is f , is not the th part of the string , but the th , viz. the later part of that divided note . these two accidents are all that i think need be taken notice of in all seven of them , because though they do occur in the rest , yet being of the same nature , the reader will know how to understand them . this may seem a difficulty and inconveniency ; that after all , the intervals of musick could not every-where be given in perfect proportions : and i will confess that there are a few instances wherein they cannot , as the lesser note being the th part of a string , and the least note which is the th part , will not make a true lesser third , that is the th part of the whole string . but this does not proceed from the defect of this proposal , nature it self will have it so ; scholars are not to alter nature , but to discover her constitutions , and to give opportunity for the best management of all her intrigues : i still perform my design , because i maintain those perfect and mathematical proportions in every place , where demonstration either requires or permits them . that the reader may know how few , and how easie to be avoided , these inconcinnous intervals are , i will give him an account of all and every one of them : there are three in each constitution of an octave , which are exact and necessary to carry on the progress of single gradual notes , but they must not be allowed in the composition of parts . inconcinnous intervals from the key c. . a lesser third , from the seventh to the ninth above the key . . a fourth , from the second to the fifth above the key . . a fifth , from the fifth to the ninth above the key . inconcinnous intervals from the key a. . a lesser third , from the second to the fourth above the key . . a fourth , from the fourth to the seventh above the key . . a fifth , from the seventh to the eleventh above the key . this is the exactness , which reason , guided by mathematical demonstration , requires of us ; and this exactness is rewarded by a proportionable pleasure , that arises from it . indeed since musical ears , ( especially where sence has no great acuteness ) are commonly debaucht with bearings and imperfections , they may not perhaps at first observe the advantage offer'd ; but i am sure nature desires it , and will rejoyce in those proportions , which by the laws of creation she is to be delighted with . yet there may be many an one , who will not care either for the trouble or charge of changing finger-boards ; if some little thing would mend their musick , it might be acceptable : i shall therefore add one more table , number viii . which any person that uses a fretted instrument , either lute , viol , or gittar , may easily make use of , and find the benefit of it . i call it the lyrick harmony , because our lyra-tunings require all the proportions to be most conveniently accommodated to the strings open : now if the frets be placed at the distance assigned in this table , they will be generally perfect . this table is calculated like the rest for a string inches long from the nut to the bridge ; but whatever length your instrument be , keep the same proportions , and you will be right : a fourth part of a string is a fourth part , and the same proportion , whether the string be longer or shorter . for the first fret then , take the th part of the whole string from the nut , which is the least diatonick second that lies between b and c , between e and f ; so that this will be always right , except in the chromatick half notes , not much used in lyra musick ; but if the excellency of the chroma be desired , then must the practiser put himself to the expences of what has been formerly proposed : jewels can never be had cheap . for the second fret you have two lines , the uppermost is the th part , the lowermost is the th part of the whole string from the nut ; we use no proportion in musick between the th and the th , as will appear by speculative demonstration , and practical experiment . if the tuning be with a greater third , then the second fret had best stand upon the th part ; if the tuning be with a lesser third , this second fret had best stand upon the th part ; for in lyra-tunings the key is generally some string open , and you will find by the twofold constitution of an octave in the former chapter , that the lesser third requires the greatest second from the key , which is the th part , as from a to b ; but the greater third requires the lesser second from the key , which is the th part from c to d. this may not be always convenient , in respect of composition , and therefore the practiser may set his fret where he pleases between these two strokes , according as he desires his bearings : however it can't but be a very advantageous satisfaction , to know his latitude within which he may be right , and above or below which he must be wrong : these are the bounds , quos ultra citraque nequit consistere rectum . the third fret must be the th part of the string from the nut , which is the proportion of a lesser third to the string open ; for 't is demonstrable , that in musick we use no proportion between the th and the th part : but if you are not to have a true lesser third to the string open , as may sometimes happen , when the tuning does not well favour your design , you may then use what bearing you please . the fourth fret must be a th part of the whole string , as being the proportion of a greater third to the string open . the fifth fret must be a th part of the whole string , as the just proportion of a practical fourth . the length of the plate would not suffer me to give the sixth and seventh frets , which are upon viols ; but the direction is easie . the seventh fret must be just the third part of the whole string from the nut , as being the grateful proportion of a practical fifth . the sixth fret standing between the th and third parts of the string , may be usually placed in the precise middle , where you may make a stroke the finger-board of your viol : but if the tuning requires any impo●●●nt note to fall upon it , then may you tune your fret by moving it higher or lower , as its octave upon some of the higher frets requires . thus you may keep your former gut-frets , which are movable and tyed quite cross the viol ; the strokes made upon the finger-board , being as so many land-marks , either to keep you just in the right , or else to give you aim in the variation . i acknowledge that this will not come near perfection in the note-way , nor always do in the other ; but 't is an advantage to make a good guess , and not always to do things at random : if i travel without a certain track , an information that i must leave a town a quarter of a mile on the right hand , is a satisfactory direction , though i am not to go thorough it . for a conclusion of this proposal , i need only add , that the truth of it is evident , both from rational and sensible demonstrations ; for the usefulness and necessity of it , every man that wears a musical ear shall be judge ; the difference of seconds , the greater and lesser note , ( which have hitherto been used without any regard ) is so very considerable , that whoever takes but a transient view of them , will confess his frets must be rectified , he cannot bear so great a deviation from what is truly in tune ; and accordingly the practical master does rectifie them , when he passes from one suit of lessons to another . for assigning these particular proportions , and denying that others are now to be used ( as was asserted in the lyrick harmony ) the author desires no longer to be trusted , than there shall appear an inclination in any to study the arithmetical and geometrical parts of musick , which are ready to be published . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . i a b. . c. . d. . e. . f. . g. . a c. . d. . e. . f. . g. . a b. . c. ii d. . e. . f. . g. . a. .b ♯ . . c. ● e . g. . a. . b ♯ . . c . iii e. .f. ♯ . g. . a. . b. . c. . d. . e g. . a. . b. . c. . d. . e. .f. ♯ . . g v b. .c. ♯ . d. . e. .f. ♯ . g. . a. d. . e. .f. ♯ . g. . a. . iiii g. . a. .b ♯ . . c. . d. .c ♯ . . f. . g b ♯ . . c. . d. .c ♯ . . f. . g. . a. .b ♯ . vi c. . d. .c ♯ . . f. . g. .a ♯ . .b ♯ . . ● ● . . f. . g. .a ♯ . .b ♯ . . ● vii ● ♯ . g ♯ . . a. . b. . c ♯ . . d. . e. . f ♯ . a. . b. . c ♯ . . d. . e. . f. ♯ . g ♯ . . a viii harmon : lyric : digit : . to mr. thomas salmon , m. a. rector of mepsal in hartfordshire . decemb. . . sir , yours of decem. . i received this week , with the printed sheets , of which you desire my judgment : which i did the next day consider of , and made some remarks on them . not by way of contradiction to your design , ( which i approve of ) but for explaining some particulars , which seem either not so clearly , or not so cautiously expressed . an account of which i send you with this , from , sir , your friend to serve you , john wallis . remarks on the proposal to perform musick , in perfect and mathematical proportions . divers things you suppose therein , or take for granted , as agreed by those who have philosophically discoursed of musick ; and thence proceed to what you direct , as to the instrumental practice thereof . you first suppose , as agreed by all , ( pag. . line penult . ) that musick consists in proportion ; and this proportion ( p. . l. . ) twofold , in tune , and in time ; meaning by that of time , the different proportion of length and shortness of the intermixed sounds ; and by that of tune or tone , their different greatness and acuteness . there are some other things considerable , for the improvement of musick : as , the different loudness and softness of the sound or voice , wherein a pleasing variety addeth much to the embellishment of the musick , and may much conduce to that pathos ( or moving the affections ) which the ancients seem much more to have affected than we do : and many other appurtenances to musick , more remote from your present business . you tell us then , ( p. . l. . ) that none will pretend to musick by playing good time onely , without that of tune . you might here have excepted the drum , the tabor , and the huntsmans horn ; which make a kind of musick ( though not that which you are here treating of ) by a due mixture of long and short sounds of the same tone . and ( as you there intimate , l. . ) dr. isaac vossius ( in his book de viribus rythmi ) contends this to have been the charming musick of the ancients , without taking notice of any difference of tone therein . but this is not the part of musick that you are treating of ; but that other part which lieth in the proportion of sounds , as to their graveness and acuteness , which by the ancients was called harmonica . you next take for granted , ( p. . l. ult . ) that in order to this , we are to have a series or sequence of certain gradual notes or sounds succeeding one another , by which the voice riseth and falleth ; and this in the best proportion possible ; that by a due mixture of these in several orders ( as by a mixture of letters to make words ) the whole musick may be best composed : and such are those notes which we now call by the names of la mi fa sol la fa sol la , ( and so forth in the same sequence ) which make up what we call an octave , and the ancients a dia-pason , ( the last of one octave beginning another , in the same order , and so onward as far as there is occasion ) ; to which the ancients gave the names of proslambanomenos , hypate hypaton , parypate hypaton , and so onward to a double octave , or dis-dia-pason ; and which , in guido's gammut , are called a re , b mi , c fa ut , &c. his a re answering to the greeks proslambanomenos , and the rest to the rest in order . ( the original and reason of which names , i have given you elsewhere , and shall not here trouble you with them ; ) but are now wont ( by writers of musick ) to be expressed by the initial letters of these names , a , b , c , d , e , f , g ; and then ( for another octave ) by small letters , a , b , c , d , e , f , g ; and ( for a third octave ) by small letters of another shape , or by small letters doubled , aa , bb , cc , &c. and , if there be occasion to go backward from Γ or gg , by double great letters , ff , ee , dd , cc , &c. and between every two of these notes are certain intervals , ( as they are wont to be called ) different according to their different proportions of the graveness or acuteness of those notes each to other . 't is next presumed ( p. . l. . p. . l. . ) as agreed on all hands , that the little intervals ( between note and note next following ) are not all equal . in the diatonick musick of the greeks , and in guido's gammut , they are accounted to be tones and homitones intermixed ; or , as we now call them , notes and half-notes , in this order . a. b. c. d. e. f. g. a. b. c. d. e. f. g. aa . &c. la. mi. fa. sol . la. fa. sol . la. mi. fa. sol . la. fa. sol . la. &c. t. h. t. t. h. t. t. t. h. t. t. h. t. t.     not that they are exactly such , but near the matter . and what is the exact proportion of each , we are after to consider . what it is in the chromatick or enarmonick of the greeks , comes not into our present enquiry . and here we are to take notice of the ambiguous or double sence of the word note . before , it signified one particular sound or note , as la , mi , fa , &c. but here , when we speak of notes and half-notes , it signifies an interval between note and note . the greeks had two words for it , phthongus , and tonus ; but we use note promiscuously for both . in an octave thus constituted , from mi to mi ( or from b to b , which is the natural place of mi ) there are five tones , and two hemitones ; ( fa rising every-where half a note , and the rest a whole note : ) and , therein two tetrachords or dia-tessaron's , or ( as we call them ) fourths ; where , from mi or la , we rise by fa sol la , ( that is , mi fa sol la , or la fa sol la , according as mi or la come next before fa ; ) and moreover , one tone , or whole note , la mi : which added to the tetrachord , either next before it , or next after it , makes a pentachord or dia-pente , which we call a fifth ; whereby the octave is near equally divided into a fourth and a fifth , as be and eb. and the same we have , for quantity , in any other octave ; as from a to a , from c to c , &c. though not in the same order : for the same notes still return after one octave , in the same sequence as before , the last note of one octave being the first of the next ; so that what is cut off at the one end , is supplied at the other , at what place soever we begin : but the order is different . if we begin at a , then is la mi ( the odd note ) in the first place , ( before the two tetrachords : ) if at b , 't is in the last place ( after both : ) if at e , 't is just in the middle between both , ( and will make a pentachord with either . ) if at any other place , one of the tetrachords will be divided ; and what of it is wanting at the one end , will be supplied at the other end of the octave . sutably hereunto , the greeks observed seven species or sorts of octaves , ( all equal in quantity , but different in order ) according to their different beginnings . the first aa , and second bb , the third cc , &c. of which each had its peculiar name . the first of them begins at a , which was their proslambanomenos , ( a sound given , or assumed , ) answering to what our musicians now call the key : a note at which ( in the base-part ) the song begins , and to which great respect is had through the whole . the other species had their several beginnings , or respective keys . which , and how many of these , they did make use of in their musick , is hard to say . our ancestors , about guido's time , seem chiefly to have affected that of g ; as appears by their scale beginning at gamm-ut ; and their series of notes , vt re mi fa sol la : where we have two notes lower than mi. and our musick-masters , to this day , when they teach to sing , begin commonly with sol la mi fa , &c. as if ut , or the nearest sol below mi , were the key or note most regarded . beside which , they seem ( by the gamm-ut ) to have had two more ( upon a remove ) but of the same constitution , at c , and f , where ( in the gamm-ut ) the note ut returns again . for twenty years last past , you tell us ( p. . l. . p. . l. . ) in the compositions of the most eminent masters , they scarce make use of any other key ( as to the internal constitution of the octave ) than a and c. that is , their key or leading note , at which their base-part begins , is either la next before mi , or fa next above mi. and , because you are much better acquainted with the eminent masters of musick , and their compositions , than i am , i take it , as to matter of fact , so to be . but at whatever note they please to begin , and make it their key , it is , as to this point , much one . if these keys be transferred to any other place ( to accommodate the voice or instrument ) mi is transferred also , ( by help of flats and sharps ) and the other sequence of notes with it ; which alters the pitch but not the tune ( p. . l. , . ) that is , the same tune is sung by a higher or lower voice . as for instance : if i would remove these keys from a and c , to b and d , ( that is , if i would set the whole tune a note higher ) then must la ( which is now at a ) remove to b , and mi ( from b ) to c , and fa to d , and so forth . but then i find , that bc ( an half-note ) is not wide enough to receive la mi , ( a whole note : ) and therefore c ( by a sharp ) must be raised half a note higher , that b c ♯ may be fit to receive la mi ; and thence to d , will remain half a note for mi fa ; thence to e , an whole note for fa sol ; but thence to f , is but half a note , not capable of sol la , an whole note : and therefore f ( by another sharp ) must be advanced half a note higher , that e f ♯ may receive sol la ; and f ♯ g receive la fa , ( an half-note ; ) and g a receive fa sol ; a b receive sol la ; and then b c ♯ receive la mi , and so forth . so that c and f must every-where have a sharp , but the other notes remain as before , in this form . b. c ♯ . d. e. f ♯ . g. a. b. c ♯ . d. &c. la. mi. fa. sol . la. fa. sol . la. mi. fa. &c. t. h. t. t. h. t. t. t. h.     in like manner , if i would bring back a and c , to Γ and b , that is , if i would set the tune a note lower ; then must la come back to Γ , and mi to a , and fa to b , and so forth . but because a b ( an whole note ) is too wide for mi fa ( an half-note ) there b ( by a flat ) must be taken down half a note ; that so a b ♭ may just receive mi fa , and ( instead of b c an half-note ) b ♭ c ( an whole note ) receive fa sol ; and ( for a like reason ) another flat at e. and so every-where at b and e. the rest remaining as before , in this form . Γ. a. b ♭ . c. d. e ♭ . f. g. a. b ♭ . &c. la. mi. fa. sol . la. fa. sol . la. mi. fa. &c. t. h. t. t. h. t. t. t. h.     and the like in other cases ; of which you give us the particulars , at pag. . and it is , in effect , no other than the common rules by which learners are taught to find mi : only there , by the flats and sharps we find the place of mi ; and here , by the assigned place of mi , you find the flats and sharps , if any be . of those two keys , at a and c , in their natural position , you observe aright ( p. . l. . p. . l. . p. . l. . ) that if you begin at a , then are c , f , g , the lesser third , sixth , and seventh , from the key : if at c , then are e , a , b , the greater third , sixth , and seventh , from the key . and therefore the composer , if he design those , should chuse the key a ; if these , the key c : or the equivalents of these transferred ( as is shewed ) to other places . and thus far we have pursued the language of aristoxenes and his followers the aristoxeneans , and the practical musicians , who content themselves with the names of notes and half-notes , without enquiring into the proportions of each interval . but pythagoras and his followers , whom you call the speculative musicians , enquired further into the proportions ( of graveness and acuteness ) at several intervals . and here it was first discovered by pythagoras , and since admit●ed by all , ( which therefore you suppose as granted ) that the proportion for an octave ( as a a , or b b , ) is double , or as to : that for a fifth , ( as a e , or e b , ) sesquialter , or as to : that for a fourth , ( b e , or e a , ) sesquitertian , or as to : and consequently , that for the tone ( a b , or a b , ) sesquioctave , or as to . hence euclide ( in his musical introduction , and section of the canon ) taking all tones to be equal , computes , that for the ditoue , fa sol la , to be as to , ( which is the duplicate of to ; ) and therefore the hemitone mi fa , or la fa , to be so much as that wants of a fourth ; that is , to : which is somewhat less than half a tone , or the sub-duplicate of to . and so boethius ( after him ) and others downward , till that ( about an hundred years ago ) zarline revived the doctrine of ptolomy in this point . that of ptolomy ( in his harmonicks ) is this : the proportions for the octave , the fifth , and fourth , he retains as before ▪ and that of the dia-zeuctick tone la mi ; which , together with the two fourths , compleats the octave ; and doth , with either of them , compleat the fifth ▪ ( and so far pythagoras proceeded , and no further . ) but the ditone fa sol la , ( which is the greatest third ) he reckons to consist of two tones , but unequal . the one as to , ( which is called the major tone , and is equal to that of la mi ; ) the other as to , ( called the minor tone : ) and therefore the compound of both , as to ; ( which is a much more musical interval , than to : ) and consequently the hemitone or half-note mi fa , or la fa , ( so much as / wants of / ) as to , ( which is somewhat more than half a note : ) and this together with a major tone , ( which make the lesser third ) as to ; as la mi fa ( from a to c , ) or la fa sol ( from e to g , ) or mi fa sol ( from b to d ) taking fa sol for a major tone , and therefore sol la for a minor tone . these proportions setled by ptolomy , ( for the diatonick kind ) were afterward disused , till revived by zarline about a hund●●d years since ; who is followed by kepler , mersennus , cartes , gassend●● , and others , ( p. . l. . ) and generally admitted by specula●●●● musicians since zarline's time . and these you pre-suppose ( up●n their authorities ) referring to their reasons for it . you pre-suppose further , ( which ptolomy had shewed at large , and is since admitted ) that ( in the same or like string ) the degree of acuteness is in counter - proportion to the length : that is , if the acuteness of the sound be as to , ( as in the upper note of an octave ) the length of the string is as to , ( the sound twice as sharp , the string half so long . ) and where the acuteness of the sound is as to , ( as in the upper note of a fifth ) the length is as to . where that is as to , ( as in a fourth ) this is as to . where that is as to , ( as in the greater third ) this is as to . where that , as to , ( as in the lesser third ) this , as to . where that , 〈◊〉 to , ( as in the greater tone ) this , as to . where that , as to , ( as in the lesser tone ) this , as to . and thus every-where , the length of the string is in the counter-proportion to the height or sharpness of the sound . these things being premised , or pre-supposed , you proceed to the constitution of the keys a and c , ( p. . and p. . ) where , by , , , you mean / ● , / , / , ( which , i suppose , you so expressed , lest the small fraction-figures should not be so easily seen and read . ) and so , by , , , , ( the portion of the string from the nut to the fret , for the key a ) you mean / , / , / ● , / , ( sutable to / ● and / : ) and ( for the key c ) by , , , , you mean / , / , / , / ● , ( in the same sence with / ● and / ; ) according the exposition your self gives , pag. , , . i should rather have chosen to express the place of the fret , by the length of the other part of the string , from the bridge to the fret , than from the nut to the fret : ( for it is that , not this , that gives the sound . ) in this manner .                 a / b / c / d / e / f / g / a.                                 c / d / ● e ● / f / g / a / b / c.                 that is , from the bridge to b , is / of what it is to a ; and from the bridge to c , is / of what it is to b : and so elsewhere . again , from the bridge to b , is / of that whole string ; from the bridge to c , is / of the whole . and so of the rest . but the sense is the same with that of yours . but herein i dissent from you ; namely , whereas you say , c d e ; i would rather say , c d e. that is , of fa sol la , i would make fa sol the bigger tone , and sol la the lesser ; at c d e , as well as at f g a. and then my proportions would stand thus :                 a / b / c / d / e / f / g / a.         ●                         c / d / e / f / g / a / b / c.                 the reason why you did otherwise at c d e , that at f g a , is ( i presume ) that a d might be a true fourth to the key a. whereas otherwise / is a false fourth . though very near a true one : for / would be a true fourth , being the same with / . my reasons to the contrary , are these . first , a fourth ( now a days ) is scarce allowed as a good concord ; and therefore the less to be regarded : especially at this place . for , i suppose , it is not usual , from a the key , to rise a fourth at one step ; but rather a fifth , or a third . and when from the key you rise an octave at two steps , the fifth always begins , and the fourth follows , ( not first a fourth , and then a fifth : ) for a fifth being much the sweeter , this is first chosen ; and the fourth , which follows , ( though not of it self so sweet ) is helped by being an octave to the key ; which is in fresh memory , as being the sound last heard but one . ( and of an interval never used , we need have the less regard . ) and if from any other place we move to d , the note from whence we move ( which was last heard ) is more to be regarded , than the key , which had not been heard for some while . and then , by preserving this fourth at a d , you spoil a good third ( which is more considerable ) at d f , and again at b d , and a fourth at d g , and a fifth at d a , and again at Γ d ; and so leave no place from whence to move to this d. and if perhaps you will say from d ; at that it is as hard to come as at this d. so that your d will be of no use at all . and for such reasons , it was a rule with the greeks , that the two conjoyned tetrachords , mi fa sol la , at b c d e ; and la fa sol la , at e f g a ; should ever be divided in the same manner . for though they had their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( a transite from one kind of dividing the tetrachord to another ; ) yet they would have this transite to be always at the disjunctive tone la mi. allowing to the tetrachord above it , a different division from that below it ; but not a different division to the two conjunct tetrachords above it . again , if you make your key at c , and thence sing fa sol la ; it is most natural for the greater tone to begin , and the lesser to follow . ( upon the same account as when we rise an octave at twice , the fifth leads , and the fourth follows ; and when at two steps we would rise a fifth , it is most proper for the greater third to begin , and the lesser to follow . ) and therefore here , not to make fa sol the lesser tone , and sol la the greater ; but , that the greater , and this the lesser ; as your self do at f g a. and if , for these reasons , you give the same division to c d e , that you do to f g a ; it will relieve all those inconcinnous intervals mentioned pag. . i have now done with the constitution of your two keys at a and c , ( and indeed of any other key ) in the natural constitution . and consequently , with all the essential flats and sharps , which serve onely to remove it to a higher or lower pitch , without changing the sequence of the notes : and which are wont to be noted at the beginning of the tune , so as to influence the whole , without repeating them at the several notes . but , besides these , there are some accidental flats and sharps , which occur in the middle of the musick , affecting some one note . these you call chromatick half-notes , ( p. . l , . p. . l. . ) which , you say , are truly made by placing the fret exactly in the middle between the two frets of the diatonick whole note wherein it falls . which is not so cautiously expressed as not to be liable to a mistake . the reader , by exactly in the middle , will be apt to understand an arithmetical middle : as for instance , if f g be an inch , f f ♯ and f ♯ g should be each of them half an inch. or , a geometrical middle , ( which we call a mean proportional ; ) as , if the proportion for f g be as to , that for f f ♯ and f ♯ g should be as to ( the square root of to the square root of . ) neither of which are your meaning . but you mean ( i presume ) a kind of musical middle , which is thus to be taken : suppos●●g the proportion for f g to be as to , that is , ( doubling both numbers ) as to ; this is to be divided by help of the middle number . so that the proportion for f f ♯ shall be to ; and for f ♯ g , to . which , together , make f g as to , or to . in like manner , if g a be as to , that is as to ; then is g g ♯ as to , and g ♯ a as to : which , together , make to , or to . and this , i presume , ( though the book be not at hand ) is the meaning of aristides at the place cited ; and your meaning here . and this , i suppose , may do pretty well in most places . but if we would be exact , we must , in each place , consider , what is the particular design we aim at in such a flat or sharp ; and make the division accordingly . as for instance , if to the key a , instead of a lesser sixth at f , i would have a greater sixth at f ♯ ; i must not so much aim at such equal division ( or near-equal ) of f g ; as , to take out of it so much as will make e f ♯ a minor tone , ( whatever chance to be the remaining part to g. ) which will make for f f ♯ , ( not to , but ) to . ( for this , with to , for e f , will make that for e f ♯ as to ; and for a f ♯ as to , a greater sixth ; instead of a f as to , a lesser sixth . ) in like manner , if i would , from c , rise a fourth to f , at two near-equal steps , ( as when we rise an eighth by a fifth and fourth ; or a fifth , by greater and lesser third ; ) that is , if i would divide the proportion of to , or to , into two near-equals ; those are to be to , and to : and therefore c d ♯ as to , and d ♯ f as to , ( whatever chance thereby to be the division of de. ) and the like for other cases . so that for instance , the same d ♯ or f ♯ , as to different purposes , shall signifie differently . and such arts we must make use of , if we would revive the greeks chromatick and enarmonick musick . but the speculation is too nice for most of our present practisers . to return therefore to our diatonick notes , in their natural or primitive constitution , together with their essential sharps and flats incident upon removing the key to an higher or lower pitch : having once fixed their proportions as to the monochord , ( as supposing them all set off upon one string ; ) it is easie to transfer them to as many strings as you please , ( by the substitution of a smaller string , instead of a shorter distance ) as you direct , p. . l. . and from thence to the finger-board , p. . l. . p. . l. . p. . l. . nor do i take exception to any of your numbers herein ; save that i think d with its octaves ( or the equivalent upon removing the key to an higher or lower pitch ) should be tuned somewhat sharper than you direct . and therefore you may , if you please , cause a mark to be made for it , in each of your finger-boards , ( as is already done in that at numb . viii . ) a little below yours , in such proportion as i have before directed : that so the practiser may , at his discretion , make use of yours or mine , as his ear shall direct him . your reader also may be advertised , that though your measures be fitted , on the plates , ( p. . l. . ) to a string of inches ; yet , on the paper , they may chance to be somewhat less than so : for ( being printed upon wet paper ) the measures will shrink , as the paper dries . and , because ( p. . l. . ) you do not confine your artificer to this method ( of distinct finger-board ) onely ; you will give me leave to propose another . which is ( without changing the finger-board ) to have the frets , for each string , to slide up and down in a groove , ( whereby they may be removed from place to place as you please ) with lines or marks on the finger-board ( of several colours , as black , white , red , &c. ) at the place where every fret is to stand for each tuning . by help of which , the practiser may at pleasure set his frets to any of these tunings , ( or to any other upon emergent occasion ) with what exactness he please ; as well as in any unfretted instrument . nor do we herein depart from the ancients : for there are manifest places in ptolomy , that their frets ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) were movable , not in tuning onely , but even in playing . finis . to the reverend mr. salmon . reverend , i thank you for the great kindness of your letter , of which i am altogether undeserving : and as for your good contrivance in the art of musick , i wish that the use of the masters of that art may not hinder the best method to obtain . however , you have left a specimen to posterity , of what might have been done ; and also by this present , much obliged , reverend , your humble and affectionate servant , e. bernard . oxon. dec. . . a catalogue of books , printed for , and sold by john lawrence , at the angel in the poultrey , bookseller . gell's remains : being sundry pious and learned notes and observations on the new testament , opening and explaining it : wherein jesus christ , as yesterday , to day , and the same for ever , is illustrated . by that learned and judicious man dr. r. gell , late rector of st. mary aldermary , london . in folio . the history of the affairs of europe in this present age ; but more particularly of the republick of venice . written in italian by battisti nani , cavalier and procurator of st. mark. englished by sir robert honeywood , knight . folio . the merchant royal. a sermon preached before the king at the nuptials of an honourable lord and his lady . quarto . several excellent discourses : viz. . of purity and verity . . of repentance . . of seeking first the kingdom of god. by that eminent divine hezekiah burton , d. d. late rector of barns near london , and prebendary of norwich . published by the reverend doctor tillotson , dean of canterbury . octavo . the antiquity of china : or , an historical essay , endeavouring a probability that the language of the empire of china is the primitive language spoken through the whole world , before the confusion of babel . wherein the customs and manners of the chineans are presented , and ancient and modern authors consulted with . by john webb of burleigh in the county of somerset , esq octavo . a relation of the invasion and conquest of florida by the spaniards , under the command of fernando de soto . written in portuguese by a gentleman of the town of elvas . now englished . to which is subjoyned two journeys of the present emperour of china into tartary , in the years , and . with some discoveries made by the spaniards in the island of california in the year . in octavo . the life and actions of the late renowned prelate and souldier chr. bernard van gale , bishop of munster , prince of the holy empire , &c. in which is an account of the most considerable actions of europe in his time . in octavo . the triumphs of grace : or , the last words and edifying death of the lady margaret de la musse , a noble french lady , who died in may , aged but sixteen years . in twelves . considerations on the explications of the doctrine of the trinity by dr. wallis, dr. sherlock, dr. s-th, dr. cudworth, and mr. hooker as also on the account given by those that say the trinity is an unconceivable and inexplicable mystery / written to a person of quality. nye, stephen, ?- . approx. kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from -bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : - (eebo-tcp phase ). a wing n b estc r ocm this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons . universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase , no. a ) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set ) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, - ; : ) considerations on the explications of the doctrine of the trinity by dr. wallis, dr. sherlock, dr. s-th, dr. cudworth, and mr. hooker as also on the account given by those that say the trinity is an unconceivable and inexplicable mystery / written to a person of quality. nye, stephen, ?- . wallis, john, - . sherlock, william, ?- . p. s.n.], [london : mdcxciii [ ] attributed to nye by wing and nuc pre- imprints. place of publication suggested by nuc pre- imprints. incorrectly listed in reel guide as wing n a. reproduction of original in the huntington library. created by converting tcp files to tei p using tcp tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between and available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the , texts created during phase of the project have been released into the public domain as of january . anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. % (or pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf- unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p , characters represented either as utf- unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng trinity -- early works to . - tcp assigned for keying and markup - apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images - john latta sampled and proofread - john latta text and markup reviewed and edited - pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion considerations on the explications of the doctrine of the trinity , by dr. wallis , dr. sherlock , dr. s — th , dr. cudworth , and mr. hooker ; as also on the account given by those that say , the trinity is an unconceivable and inexplicable mystery . written to a person of quality . printed in the year mdcxciii . considerations on the explication of the doctrine of the trinity , &c. sir , 't is the principal design of both testaments , by confession of all parties , to estabish the worship and belief of one only god ; 't was for this that all the books of the old testament were written , and delivered to the jews ; and for this the new was bestowed on the gentiles . of jews and gentiles , as the apostle observes , there were none that understood , none that sought after ( the true ) god : they were all gone out of the way ; they became vain in their imaginations , and their foolish heart was darkened : professing to be wise , they became fools ; and changed the truth of god into a lie , by worshipping the creature , and doing service to them who were not by nature gods. this was the condition of both jews and gentiles , when first the law , and then the light of the glorious gospel of christ , who is the image of god , shone out upon them . in the law , the jews were charged , ye shall have no other gods but me : and again , thou shalt know no other god but me. in the gospel the gentiles are taught , there is one god , and there is none other but he : there is no other god but one ; god is one . exod. . . hosea . . mark . . cor. . . gal. . . these and an hundred more such like , clear and express declarations of holy scripture , have been the occasion , that the unity of god , or that there is but one god , is the first article of faith , both with jews and ( true ) christians . from the christians and jews , it hath been learned and embraced by all the mahometans , and is now the general belief even of the pagan and idolatrous nations : for tho these last own and worship many gods , yet they ( commonly ) own but one who is supream , infinite , almighty and pre-eternal ; they make the other deities to be but the ministers of his providence and will , and their mediators with him. but that there is an almighty and all-wise mind , the maker of heaven and earth , and of all the creatures and kinds in them , we discern plainly by the order , beauty and stability of things ; and more especially , by the admirable designs in the whole , and in all the parts of the creation : but as this divine beauty and order , and those numberless and most useful designs , aims and ends seen in the creation , do evince that there is a thinking , designing and all-powerful mind , whom we call god ; so they no way intimate to us , that there is more than one creating and governing mind , or god. they demonstrate to us ( beyond exception ) that one such mind there is , but not that there is more than one : therefore we may say , that we can own and worship but one such mind , or but one god , because we know of no more . of one we are certain , by the order and design of the parts in the world : of more than one , we have no manner of proof ; therefore we cannot own , or worship , or but talk , or even think of more . but the revelation made to us in holy scripture is categorical , apodictical , express and direct : there we are told plainly , and in terms , there is no other god but one ; there is one god , and there is none other but he ; the lord thy god , the lord is one ; god is one . as this doctrine is so clearly delivered in scripture , so good christians have been always very jealous ; that neither directly nor indirectly , neither in express words nor in consequence , any thing should be said or held contrary thereto . they have considered , that polytheism and atheism are much the same thing : as 't is much one to acknowledg , and contend for more kings of england , others besides king william , and to renounce or deny him to be king of england . both the covenants , the old as well as the new , are between us on the one part , and the one true god on the other part : he covenants to be our god , and our exceeding great reward ; we covenant to be his people , and his only : this covenant is manifestly dissolved , and the premium , or promise of eternal life , annexed to our faithfulness to this covenant , is utterly forfeited ; if we take to our selves any other , besides him with whom we are in covenant , and who alone is true god. the guilt of polytheism , or of affirming more than one god , being so very great ; and the forfeiture thereby made so unspeakable , and the unity of god being so often and so expresly delivered in holy scripture ; 't is an amazing circumstance , that polytheism is not only found among christians , but is also the more general and prevailing belief of christian states and kingdoms . it is true , we all agree in the words , there is one god , and there is none other but he : but when we come to explain our selves on these words , the incomparable majority of modern christians are found to affirm three gods , and not one only . one would have thought that these words , thou shalt have no other gods but me , the lord thy god is one lord , thou shalt know no other god but me , there is none other god but one , god is one : i say , one would have thought these declarations to be so plain , and so uncontestable , that a question could never have arose concerning their meaning . but so it is , that there are a great many senses given of these words , which senses are contrary to , and destructive of one another . the doctrine of the unitarians concerning god. the first of these senses is the unitarian . for the unitarians say , there is none other god but one , god is one ; the plain , obvious and indubitable meaning of these words is this , there is but one , who is god , or a god : one god , say they , is to be understood in the same natural , sincere and unsophisticated sense ; as when we say one sun , one earth , one world. when the scriptures , say they , speak to us of so high an object as god ; when they tell us , there is one god , and there is none other but he ; when they declare this faith to be the very first of all god's charges , or commandments to men ; without doubt they speak without artifice or querk , they have no double or deceitful meaning ; they don't lay snares for us , by intending such a meaning as is contrary to the usual , the grammatical and proper sense of the words . there is but one god , say the holy scriptures ; where can be the ambiguity of such usual and plain words ? the meaning of the terms one and god , is perfectly known to all men ; why do we study subtilties and finenesses , with which to deceive our selves into polytheism , and to destroy the simplicity of the faith ? when god says in the first commandment ; thou shalt have no other god but me , he speaks to all men , to the illiterate , to the sincere , and even to children , as well as to those who are practised in the arts of deceiving and being deceived , by a disguise of words , and by captious forms of speaking . if his meaning therefore was , there is an almighty father , who is god ; he hath an almighty son , who also is a god ; and besides these , there is an almighty spirit distinct from the other two , and a god no less than either of them : if ( i say ) this was his meaning , would he have couched it in such words as these , there is none other god but one ? or in these , there is one god , and there is none other but he ? or would he have said , thou shalt have none other god but me ? could the wisdom of god it self find no other words but these , which are so directly contrary to such a meaning , by which to express himself ; and that too to those who were utterly uncapable of apprehending such a sense in them ? these are the words which god spake upon mount sinai , with thunders that shook the earth and heavens , i am the lord thy god , thou shalt have no other god but me. they tell us his meaning was , there are three almighty , all-knowing , and most good persons , each of them ( singly and by himself ) god , and all of them jointly creators of all things : now who would have thought it , that this should be the meaning of no other god but me ? without doubt , the texts and the meaning are as far from one another , as any the most contradictory propositions can be : and till they can remove this first commandment out of the way , it will be impossible for men of sense to be of the trinitarian perswasion ; i mean , if they be also sincere , if they suffer not themselves to be blinded by the interests , or awed by the ( vain ) terrors of the present false world. our opposers themselves grant , that when the israelites first heard this commandment , they understood it , and could then no otherways understand it , as the unitarians now do , namely thus , thou shalt never own any other person as god , but only me who now speak to thee . god almighty suffered this sense of his words to pass current for upwards of years : but then , say they , he sent our saviour and his apostles to give another sense of them ; nay , a contrary sense . the apostles and our saviour had it in charge to tell us , that no other god but me , was as much as to say , god the father , and god his son , and god the holy ghost , three divine persons , each of them almighty , each of them all-knowing and most good , and each of them god. but i verily think , had the apostles indeed pretended this to be the interpretation of the first commandment , they would not have found a single person who would have believed or received them . for these good men had not ( nor desired ) penal laws , prisons , confiscations , deprivations , exclusions from the common privileges of the society , by which to awe mens minds , to profess , and even to believe that black is white , and white is black . it would have been told them by all their hearers , that the sense of words is unalterable ; and that even the greatest miracles cannot authorize an interpretation evidently contrary to the text. if the speaker had been only a man , yet the sense of his words when actually spoken , can never be changed by any authority whatsoever : if heaven and earth were miraculously destroyed to confirm an interpretation that disagrees with the natural and grammatical sense of the words , it will ( for all that ) ever remain a false interpretation . cardinal bellarmine is extreamly puzled with this difficulty ; he saw plainly , that the first commandment ( and other texts of the law ) is conceived in such words , that the israelites could not think there were three divine persons , but only one divine person . but the reason , saith he , of this was , because the israelites having lived long in a nation where they owned and worshipp'd many gods ; if they had been told of three divine-persons , ( or of god the father , god his son , and god the holy ghost ) they would most certainly have apprehended them to be three gods. this , saith the cardinal , is the reason why the doctrine of the trinity was reserved to the times of the new testament . bellarm. de christo , l. . c. . notandum est , deum in vetteri testamento noluisse proponere mysterium triuitatis expresse , quia judaei incapaces erant , & quia recens exierant de egypto , ubi colebantur multi dii , & intraturi erant in terram chanaan , ubi etiam multi babebantur dii , ne videlicet putarent , sibi tres deos proponi colendos● voluisse tamen deum adumbrare hoc mysterium ; ut cum in novo testamento praedicaretur , non videretur omnino novum . q. d. the doctrine of the trinity was not propounded expresly to the jews in the old testament ; they were uncapable of it , because coming out of egypt where many gods were worshipped , and entering into canaan where also many gods were acknowledged , the jews would have thought that three gods had been propounded to them to be worshipped . nevertheless it was hinted , or shadowed to them , lest when it came to be preached in the new testament , it should seem altogether a new thing . in reading the works of this cardinal , i have often had this thought , that provided his works were but bulky and learned , he never cared what other property they wanted : no one can deny that his five books against the unitarians , intituled by him de christo , are the most learned of any that have been written against us ; but they have no wit , and are ( throughout ) most injudicious . what can be more unthought or silly , for instance , than this vain elusion ? god speaks to the jews , saith he , as if he were but one person , because they ( living among people who acknowledged many gods ) would have mistaken three divine persons to be three gods. how came it to be more safe or seasonable , or less liable to misinterpretation , to instruct christians in the belief of three divine persons ; than it would have been to teach the same belief to the jews ? the jews , saith the cardinal , would have mistaken , they would have thought the trinity ( an almighty father , an almighty son , and an almighty spirit ) to be three almighties , and three gods ; so this mystery was not preached to them . what a narrowness of thought and consideration is implied in this answer ; for , was not the whole christian church taken from among such nations , who all worshipped and owned many gods ? the reason alledged by the cardinal , if it were good for any thing , must also have prevented the revelation of that ( pretended ) mystery to any of the christian nations and churches . i might also ask the cardinal , why he hath so much better thoughts of athanasius , than of moses , and the prophets ? athanasius knew how to compose a trinitarian creed , in the most express and particular manner , that might be delivered out to all the churches , without the least danger of leading them into any mistake about it : but moses and the prophets , tho inspired by god , wanted this dexterity . they , poor men , were forced to speak ( falsly ) of god , as if he were but one person , not a trinity of persons , lest they should commit some dangerous blunder in the wording of their doctrine , and so lay an occasion of polytheism in the way of the jewish church ; but athanasius , and the nicene fathers have happily got over this difficulty , they have blest the christian churches with a pair of creeds , worth an hundred first commandments . but to be short ; the unitarian explication of the texts , which say there is but one god , is , that there is but one who is god , or but one divine person , but one who is almighty , all-knowing , and perfectly good. our very opposers confess that this was the antient and first sense of the words , so the faithful understood them for years together . they confess too , 't is a very natural and a very rational sense ; that it hath no difficulties , no mysteries or monstrosities in it . they are constrained also to own , that the before-mentioned texts alledged by the unitarians , are so read in all copies both of the hebrew and greek , and can no other ways be rendred from the original text ; or more clearly thus , as to these texts there is no variety or difference in the reading , in the copies of the original , nor any uncertainty in the translations of those copies . this is a very great matter , and cannot be said , nor is so much as pretended , for the texts are urged by trinitarians ; they have been often challenged to produce but one text for their doctrine of the trinity : but either 't is otherwise read in the most antient and eminent copies of the greek and hebrew , or 't is easily and naturally render'd and translated to another sense ; or 't is given up by their own ( ablest ) interpreters and criticks , as wholly impertinent , and no proof of the doctrine in question . from these confest and acknowledg'd premises , we have these two necessary and unavoidable consequences . . that the account which the unitarians give of god , and his unity , is the very voice of nature and reason , supported by such texts of holy scripture , as have neither uncertainty nor ambiguity . . that the trinitarian faith is at best but precarious , uncertain and doubtful ; because it is not only disclaimed by reason , but it hath no other scripture-proofs but such , concerning which there is no certainty , either how they are to be read in the originals , or how they are to be translated from the originals into the modern languages . no faith or doctrine whatsoever can be more certain than the proofs are on which 't is grounded : if those proofs are of suspected authority and credit , or of uncertain meaning and sense , the doctrine it self must be altogether uncertain , suspicious and precarious . but because you expect from me a letter , not a volume , i will say no more now of the unitarian hypothesis , but will briefly ( as i can ) compare and consider the hypotheses , or explications advanced by our opposers . of the explication by dr. j. wallis . all men know , that the difference between the unitarians and their opposers the trinitarians , is ( in few words ) this , whether there be more than one divine person , or more than one person , who is true and most high god ? the unitarians say there can be but one divine person ; because , not to mention the scripture-proofs of it , a divine person being as much as to say a divinity , or a god ; if you say , there are more divine persons , you therein and thereby say there are more gods. as three angelical persons are three angels , and three human persons are three men : so three divine persons in grammar and common sense , are three divinities ; which ( all grant ) is as much as to say three gods. so they . but , saith dr. wallis , here 's a reasoning why 't is grounded on this silly mistake , that a divine person is as much as to say a divinity , or a god ; when indeed a divine person is only a mode , a respect , or relation of god to his creatures . he beareth to his creatures these three relations , modes , or respects , that he is their creator , their redeemer , and their sanctifier : this is what we mean , and all we mean , when we say god is three persons ; he hath those three relations to his creature , and is thereby no more three gods , than he was three gods to the jews , because he calleth himself the god of abraham , the god of isaac , and the god of jacob. three human persons , say the socinians , are tres homines , or three men , and three angelical persons are three angels ; therefore three divine persons are , in grammar and common sense , three divinities , or gods : where , i pray , did they learn this stuff ? not from tully ; that learned orator , and great master and director of elegant and proper speaking , would have taught them , that an human person is not as much as to say homo , or a man , but is a qualification , a capacity , a respect , or relation of one man to other men. n●o unus tres personas , saith tully ; i. e. i being but one man do sustain ( or am ) three persons , that of my self , that of my adversary ; and that of a judg. see here , one man sustains ( or is ) three persons , an advocate , an accuser , and a judg , without being three men : why should it be thought incredible , or harsh , to say with the church , three divine persons are but one god , when tully maketh those three other persons to be but one man ? this is the sum of what dr. wallis hath said in eight printed letters , and in three sermons that were preached to the university of oxford . sermons that have been preached to the university , and not censured by them , must be supposed to contain nothing heretical , no nor dangerous , scandalous , or heterodox . but besides that these sermons have passed so great a test , as that of the university of oxford , the doctor assureth us , that he hath been thank'd and complemented , in a great number of private letters , on account of his sermons and letters : some of these letters written to him have been published ; and it doth appear , they were indeed written by able men. we must also take notice of two other considerations in favour of these letters and sermons of dr. wallis : the first is , that dr. s — th ( author of the animadversions on dr. sherlock ) having taken particular notice of the letters written by and to dr. wallis , speaks respectfully of the authors of them , calling them reverend and very learned persons , without making the least reflection on his doctrine , as heretical , or as heterodox . the second is , dr. sherlock himself , tho dr. wallis had expresly said in his answer to w. i. that dr. sherlock's doctrine doth imply tritheism , and that so much had been proved upon him by w. i. yet does dr. sherlock , who is so little wonted to carry coals , pass by this affront and imputation which no clergy-man ought to bear ; nay he even fawns upon the oxford doctor , in his late answer to the stander by . but a very surprizing thing hath happened ; dr. wallis writes in defence of the trinity and the athanasian creed ; his explications are allowed by the university of oxford , and even applauded by great numbers of learned men who profess to be trinitarians : and yet after all , the socinians in their observations on the letters of dr. wallis , profess that they are of his mind ; they even say , that in honour of him they are content to be called wallisians . this is very odd ; for it follows , that either the socinians are the true orthodox , and their opposers tritheists ; or else , that this good doctor is a socinian , and knows it not . those that say , without doubt the socinians understand their own doctrine , are very picquant upon dr. wallis ; they pretend themselves very desirous to be informed , what might be in the doctor 's mind , to apologize for the athanasian creed and the trinity , and yet to asperse at the same time his own patriarch socinus , and his dear and close friends and brethren the unitarians ; especially in such an hainous manner as we see in his third and fourth letters . they say , either the man is wood , or he has written after that fashion , only to give occasion to the socinians , as in effect it also happened , to appear more bright , by a thorow and unanswerable vindication of themselves : for so it is , that wronged innocence and vertue are rendred more conspicuous and lovely , when injurious calumnies are wiped off . they say farther , that 't is not to be much regarded that so many have complemented dr. wallis for his letters ; for what assurance have we that the writers of them are not secret socinians , and that they only banter the good doctor ? as for the university of oxford , to whom these sabellian and unitarian sermons were preached , 't is very usual for the old men that preside in that university , to sleep at sermons , especially at dull ones . but you are not to think , say they , that these sermons or letters were ever licensed to the press by the university ; or that the doctors there understand so little , as to mistake a disguised sabellianism or socinianism , for the trinity of the catholick church . the three persons , says dr. wallis , are but three relations , capacities , or respects of god to his creatures ; he is their creator , redeemer and sanctifier ; and in this sense of the word person , god is three persons . but then because god hath also the capacity or relation of a judg , and of an oeconomus , or provider , and many more ; we must not say that god is only three persons , he is five at the least , besides i know not how many more . furthermore , this new-fangled socinian or sabellian has introduced a trinity of divine persons ; that were but of yesterday . the churches trinity are all of them from all eternity ; co-eternal , saith the athanasian creed ; before all worlds , saith the nicene creed : but dr. wallis his three divine persons , the first of them begins with the creation , and the second is no older than the crucifixion of our saviour ; for god was not a creator before he created any thing ; nor a redeemer , till those words were spoken by our saviour on the cross , it is finished , i. e. the great work of redemption is accomplished . the three divine persons believed by the church , begat one another after a wonderful manner : will dr. wallis , being the oldest divine of england , instruct novices that are desirous to learn , how his persons begat one another ? how did creation beget redemption , and from all eternity , that is , before either of them were ; for creation it self is but coeval with the world : and how was sanctification , we must not say begotten , for that 's heresy when you speak of a third person ; but how did it proceed from creation , and from redemption ? dr. wallis , say they , will find it as hard to account for these difficulties , as to double the cube , or even to square the circle , which the most learned mathematicians think to be impossible . he is not , say they , to think that he is orthodox , because he hath escaped the heavy cudgelling that hath all fallen on dr. sherlock ; 't is not because his doctrine , but because his luck hath been better than that doctor 's . in a word , whereas the church believes three real subsisting persons , dr. wallis hath taught a trinity of external denominations , or accidental predications only . creation , redemption and sanctification are acts of god's free and soveraign will : he was under no necessity to create , to redeem , or to sanctify ; they are all effects of his most voluntary and every way free love : if therefore the mystery of the trinity , so much hitherto contested , be nothing else but almighty god , considered as the maker , redeemer and sanctifier of his creatures ; 't is a trinity only of three denominations or names , and of predications purely accidental ; and besides that , 't is no manner of mystery , but the most intelligible and obvious thing in the word ; nor was it ever denied , either by sabellians or socinians . thus it is , sir , that divers learned persons speak concerning the trinity maintained by dr. wallis : i , for my part , will add nothing to the observations i have formerly made on dr. wallis his letters ; only ( i pray ) take notice here with me , how well the cadmean brethren agree among themselves . three divine persons , saith dr. wallis , are the three relations of god to his creatures ; he made , he redeemed , he sanctifies them ; this is the holy trinity . out upon it , saith dr. sherlock , 't is nonsense and heresy both ; for the divine persons are three beings , three minds , three spirits , all of them living , subsisting , and conscious to one another . no , no , that 's as much too much , saith dr. s — th , 't is neither so nor so , but as i have explained it in my eighth chapter of animadversions on dr. sherlock . the explication of the trinity by dr. sherlock , saith dr. s — th , is a treacherous and a false defence of that mystery ; he hath advanced a notion , that immediately and unavoidably infers three gods : and if he had lived in the times of the sixth general council , he would have incurred the penalty of deprivation . pref. p. , , & . well , i hope dr. s — th hath at length told us the very true doctrine about the trinity . yes , he hath ( without question ) laid down the very explication of the schools , the doctrine or explication generally received in universities ; i doubt not it would be approved by most of the chairs of our european universities , or schools of learning : he hath verily acquitted himself like a man of learning and wit. for all that , dr. cudworth , in his intellectual system , hath largely and clearly proved these two things . . that this trinity of the schools is quite different from the trinity held by the fathers , and that by them it would have been reckoned no other than sabellianism . . that as the first inventors of it were peter lombard and the schoolmen ; so it hath no other publick authority , but that of the fourth lateran council , held in the year . he saith , 't is a gross piece of nonsense ; that it falleth not under human conception ; neither ( saith he ) can it be in nature . this is the judgment , which this great philosopher and divine maketh , of the explication propounded and defended in dr. s — th's animadversions on dr. sherlock . and in very deed , dr. s — th's explication can ( fitly and properly ) be called by no other name , but an absurd socinianism , or socinianism turn'd into ridicule ; as we shall see , when we come to consider it , in particular . mr. hooker , the celebrated author of the ecclesiastical polity , giveth yet another explication of the trinity ; he descibeth it to be the divine essence , distinguished by three internal and relative properties : this explication differs as much from dr. wallis as any of the rest ; for dr. wallis's three persons are all of them external denominations or predications . but these differences , sir , among our opposers , will appear to you most clearly , without my needing to point at them ; in the accounts i am about to give , of their several explications of their trinity , and the observations i shall make on them . therefore i pass on , to the explication given us by dr. sherlock . of the explication by dr. w. sherlock . for memory and method's sake , and because the division is so just ; we may distinguish the accounts , or explications of the trinity contrived by our opposers ; after this manner . there is , first , the trinity according to tully , or the ciceronian trinity ; which maketh the three divine persons , to be nothing else but three conceptions of god ; or god conceived of as the creator , the redeemer , and sanctifier of his creatures . dr. wallis , after many others , hath propounded and asserted this trinity , in his letters , and his sermons to the patris conscripti at oxford . he found in tully , sustineo unus tres personas ; of which he mistaketh the meaning to be , i being but one man , yet am three persons : saith the doctor hereupon ; why may not god be three persons ; as well as one man was three persons ? the next is the cartesian trinity , or the trinity according to des cartes : which maketh three divine persons , and three infinite minds , spirits and beings , to be but one god ; because they are mutually , and internally , and universally conscious to each others thoughts : mr. des cartes had made this inventum to be the first principle and discovery in philosophy , cogito , ergo sum ; i think , therefore i am : and he will have the very nature of a mind or spirit to consist in this , that 't is a thinking being . therefore , says dr. sherlock , three persons can be no otherways one god , but by unity of thought ; or what will amount to as much , as internal and perfect consciousness to one anothers thoughts . any one may see , that dr. sherlock's mutual consciousness , by which he pretends to explain his trinity in unity , was by him borrowed from the meditations and principles of monsieur des cartes : his system was hinted to him , by that unhappy philosopher who hath razed ( as much as in him lay ) the only foundation of religion ; by resolving ( so absurdly , as well as impiously ) the original of the world and of all things , not into the contrivance and power of an almighty and all-wise mind , but into the natural tendencies of bodies , or as he calls them , the laws of motion . the third is the trinity of plato , or the platonick trinity ; maintained by dr. cudworth , in his intellectual system . this trinity is of three divine co-eternal persons , whereof the second and third are subordinate or inferior to the first ; in dignity , power , and all other qualities , except only duration . yet they are but one god , saith he ; because they are not three principles , but only one ; the essence of the father being the root , and fountain of the son and spirit : and because the three persons are gathered together under one head , even the father . this , saith dr. cudworth , is the trinity of plato , and the genuine platonists ; and is the only true trinity : all other trinitarians besides the platonists , are but nominal trinitarians ; and the trinities they hold , are not trinities of subsisting persons , but either of names and denominations only , or of partial and inadequate conceptions . the fourth is the trinity according to aristotle , or the aristotelian or peripatetick trinity ; which saith , the divine persons are one god , because they have the same numerical substance , or one and the self-same substance , in number : and tho each of the three persons is almighty , all-knowing , and most good ; yet 't is by one individual and self-same power , knowledge and goodness , in number . this may be called also the reformed trinity , and the trinity of the schools ; because the divines of the middle ages , reformed the tritheistick and platonick trinity of the fathers , into this sabellian jargonry ; as dr. cudworth , often and deservedly , calleth it . this is the trinity intended by dr. s — th , in his animadversions on dr. sherlock , especially at chap. . the author or first contriver of it , was peter lombard , master of the sentences , and bishop of paris , who died in the year . it never had any other publick authority , saith dr. cudworth , but that of the fourth lateran council ; which is reckoned by the papists among the general councils , and was convened in the year . he might have added , that the doctrine of p. lombard was disliked and opposed by divers learned men , and censured by alexander the third , and other popes ; till pope innocent the third declared it to be orthodox . it may be not unprobably said , that an unitarian was the true parent of it ; for 't is said , that peter lombard took his four books of sentences , for so much as concerneth the trinity , out of a book of p. abelardus concerning the same . to this trinity ( of aristotle and the schools ) we must reckon the trinity of properties ; which ( we shall see hereafter ) is so variously explained , as to make even divers sorts of trinities : yet i refer all the property-trinities to this fourth distinction of trinities , the trinity according to aristotle ; because they are all grounded , on the abstracted or metaphysical and logical notions , of that philosopher ; nor can they be understood , without some knowledge of his philosophy . we must add to all these , the trinity of the mobile ; or the trinity held by the common people , and by those ignorant or lazy doctors , who in compliance with their laziness or their ignorance , tell you in short , that the trinity is an unconceivable , and therefore an inexplicable mystery ; and that those are as much in fault , who presume to explain it , as those who oppose it . i have propounded to my self , to discourse briefly on all these trinities ; i have begun with the trinity of marcus tullius cicero , or , if he pleases , of dr. wallis : i have said of it , as much as is necessary ; the next is the trinity according to the philosopher des cartes , but the discoverer of which is dr. sherlock . when dr. sherlock came out with his vindication , in answer to the brief history of the unitarians , and the brief notes on the creed of athanasius : the more ignorant of the doctors and rectors , and all the young fry of lecturers and readers about town , were his hawkers to cry it about , and cry it up . they questioned not , what such a master in polemicks had delivered ; especially with so much assurance and confidence , and with so much keenness , and contempt of the poor kick'd note-maker , and epistler . but the more learned among them , said from the very first ; that indeed dr. sherlock meant honestly , and he might have propounded this explication to his private friends , to be considered and debated : but it was liable to too many obvious exceptions , to be published to all the world ; without great corrections , in the manner of expression . but the socinians presently saw their advantage ; and resolved to make use of it : accordingly , in about four or five weeks time , out came their observations on the vindication of dr. sherlock ; which in some editions of them are prefaced , with the acts or gests of athanasius . here they tell the doctor , that he hath published a worse heresy , than even ours is held to be , by our bitterest opposers ; in one word , that he hath revived paganism by such an explication of the trinity , as undeniably introduces tritheism , or three gods. they show him , that his error was condemned by the antients in the person of philoponus ; and in the middle ages in the person and writings of abbat joachim : but more severely since the reformation , in the person of valentinus gentilis ; who was condemned at geneva , and beheaded at bern , for this very doctrine . they demonstrate to him , by a great many unexceptionable arguments , that a mutual consciousness of three ( supposed ) divine spirits and minds , having each of them his own peculiar and personal understanding , will and power of action , is so far from making three such spirits to be one god in number ; that 't is the clearest and the certainest demonstration , that they are three gods. mutual-consciousness maketh them to be a consult or council , a cabal or senate of gods , if you will ; but by no means , one numerical god , or one god in number . the observations of the socinians opened all mens eyes , to see and acknowledg , that dr. sherlock had greatly overshot the mark ; and that it was necessary , he should yield his place to some new opponent , who ( in these disputes with the socinians ) would speak more cautiously . all endeavours therefore were used by his friends , to perswade dr. sherlock to be quiet : and because such an example had been made of him , they stopped a while all sermons and other tracts , that were going to the press against the socinians . the politicians among them feared the success of a war , that in its beginnings had been so unsuccessful : they said to one another , we need not trouble our selves with the socinians ; because being masters of all the pulpits , we can sufficiently dispose the people to the orthodox belief , without the help of printed answers and replies . 't is about three years , since these observations on dr. sherlock's vindication were made publick ; and all this time , he hath very peaceably taken the imputations of heresy , and paganism ; tho he had said in the preface to his vindication , that having dipped his pen in the vindication of so glorious a cause , by the grace of god he would never desert it , while be could hold a pen in his hand . the socinians did not design to give him any farther trouble : but dr. s — th not able to endure , that such aspersions should lie at the door of the church ; could not refrain from declaring to all the world ; that the church had suffered nothing , in the defeat of dr. sherlock . he professeth , that the charge drawn up against dr. sherlock , by the socinians , is true ; for he hath in very deed advanced an explication of the trinity , saith dr. s — th , which immediately and unavoidably inferreth three gods. pref. p. . it not being the design of dr. s — th , in his animadversions , to prove the truth of the doctrine of the trinity ; but only to explain or declare it , that is , to notify in what sense and manner 't is held by the church : we must say , that his performance is an accurate , and learned work. he concerneth not himself with the socinians ; but only rescues the received doctrines of the church , from the misrepresentations of them by dr. sherlock , who either understood them not , or ventur'd to depart from them . nor do we concern our selves with dr. s — th : but whereas he is the only writer , since the revival of these controversies , who has indeed understood what the church means by a trinity in unity ; therefore we must take leave to say , and will also prove it ; that this his true explication of the trinity , is ( for all that ) a great untruth , or rather a great piece of nonsense . dr. sherlock's was a rational and intelligible explication , tho not a true one ; 't is not orthodox , as orthodoxy is reckoned since the lateran council : dr. s — th's is a true and orthodox explication , of what the church intends to say ; but 't is neither rational , nor intelligible , nor possible . but of that in its proper place ; for i must next examine the trinity according to plato , defended by dr. cudworth . of the explication by dr. cudworth . it will be necessary , in the first place , to declare dr. cudworth's explication , more largely and clearly , than hath been yet done . in accounting for the doctrine of the trinity , he professeth to follow the platonick philosophers ; with whom , saith he ( not the arians , as some suppose , but ) the orthodox fathers perfectly agree . these held a trinity of divine persons , co-eternal indeed ; but not co-equal : for the son and spirit are inferior to the first person , or the father , in dignity , in authority , and in power . they are so many distinct substances ; not one numerical substance , as hath been taught by the school-doctors , and the lateran council . for tho the fathers said , that the three persons have but one and the same substance , essence or nature ; they did not mean thereby one and the self-same substance or essence in number , but the same essence or substance for kind , or nature . because each person of the three , is spiritual , eternal , infinite , a creator , and necessarily existent , therefore they were said by the fathers and platonists , to have the same nature , essence or substance ; and not because their essences or substances , physically or properly so called , are one and the same physical substance in number . in few words ; saith he , this famous term consubstantial ( or of the same substance ) was never intended by the platonists , or by the fathers , to deny ( as the schools do ) three distinct individual essences , or to denote one numerical substance or essence ; but only to signify , that the trinity believed by the orthodox is not made up of contrary or unlike natures , ( as the arian trinity is ) but of persons all of them homogenial , all of them eternal , spiritual and uncreated . they that shall deny this to be the doctrine of the fathers , will find themselves obliged to answer to two things , which are indeed ( fairly and truly ) unanswerable : the first is , why those fathers who contend for the homo-ousios ( consubstantial , or of the same substance ) do yet expresly reject the tauto-ousios and mono-ousios , or of the self-same substance and essence in number ? the tauto-ousios and mono-ousios ( or of the self-same essence or substance , in number ) is the very doctrine of the schools and moderns ; but is denied by the fathers , as meer sabellianism : which invincibly proves , that by one and the same substance and essence they meant , not one and the self-same , or one in number ; but one for kind , nature or properties . secondly , they must also satisfy the citations of d. petavius , and s. curcellaeus , and these in the intellectual system ; which do all of them severally ( and much more conjunctly ) clearly show what the sense of the fathers was , about homo-ousios , and consubstantial . it appears by this , and abundance more the like ; that dr. cudworth had the same apprehensions , concerning the three divine persons , with dr. sherlock : they both apprehend the three persons to be as distinct and different , and as really three several intelligent beings and substances , as three angels are , or as peter , james and john are . dr. sherlock saith , they are however called one god , because they are internally conscious to all one anothers thoughts and actions : but i do not believe , that dr. cudworth would have allowed so much to the son and spirit , as to be internally conscious to all the thoughts and actions of the first person ; he always speaketh of them , as every way inferior to the father : he will not allow them to be omnipotent in any other respect , but only externally , that is to say , because the father concurreth omnipotently to all their external actions , whether of creation or providence . dr. cudworth desires to distinguish his explication , from all others of the moderns , by this mark ; that it alloweth not the three persons to be , in any respect but duration , co-equal : for ( saith he ) three distinct intelligent natures or essences , each of them pre-eternal , self-existent , and equally omnipotent ad intra , are of necessity three gods , nor can we have any other notion of three gods ; but if only the first person be indeed internally omnipotent , and the other two subordinate in authority and power to him , you leave then but one god , only in three divine persons . this is dr. cudworth's explication . every one will readily make this exception : he thinketh , either that there is one great god , and two lesser ones ; or else only the first is true god , and the other two in name only . the doctor foresaw , without doubt , this objection ; therefore see , how he hath endeavour'd to prevent it . first , he reports some answers of the fathers , to this difficulty ; which answers he expresly rejecteth . for some of them said , that the three persons are one god , by their unity of will and affection : others said , they are one god , as all men or all mankind are called homo , or man ; namely because they all have the same specifick nature , or essence , or substance , even the rational . for as all men have the same specifick essence or nature , which is the rational ; so the divine persons also agree in one nature , namely the eternal , spiritual and self existent . but dr. cudworth confesseth , that an union of will and affection is only a moral union , not a physical or real unity : and as three human persons would be three distinct men , notwithstanding the moral union in affection and will ; so also the three divine persons will be three distinct gods , notwithstanding such an union in will and affection . as to the other , that the three persons are but one god , by their having the same specifick nature or essence ; or as some call it substance , namely because they are all of them spiritual , self-existent , and coeternal ; he calleth it an absurd paradox , contrary to common sense , and our common notions of things : for so all men will be but one man , because they have the same specifick essence or nature , namely the rational ; and all epicurus his ( extramundan ) gods will be but one god. then , he propoundeth divers other explications , which he neither approveth , nor expresly rejecteth , tho 't is plain that he disliked them : for the explication on which he insisteth , and which appears to be his sense of the matter , is this that follows . the three divine persons are one god , because they are not three principles , but only one ; the essence of the father being the root , and fountain of the son and spirit : and because the three persons are gathered together under one head or chief , even the father . he adds here expresly , that if the persons were co-ordinate , ( i. e. equal in authority , dignity , or power ) they should not be one , but three gods. this is at large dr. cudworth's opinion : the short of it is ; that the three persons are as really distinct beings , essences , or substances , as dr. sherlock hath imagined them to be . and as their substances or natures are not one , but three ; so also must their understandings , and other personal powers and properties . the doctors differ only in this ; that dr. sherlock maketh the unity of the three persons in the godhead , to consist in the mutual-consciousness of the persons ; but dr. cudworth in this , that the father is both the principle ( root or fountain or cause ) and also the head of the other two persons . they neither of them believe one numerical , but one collective god : one god , not who is really one god , but is one god in certain respects ; as of mutual consciousness , or of being the cause , principle and head of all other beings , and of the second and third persons . dr. cudworth contends by a great number of very pertinent and home quotations ; that his explication ( i mean , that part of it which makes the three persons , to be so many distinct essences or substances ) is the doctrine of the principal , if not of all the fathers , as well as of the platonists : and i ( for my own part ) do grant it . for i am perswaded , that no man hath read the fathers , with judgment and application , but he must discern ; that tho they do not express themselves , in the incautelous , unwary and obnoxious terms used by dr. sherlock , as neither doth dr. cudworth ; yet the fathers as much believed the three persons are distinct minds and spirits , as dr. sherlock doth ; all the difference ( as i said ) is only this , that they and dr. cudworth do not use his very terms . they do not say in express words , three minds , or three spirits : but the comparisons which they use , and their definitions or descriptions of what they mean by persons , are such ; that it cannot be questioned by any , that they apprehended the three persons , to be three distinct spirits , minds and beings , having each of them his own understanding , and all other personal qualifications . it is indeed apparent tritheism ; and that was the true reason , why the schools advanced a new explication : but because the schools durst not find fault with the fathers , or seem to depart from their doctrine ; therefore what the father 's intended of one specifick essence , or nature , or substance , that the scools interpreted of one numerical substance , nature or essence ; but of that hereafter , when we examine their doctrine in its own place . dr. cudworth being so great a philosopher , as every one knows he was , found himself very hard put to it , what to say ( colourably , and reasonably ) concerning the persons of the trinity . he saw , that either he must say , that they are but one self-same essence or substance , in number ; or that they have distinct and several substances or essences . to say , that they are ( or they subsist in ) one self-same substance or essence in number , is such jargonry in philosophy ; that is to say , in the nature and possibilities of things ; that he never speaks of it , without a just mark of contempt : 't is nonsense , saith he , and 't is impossible ; and besides that , 't is sabellianism , and a trinity not of persons , but of words and names . well , shall we say then , that the three persons are three distinct substances ; is it not plain tritheism ? no , saith the doctor ; for the persons are not equal : the father is both the principle or original , and the head of the other two persons ; and besides that , he only is omnipotent ad intra . but then , will some say ; indeed this explication leaveth us but one god , which is the thing we look'd after : but it is , by utterly abolishing the godhead of the son and spirit ; it maketh only the father to be really god , the other two persons are so only by a certain dependance on him , both in origination and acting . as bad as this consequence is , and as clear ; dr. cudworth is forced to swallow it , and to sit down contented with it : he thought , it should seem , it is better somewhat to strain the use of words , than the natures and possibilities of things . 't is hard indeed , that we must say , one supream and two dependent persons make but one god ; but 't is harder to say , three persons have but one substance or essence in number . words are arbitrary signs , applied to things according as men please , and therefore are capable of alteration in their use : but the nature of things is absolutely unchangeable ; three persons can never be one substance , essence or individual nature . no philosophy , but that of gotham , will allow ; that one intelligent substance can be more than one person : but divers philosophers , especially the platonists , have called three distinct , intelligent , divine substances , one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , one di●inity , or god ; therefore nothing hinders , but that so also may christians . to this purpose dr. cudworth , in divers places of his intellectual system . but it is now time to make our observations on this doctor 's explication ; which i shall do the more carefully , because i am perswaded , that all the chief fathers were in his sentiments , that the three divine persons are three distinct individual substances or essences in number ; which by the schools and all the moderns , is granted to be tritheism : and because it is evident by his intellectual system , that this doctor understood all the philosophies , antient and modern , in the most perfect manner ; and was himself one of the ablest philosophers we have known . his explication hath these parts . . that the divine persons are ( one specifick , but ) three distinct , particular individual substances or essences in number , or in the reality of things : and that otherwise , there could not be three divine persons , but only one such person . . that three distinct , individual , intelligent divine essences or substances , commonly called persons , are yet but one god ; because tho they are three in number , yet they are one in original ; for the second and third persons are derived from the father , as their fountain and cause . . tho they are three persons , yet they are but one god , because they concur to all the same actions both of creation and providence , under one head , even the father . the emphasis of this lies in their concurring to all the same actions ; but principally in this , that they concur to the same actions under one head , which is the father . . that the divine persons are three distinct , particular , individual , intelligent substances , essences or natures ; and that otherways , that is , were there but one self-same substance or essence in number , they should not be three persons , but only one person . i have granted , that if there are three divine persons ; those persons are ( of necessity ) three distinct , individual essences or substances : so that , as to this first proposition , the doctor and the socinians are perfectly agreed ; all that we deny , is , that three such essences ( or persons ) are , or can be but one god. but tho the socinians allow , that three persons must be three distinct substances or essences , yet all the modern trinitarians utterly deny it : the reason is , because they saw plainly , that to say there are three distinct essences , or substances , is to grant ( in effect ) to the socinians what they so much contend for ; namely that the doctrine of the trinity doth imply three gods. three distinct divine persons , saith dr. cudworth , are three distinct divine essences or substances ; it is true , say the socinians , and we grant this to the doctor : no , say all the modern trinitarians , three distinct divine essences , are not only three distinct divine persons , but they are also three distinct gods ; if once we grant that the three divine persons are three essences , the socinians will extort it from us ( as an unavoidable consequence ) that we teach three gods. the truth is , since the lateran council , which determined in favour of p. lombard , against abbat joachim and the fathers , that there is but one only divine essence or substance in number ; i do not believe , there hath been any divine of note but dr. cudworth and dr. sherlock and some few who may have borrowed it from them , who durst ever publish it in writing , that there are three distinct divine substances , essences or natures , or that every distinct person is a distinct substance . they all saw , that so to say , is to introduce three gods : for if you say , there are three distinct intelligent , almighty , all-knowing and pre-eternal substances , essences or natures ; you have actually said , there are three gods , because you can possibly give no fuller nor other description of three gods. if one all-knowing , almighty essence or substance , is one perfect god , to whom nothing at all can be added ; 't is no better than fooling , or effrontry , to deny , that three such essences or substances are three gods. this plain and clear reason hath constrained the school-divines to depart from the explication of the fathers ; and has also obliged all the moderns , to follow the schools , and forsake the fathers . yet so , as out of good manners , to deny that the fathers ever held more than one divine essence or substance : but i have shown before , the ground of that gross ( and i doubt not , wilful ) mistake , of the doctrine of the fathers . but dr. cudworth thought , that he had found an expedient , how he might keep sincerely to the fathers , and yet not be guilty of tritheism : for , saith he , tho there are three distinct divine essences or substances , vulgarly called persons ; yet the second and third persons or essences are derived from the first ; and they all concur to the same actions , under the same head or principal , even the father . therefore , . to that , the second and third persons are derived from the father , as their fountain and cause ; therefore they may be reckned as one god with him . here begins the controversy , between the socinians and the doctor . they grant , that every distinct person is a distinct and particular essence or substance ; but they deny , that three distinct divine essences can be understood to be one god : unity of original , or that the second and third persons are derived from the first , will not help the doctor , no not in the least . the three divine essences ( which are called persons ) are one god , saith this doctor ; because the second and third are derived from the first : why doth he not say too , that three human essences ( or persons ) whereof the second and third derive themselves from the first , are one man ? he may as well say this , and as soon perswade it , as the former : the son and grandson derive themselves from a first human essence ( or person ) called the grandfather ; two brothers derive themselves from their common father : doth this unity of original make them all to be but one man ? if not , neither can unity of original make the son and spirit one god , with their fountain and cause , even the father . it is a reasoning , altogether unworthy of dr. cudworth ; the son and spirit are particular substances or essences , derived from the essence of the father , as their principle or cause , therefore they are one god with the father : for then , all angels , all men , nay and all beasts , shall be one god with the father , who is their cause and principle . unity of original is so far from proving , that they are one god with him ; that it even demonstrates the very contrary : for if they are derived from the one true god , they themselves cannot be that one true god ; no more than the effect can be the cause , that very cause whose effect it is . these arguments are so clear , and withal so very obvious ; that i wonder much , that dr. cudworth foresaw them not : but it may be , he foresaw them ; but thought withal that even all these consequences are better , than to admit such a monstrosity in philosophy , as three persons having only one self-same substance in number . all things , how hard soever , would go down with him , but only that ; but that can never be agreed to , by a philosopher . . his last subterfuge was this ; the three divine essences ( called persons ) are but one god , because they concur to all the same actions , of creation and providence , under one head the father , who only is almighty ad intra , or really almighty . how many rarities hath he boxed up , in a very little compass ? . here is one almighty , who together with two other persons , is one god. i would know , how two other persons can contribute to make him a perfect god , who without them is almighty ? the scale is already full , if almightiness be there ; we need no more weight : and least of all , the weight of two impotents . if the son and spirit are not almighty ad intra , or not really almighty , but only as the father omnipotently concurs with them ; they are impotent : for every person and thing , that is not almighty , or cannot do all things , is impotent to some things . dr. cudworth , being so accurate a philosopher , saw evidently , that three almighty persons are ( of necessity ) three gods ; therefore he will admit of but one almighty person , even the father . but then , he should have look'd a little further , or closer ; and he would also have seen , that when he had found one almighty , there was no need to add to him two impotents , to make him a compleat god ; or ( as he speaks ) to make up the intireness of the divinity . . 't is altogether as rare , strange and surprizing ; that the son and spirit are one god with the father , because they are gathered under him , as their head and principal . doth not the doctor prevaricate ? doth he not say these things , only to establish unitarianism , so much the more strongly ? for if you say first , that the father is the head and principal , and the son and spirit are subjected to him ; and then , therefore they are one god with the father their principal and head : this , in a man of so great sense , looks like meer prevarication ; for 't is plain to all , that he should have inferred the contrary , namely , therefore only the father is god. we shall see the weakness of dr. cudworth's reasoning , so soon as ever we apply it to any other instances . the son and spirit are one god with the father , saith he , because he is their head and principal : therefore say i , the servants and their master , the subjects and their prince , the children and their parent , are all one governour ; because the subjects , servants and children , are gathered under their prince , their master and parent , as their principal and head. will the doctor allow of this ( last ) consequence ; if not , he vainly urges , or insists on the other . . but the son and spirit concur with the father , to all the same actions , both of creation and providence ; and therefore may be said to be one god with him . if the doctor could prove , that the son and spirit concur to the same acts , of providence and creation , with the father ; he would thereby prove , that there are three gods , not that the concurring persons are one god. many carpenters , for instance , concur to make a ship , under one head or principal , the master-builder : many colonels and captains concur to the marshaling of an army under one principal and head , their general : are therefore all these carpenters , colonels and captains , one master-builder , and one general ? that there is but one master-builder , and but one general , we grant ; but the captains and carpenters , concurring with their master-builder and general , are not one with the general and master-builder . i do not think it necessary to make any further reflections , on such impotent reasonings : i will leave it with you , sir , to judg , whether dr. cudworth hath given any new strength to the trinitarian cause , by reviving an old forsaken explication ! if we will give a name to dr. cudworth's explication of the trinity , we must call it mollis arianismus , a moderate arianism . the arians were divided into two parties , the high or rigid arians , and the ariani molles , or the moderate arians . the former of these ( being the eunomians and aetians ) strictly followed arius ; they believed that the son was created by the father , or god , but a little before the creation of the world ; and that the spirit was the work or creature of the son : and further , that their substances or essences were altogether unlike ; from whence they were also called heterousians . but the moderate arians were content to say , that there was no conceivable duration or time , between the being of god or the father , and the generation or creation ( for those are with them equivalent terms ) of the son ; the father made or generated the son , so early , that there was no conceivable portion of time before the son was ; no more than was absolutely necessary , for giving to the father the priority of existence , and his title of father : and as to their substances , they are consubstantial ; by which this sort of arians meant ( and the church then meant no more ) that their substances or essences are alike , or the same for kind and properties , tho not in number ; that is , the essences of these three persons are all of them spiritual , eternal and infinite , tho only the father is infinite in power . these moderate arians were received to communion by the moderate trinitarians ; and particularly by pope liberius . dr. cudworth holdeth their very doctrine ; he alloweth only the father to be omnipotent : and tho he saith , that the son and spirit are also eternal ; yet he cannot deny , that there must be some priority of the father , as the fountain , principle and cause , before the son and spirit as effects . in a word , the moderate arians ascribed as much to the son as dr. cudworth doth . were dr. cudworth alive , it would not be expedient to make this judgment of his explication ; but being dead , it cannot hurt him . he is retired to the true mount moriah , or land of vision ; where he no longer guesses , by prudent and wary conjectures , but he knows and even sees how these things are . god and nature , after which he enquired with so much application and freedom , are now known to him : and he now rests from his excellent labours , out of all danger from the malevolence of the present evil generation ; with whom 't is a crime , not to take every thing upon trust , on the meer credit of those who have been before us . as if it were the way to truth ; not to enquire , but to believe ; not to examine , try and judg , but to pre-suppose and take for granted , every thing that has been told us , by men in power and place . this is the spirit that now prevails in the church : and on the contrary , an ingenuous freedom in enquiring and examining , tho it be nothing else indeed but an honest and necessary sincerity , is now called heresy , and schism ; and is , if you 'll believe them , to be punish'd with certain damnation . we have however , in the mean time , this satisfaction ; that it is god , who shall at last judg us : he that hath said to us , try all things , hold fast that which is good . but i pass to the trinity according to aristotle , defended by dr. s — th . of the explication by dr. s — th . i have already done right to dr. s — th , and his book : if he takes it amiss , that i observe also some defects in it ; he ought to show his patent , by which he is constituted the only animadverter on the books of others . if he hath received any personal wrong , or affront from dr. sherlock ; he is the more excusable , that his book hath so much more scurrility , than argument : but the injury must have been very great , to excuse him wholly . he has noted some errors , either of inadvertency and haste , or of the pen ; in some expressions and words used by dr. sherlock : he imputes all these as faults of meer ignorance or dulness to the doctor . this was somewhat barbarous : nay it was more barbarity in point of morality or manners , than ever dr. sherlock was guilty of , in grammar or speech . dr. s — th will not ( at least has not yet been able to ) perswade many , that dr. sherlock wants the qualifications , or the degree of the qualifications , for which dr. s — th hath deserved esteem : the world thinks , there is a great deal more in dr. sherlock to be commended , besides his preferments ; it is only wished , that both these doctors had something more of the tenderness , and catholick charity of genuine christianity , tho it were accompanied with lesser abilities or learning . dr. sherlock hath publish'd an essay , towards vindicating and explaining the difficulties of the trinity , and incarnation ; the method he hath taken , is wholly new , and is a mistake , but it was meant well : and i do not think , that setting aside some authorities or quotations , dr. s — th hath said any thing against it , which dr. sherlock will much value . the arguments used by dr. s — th , are only metaphysical reasonings ; easily advanced , and as easily destroyed . dr. s — th's is the true explication ; that is to say , as orthodoxy is reckoned since peter lombard , and the lateran council : but dr. sherlock knew it to be nonsense , and therefore adventur'd to propose another ; he put forth his hand , to save the tottering and falling ark , and 't is made an inexcusable fault . but i will pass from the too cynical doctor , to his book and explication . 't is not till chap. . that he begins to bless us , with the catholick and orthodox account , of his trinity in unity : but at length , at pag. . out comes the secret ; with this preface to it . the doctrine of the church , and of the schools , concerning the blessed trinity ; so far as i can judg , but still with the humblest submission to the judgment of the church of england in the case , is this . truly , i am heartily sorry to hear it ; that dr. s — th , at these years , has no fixed religion of his own , no not concerning the trinity it self : but is ready to turn with the wind ; is prepared to renounce a doctrine and explication , which he believes to be not only true , but fundamental ; if the church commands him . mr. milbourn makes the same complement to his good mother the church , in his late book against the socinians ; as i have noted in my answer to him : but mr. milbourn is somewhat excusable , because he hath not yet received any of the rewards , due as he thinks to his industry and learning ; but dr. s — th is full , and even overflows with the blessings of the holy mother . it should seem dr. s — th thinketh , he hath not yet enough ; else he would never be so over-mannerly , as to put his faith it self afloat , and that too with the humblest submission , at the command of his reverend mother . we may infer however , from these publick professions of the writers , that could the socinians get mother church of their side ; all her champions would also come over to us : for 't is not ( it seems ) the cause , that they defend ; 't is not the trinity or incarnation , that they value ; but our mother , our mother the church . if dr. s — th makes so light of his own explication , that he is ready to fling it into the kennel ; at the first nod , that the church shall make : he cannot wonder , that the socinians will handle it , will look on both sides of it , will view it in a clear light ; before they bargain for it . well , see , here it is : the personalities , by which the godhead stands diversified into three distinct persons , are called and accounted modes . therefore for understanding the mystery of the trinity ; we must declare , what is properly a mode ( or manner ) of being : it is not a substance , nor an accident ; which two make indeed the adequate division of real beings : but a mode is properly a certain habitude of some being , essence , or thing : whereby the said essence or being is determined to some particular state or condition , which , barely of it self , it would not have been determined to . and according to this account , a mode in things spiritual and immaterial hath the like reference to such beings , as a posture hath to a body ; to which it gives some difference or distinction , without superadding any new entity or being to it . in a word , a mode is not properly a being , whether substance or accident ; but a certain affection cleaving to being , and determining it , from its common general nature and indifference , to something more particular ; as we have just now explained it . as for instance , dependence is a mode , determining the general nature of being to that particular state and condition , by virtue of which it proceeds from , and is supported by another : and the like may be said of mutability , presence , absence , inherence , adherence , and such like , viz. that they are not beings , but modes or affections of being ; and inseparable from it so far , that they have no existence of their own , after a separation or division from the things , or beings to which they belong . animadver . p. , , . behold the birth of the mountains ! we are kept in suspense seven long chapters ; at length in the th , at p. . of his book , he gives forth this oracle . that the three divine persons , so much talk'd of , are neither substances , nor accidents ; and consequently , saith he , no real beings . nay , they have no real existence of their own ; but are modes , habitudes , or affections of the divine substance , or the substance of god : they are in the godhead , or in the substance of god , such as mutability , presence , absence , inherence , adherence , and such like , are in the natures , or substances to which they belong . or if you will have a great deal in one single word , the very iliads in a nut-shell ; they are postures : or what amounts to the same thing , they are such in spiritual and immaterial beings , that a posture is to a body . i must needs here tell you , sir , the story of the princess dulcinea del toboso , mistress to the renowned don quixot , of the mancha in spain . this famous princess had the honour to be mistress of the affections of the so much celebrated don quixot : for her , he traversed mountains , deserts , and other dreadful places ; for her he encountred giants , knights-errant , and other formidable dangers ; and at length for her , to satisfy his amorous passions towards her , he retired to a place called the poor rock ; where he spent much time in lamenting the disdains , the cruelty and hard-heartedness of his mistress towards himself , as is largely related in the history . don quixot was waited on in his long travels and adventures , by his esquire sancho pancha , who greatly pitied his master , that he should serve so rigorous a mistress : but the esquire had one scruple in his mind , who this dulcinea del toboso should be ? but while don quixot was tormenting himself , at the poor rock ; he unluckily happened to drop some words , by which it evidently appeared , that dulcinea del toboso was only an imaginary lady or princess : and that indeed she was no other person , but a certain coarse country wench , daughter of the farmer alonso zanchez , and for her plainness called joan. ta , ta , cries sancho pancha , and is the princess dulcinea , our neighbour joan zanchez ! by my troth , a sturdy quean ; well may my master languish for her , for i am well perswaded , she hath no regard or sense of love-matters : but 't is a good-natur'd wench , &c. methinks , sir , there can be nothing more pat , or proper for this place , than this story . for just such a disappointment do we all meet with , in the explication for which dr. s — th hath made us wait so long ; as sancho pancha had when he found the princess dulcinea , was joan zanchez . dr. s — th had raised the expectation of his readers , in no fewer than seven preliminary chapters ; in the eighth he promises in the title of it , the long-lock'd for , the much-desired , catholick , and orthodox explication of a trinity of divine persons , in the unity of the godhead : but when all comes to all , he tells us , the three divine persons are nothing else but the substance of god , or the godhead , diversified into three postures . never were men so bilk'd before as his readers are , at this news ; 't is the princess dulcinea turned into joan zanchez ! was it worth while , to fall upon dr. sherlock in that outragious manner , only because he would not call the three divine persons , three postures of the godhead , or the substance of god in three postures ? dr. sherlock , poor , sensless , illiterate , cantabrigian ignoramus , thought , that these words father , son and spirit implied something that was real . he imagin'd , that the notion which all men naturally have of a father , his son , and a spirit distinct from both , must be filled up with something that will honestly and satisfactorily answer to such names and natural notions of a father , a son , and a spirit diverse from both : therefore , saith he , seeing these persons are spiritual , and immaterial , and intelligent ; i call them three minds , three spirits , and three beings . but the adepti of oxford will make him know his mistake ; first , dr. wallis tells him , three persons and one god , is as much as to say , three respects of one god to his creatures ; he is their creator , redeemer and sanctifier , and in this sense is called three persons , tho he is indeed but one god , and but one being : but dr. s — th answers , 't is neither so nor so ; three divine persons are the substance of god , in three gambals , or postures ; or in three such i know not what 's , which have the same or like reference to things spiritual and immaterial , that postures have to bodies . the three personalities are that in the one substance of god , which mutability , presence , absence , inherence , adherence , and such like ( changeable ) affections and habitudes , are in the substances to which they belong . he thinks , it should seem , that the faithful must put their trust in three postures ; and worship mutability , presence , absence , or something which in spirituals is like to them ; something which is no more in the deity , than postures are in bodies . i fancy dr. sherlock will object to him , that it is of the nature of a meer habitude or modality , to be changeable : and that the personalities in the divine nature ( or god ) are not alterable or changeable . he will say too , it may be , that there is no meer modality but may be away from the nature , or substance to which it belongs ; without any damage to the essential perfections , of such nature or substance : but you cannot take away the personalities , or the persons , from the substance of god , without lessening the perfections of the godhead . therefore we must not say , that the three divine persons , are only the divine substance with three modes . the three divine persons , he saith , are the one substance of god diversified in three postures . but how shall we conceive , that the substance of god in the first posture , or in posture a , begat the same substance of god ( in number ) in posture b ? and how doth the third posture , or posture c , proceed ( for under pain of damnation we must not say of this third posture , how was it begotten ) from the substance of god considered in the postures a and b ? the divine substance , say they in posture a , or in the first mode , generated the divine substance in the second mode , or , as dr. s — th speaks , in posture b ; and the self-same divine substance in the first and second modes , breathed ( you must well mark that ) the self-same divine substance in the third mode , which is posture c. now how shall we understand such gibberish as this ? may they not as well tell us in plain terms , that to be trinitarians , 't is necessary that we should renounce at once all good sense , and content our selves for ever with a cant without sense ? the persons , as distinguished from the substance of god , are only personalities ; which is to say , three such modes , as posture , mutability and dependence ; saith dr. s — th . they that hear this , will presently say dr. s — th and the socinians are very near to an agreement ; we are like to have this tedious , intricate and dangerous controversy fairly ended , by the rare and particular dexterity of dr. s — th . for he hath taught us , that all the difference is indeed nothing : both parties confess one self-same substance , essense or godhead , only the orthodox contend for three postures in this substance ; and the sullen , conceited socinians hitherto seem unwilling to allow of more than one mode or posture ; but under the institution and instruction of such a teacher as dr. s — th , they will return to the full acknowledgment of the whole truth . dr. sherlock had said , that there are some who make the three divine persons , to be nothing else but three modes ; and he maketh thereupon this note , can any one think that the father begat only a mode , and called it ▪ his son ? let us see now , how dr. s — th rates him for this piece of ignorance . no , good sir , no ; none that i know of , is in danger of thinking or saying so : no more than that socrates begat only the shape and figure of a man , and then called it his son ; or ( to turn your own blunt weapon against your self ) no more than god the father begot another self-consciousness , and called it his son. animadv . p. . and at p. , . and often else-where , he saith , the personalities , by which the deity stands diversified into three distinct persons , are by the generality of divines , both antient and modern , called and accounted modes . so that in short , let all the dunces take notice for the time to come , that dr. s — th , with all the antients and moderns at his heels , saith , pronounceth and declares , in manner and form following ; the personalities in the godhead ( not the persons ) are three modes , affections , or habitudes , of the divine substance , nature , or essence . now were i dr. sherlock , i would not grant to this arrogant adversary , the least tittle of all he contends for . it is certain , there is nothing more common with the metaphysicians , who follow the schools ; than to call the three persons , three modes ; and sometimes more largely , three modes of subsistence of the divine substance , or the substance of god. dr. sherlock may well defend it , that neither hath he mistaken the modalists , nor have they mistaken in what they mean to say . he may say , it is indeed true , that in all other persons , human persons and angelical persons , we may be so nice , as to distinguish between the persons and the personalities : for example , the personalities of peter , james and john , are only modes or properties peculiar to these three persons , by which they are ultimately distinguish'd from one another , and from all other persons of the same specifick nature , namely the human ; but the persons of peter , james and john , besides those modes and properties , take in also three distinct intelligent substances , in which those modes suosist . it is true , i say , that human ( and also angelical ) persons may be thus distinguished from their personalities ; but 't is otherways in the three divine persons : the three divine persons are properly and truly called only three modes ; the reason is , it is supposed by the modalists , that in the godhead the three persons have all the self-same individual substance or essence in number ; and that they have also but one self-same understanding , will and energy ( or power of action ) in number ; contrary to what happens in all other persons , whether human or angelical , who all have distinct substances , distinct understandings , wills and energies , as well as are distinct persons : this being so , 't is evident , that the very modes or personalities in the godhead , cannot be distinguished from the persons ; we must say , that the three divine persons are three modes , because they are distinguished from one another by nothing else , as all other persons are . all other persons are distinguished by their distinct substances their distinct and several understandings , wills and energies ; as well as by their peculiar modes and properties : but in the godhead there is no such distinction ; it has one self-same substance , understanding , will and energy ; 't is only distinguished by its modes , and those modes are distinguished from one another by themselves only . briefly , dr. sherlock may say , that all the modalists acknowledg no other distinction between the three divine persons , than is between modes ; they are not distinguished by their substances , nor by particular understandings , wills , or energies of their own : therefore we , properly enough , call them three modes . dr. s — th may wrangle as long as he pleases ; he may ( if it be for his credit ) write such another book of inadversions , as this upon dr. sherlock ; but when he has done and said all he can say or do , all men but himself will perceive that these two propositions are the same for sense : this of dr. sherlock , which he imputes to the modalists , and which dr. s — th so much abhors , the three divine persons are only three modes , of subsistence , in the substance or essence of god ; and this , which dr. s — th owns , and maketh to be the substance of his whole book , the three divine persons are the substance or essence of god , diversified by three modes of subsistence . but above all ; i would not have dr. s — th please himself overmuch in this ; that he hath cited some passages of the fathers , which describe the personalities of the father , son and spirit , by modes . justin and irenaeus have called them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , modes of subsisting ; others call them properties : but by modes , properties , characters , and such like , the fathers meant quite another thing , than dr. s — th and the moderns do ; they meant what dr. sherlock and dr. cudworth mean. by a mode and property they meant that discriminating character , by which the individuals of any specifick nature are distinguished or differenced , from all the individuals of the same species or nature . for example , the individuals of the specifick nature of humanity , are particular men ; and all these individuals or particular men are discriminated , characterized , differenced or modified , each by his ▪ particular properties : peter from john , peter and john from james , by particular properties , characters or modes , both of body and mind ; one ( for instance ) is bigger ▪ taller , wiser , or some other the like , than the other . this was what they meant , when they described personalities by modes , and when they said there were three properties , modes , or characters in god : they meant not in the least to deny , that each person is a particular substance , essence or nature , different in number from all other substances , essences or natures ; or to deny , that each person is a particular being : they meant only , that each individual , or each person , besides the common specifick nature , ( that is , besides the meer human , angelical or divine nature ) has also some particular properties or characters ; which ultimately distinguish him , from all the individuals or persons of the same species , specifick nature , or kind . it is not true therefore , what dr. s — th pretends , that by modes of subsistence the antients meant no more , than certain such habitudes or affections , as mutability , presence , absence , posture , or such like : they meant real , discretive and characterizing properties or qualifications ; and by person they meant , a particular , individual , intelligent substance or essence , and so modefied or characterized . they were far from dreaming , that the three divine persons , an almighty son , an almighty father ; and an almighty spirit distinct in number from both , were only one individual substance distinguished , or diversified by only three such lank and meagre affections , as absence , posture , adherence ; or any other that are no more in a spiritual substance , than those three are in bodies ; to which they add no perfection , and from which they are ( every moment ) separable . but the socinians are not concerned , what becomes of the dispute about persons and personalities in god ; whether they are adequately the same , yea or no ; and again , whether the moderns who follow the schools , agree with the antients in their notion of them : for i will put to dr. s — th a plain question , to which if he is disposed to give a clear and categorical answer , it will appear to all men , that either he falls in with dr. sherlock , or with the unitarians ; that is to say , he is either a tritheist , or ( what , i doubt , he will as much abhor ) a socinian . he saith , there is one only divine substance , essence or nature ; and thus far we agree with him : but he adds , this one substance is so diversified by three modes , affections or habitudes , or something like to them , that we must say ( under pain of heresy and damnation ) that this one substance is three divine persons , a father , his son , and a spirit distinct from both . therefore i ask , have the three ( pretended ) divine persons , each his own proper , peculiar and personal understanding , will and energy ; so that there are in the divine substance , or in god , three distinct ( all-knowing , almighty ) understandings , wills and energies , as there are three distinct persons ; as dr. sherlock has affirmed ? or have the three persons but one only self-same understanding , will and energy in number , as there is but one self-same substance in number ? if he saith the former , he joins hands with dr. sherlock ; and is guilty of tritheism , no less than he : for three ( omniscient and omnipotent ) understandings , wills and energies , without doubt , are three gods. if there be three omnisciencies and omnipotencies , of necessity there must be three omniscients and omnipotents : but that is tritheism , even in the judgment of athanasius himself ; who expresly denies three almighties , or three all-knowings . and indeed i do not think , dr. s — th will say , that each person hath his own proper and personal understanding , will or energy ; so that there are three distinct understandings , wills and energies in what his party call the godhead : i see his book is written with more judgment and precaution , than dr. sherlock's ; or even than any that i have seen , that have been written in defence of the trinitarian cause . but if he denies , that there are three ( all-knowing , almighty ) understandings , wills and energies ; he is a socinian , he has granted to us the point in controversy , he grants the whole that we contend for . they will allow him to say , there are three persons , or three thousand persons in the godhead ; so long as he grants but one ( omnipotent ) energy and will , and but one ( all-knowing ) understanding or wisdom . if this be granted to us , 't is plain to every one who gives but never so little heed ; that the question about three persons , is a meer strife of words ; and the authors of the brief history , and brief notes , are ( tho not in their words , yet in their senses ) as orthodox as dr. s — th and the schools . i will affirm , we have no need of our brief histories , or brief notes ; we need not make an operose proof of our doctrine of the unity of god , from the holy scriptures or from reason : the whole controversy with the church is ended , in the resolution of this short and plain question ; is there more than one all-knowing , almighty understanding , will and energy ? if you say , there is but one such understanding , will and energy , in one self-same divine substance ; you may talk of as many persons , fathers , sons , spirits , modes , properties , respects , nothings , as you please : we will only peaceably advise you , that these are meer empty words , that have nothing to answer them in the thing under consideration . when you have granted to us , that there is but one divine substance , and but one omniscient , omnipotent understanding and energy ; what you add more of persons , properties , thingams , and call them a trinity , 't is an addition only of words and names ; not of realities , or persons that are properly so called . these things being so , and so very evident ▪ i cannot wonder , that so discerning a philosopher as dr. cudworth , never speaks of the trinity of the schools ( maintained by dr. s — th ) without calling it a nominal trinity , a trinity of names and words only , a disguised sabellianism : which is to say , unitarianism or socinianism drest up in the absurd cant of the schools . but whereas the schools deform the sincere and easy notion of the unity of god , as 't is held by the socinians and sabellians , by transforming it into a fantastick trinity of nominal persons , or of persons who are persons only in name , not in truth and reality : therefore dr. cudworth saith farther , that this trinity is jargonry in philosophy , a trinity that falls not under human conception , and which cannot be in nature . intellect . system , p. . elsewhere he scruples not to name it , the philosophy of gotham . these are the just characters which that great philosopher and divine gives of the scholastick trinity of dr. s — th : he giveth his reasons up and down in the intellectual system ; but 't is not necessary for me to report them , when every one may see them in the author himself ; and besides they are too philosophical , to be put into a discourse which i design for the use of the less learned , as well as of the learned . i have done with dr. s — th's explication , for this time : if he is angry with me for the reflections i have made thereupon , i protest 't is without just cause . i have used no disrespectful language ; i have acknowledged , and do acknowledg the worth of the man , and all other perfections in his book , but only this one , that it maintains an unjustifiable explication . the method or structure of his book is natural , elegant and judicious ; the words , expression , or phrase , is proper , forcible , clean , and well chose : it hath very many agreeable turns of wit , which render it pleasant to an ingenious reader . as this author hath a great deal of wit , so he hath known how to govern it in this respect ; that he is witty , without buffoonry . this is a conduct , not very usual in those that have much wit ; commonly they know not how to manage it ; and among other unjudicious neglects , they forget the where and when , and other such like circumstances ; they are so taken with their talent , as to be always using it , because they know not that everlasting fooling is true and meer fooling . but i wish that dr. s — th in exercising his wit , had remembred the who , which he hath utterly forgotten : and that was utterly an oversight , and a very great one . he cannot excuse himself , by pleading the many contradictions in dr. sherlock's book : a candid man would not impute them to the author , but to the extream obscurity of the subject ; when the subject it self is contradictory , there will be many contradictions committed in defending it . i doubt not that dr. sherlock will find many contradictions in dr. s-th's second chapter . having done to dr. s — th this right , he ought not to be out of humour , that i as a socinian , have attacked his explication ; as i have some other learned men : i mean no disrespect thereby to him , or them ; i acknowledg their personal merit , but cannot give up to them so sacred a truth , as the unity of god , or consent that it be disguised and deformed . of the explication by mr. hooker , author of the ecclesiastical polity . mr. hooker , tho he was none of the fathers of the catholick church , is not of less authority in the particular church of england , than any one of the fathers is : and it must be confest he was not only a very good , but a very learned and discerning man. but it is observed of him , that in speaking of the trinity , he speaks somewhat incorrectly : this was a doctrine which he took for granted , there was no dispute in his time about it ; so he hath delivered himself , not with his usual precaution and judgment . he saith , that the substance of god , with this property , to be of none , doth make the person of the the father . the very self-same substance in number , with this property , to be of the father , maketh the person of the son. the same substance , having added to it the property of proceeding from the other two , maketh the person of the holy ghost . so that in every person there is implied both the substance of god , which is one ; and also that property , which causeth the same person really and truly to differ from the other two . i must observe , in the first place , hereupon , that mr. hooker in this matter hath not spoken over critically and correctly ; nay , hardly orthodoxly : i mean , as orthodoxy goes among the learned of his own parry . he saith that the substance of god , with these properties , to be of none , to be of the father , and to proceed from the other two , make the persons of the father , son and spirit : now to be of none , to be of the father , and to proceed from both , are but other words for this sense , to beget , to be begotten , and to proceed . but that father of modern orthodoxy , peter lombard , whom we have already twice mentioned , denies that these ( before-mentioned ) are properties in the substance of god , or that they can belong to it : he saith , essentia divina non est genera●● , nec genera●● , nec procedens ; i. e. the substance of god neither begets , nor is begotten , nor proceeds . 't is impossible to make this consist with mr. hooker , who expresly ascribeth those properties to the divine substance or essence , and saith , that being in the divine substance , they make it to be three persons . what shall we do here ? shall we say , reverend hooker has mistaken , and missed his sons ( who are all the church of england ) into an error concerning the trinity ? hath he ascribed to the divine essence , properties , which he calleth persons , that are not in it ? to give up hooker , is to dishonour the church of england it self ; to part with father hooker , is to endanger the very surplice , and even the cross in baptism ; nay , that book of books the common-prayer . if mr. hooker could err about the trinity ; what will the fanaticks and trimmers say ? will they not be apt to pretend too , he may have erred in his profound dissertations and discourses for the rites and discipline of the church ? i am afraid , for all that , we must keep close to peter lombard , master of the sentences , and of the modern divinity : he hath been espoused by all the popes since innocent the third , by the lateran council which was general , and by the tacit approbation of the whole church ever since . i doubt , it is not much more passible , that mr. hooker saith , that the properties , to be of none , to be of the father , and to proceed , do ( together with the substance of god ) make the persons of the father , son and spirit . it is not true , that those are the properties which make the persons : he might say , that they make the persons to be father , son and spirit , or to have that threefold relation among themselves ; but they do not make the three persons to be persons ; or thus , they do not make ( as he speaks ) the persons . to be of none maketh the father ; but i deny , that it maketh ( as mr. hooker affirms ) the person of the father : the character , or property which maketh the person of the father , is quite another from the property or character that maketh the father . to beget , to be begotten , and to proceed , are properties which constitute the relations of father , son and spirit : but they are other properties , which make the persons of the father , son and spirit . concerning the properties or characters which make the re●●tions , all learned trinitarians are agreed ; they acknowledg them to be these three , active generation , ( not , as mr. hooker mistakes , this meer negation to be of none ) eternal passive generation , or to be begotten , and eternal procession : but concerning the properties that make the persons , they are not so well accorded . the antient divines said , the property that maketh the person of the father , or the peculiar property and character of the first person , is monarchy ; the property of the second person , is wisdom ; and of the third is love. others said , that the property of the first person , is beatitude and rest ; the property of the second is operation : others had still other conceits , all of them false . but allowing now the way of speaking , used by mr. hooker , what a riddle has he propounded ? here is the self-same substance ( in number ) unbegotten , and yet begotten : the divine substance with the property to be of none , or to be unbegotten , is ( saith he ) the person of the father ; the self same substance ( in number ) with the property to be of the father , or to be begotten , is ( or makes ) the person of the son. can the self-same substance ( in number ) be of none , and yet be of the father ; be unbegotten , and begotten too ? are they not contradictory terms , and therefore not to be applied to the self-same substance in number ? they will say , mr. hooker doth not affirm , that the self-same substance is begotten and unbegotten ; this indeed were a ●●t contradiction : but he saith , that as 't is in the father , 't is unbegotten ; as in the son , 't is begotten . but do they reckon they have to deal only with fools ? what if i should say , my hand as in my pocket , is unskalded ; but at in my glove , 't is skalded : would it not be a contradiction , for all the blinds of in the pocket , and in the glove ? the self-same hand in number , cannot be burnt , and unburnt ; the place in which it is , will not palliate such a contradiction : in like manner , the self-same substance cannot be begotten , and unbegotten ; because you are pleased to pretend , you consider it sometimes in one subject or person , sometimes in another . in whatever person a substance is , it must either be a begotten substance , or an unbegotten ; it cannot possibly be both : if it really remains unbegotten , then it never was begotten ; but if in process of time it has been begotten , then it cannot still be unbegotten . why do our opposers choose to maintain such extravagant paradoxes , rather than acknowledg so easy and natural a truth , as the unity of god ? rather than receive the first commandment , in its natural and obvious sense ; rather than we will sincerely ( and without disguise or juggle ) own that there is but one only god : we will choose to make our selves scorned by all sensible men ; by saying , the self-same substance ( in number ) is begotten , and unbegotten ; 't is of the father , nay 't is of father and of son , and yet 't is of none . let us consider mr. hooker's catch , in three human persons . he will say , the substance of john is begotten , as john is the son of peter ; but john's substance is unbegotten , as john is the father of james : and yet it is the self-same substance in number , that is thus both begotten and unbegotten . is it so ? but if john's substance be really begotten , i will ever stand in it , that his substance is not unbegotten : it was begotten by his father peter , therefore 't is a begotten substance , not an unbegotten . some one may say , but is not john's substance unbegotten , in respect of john ' s son james ; tho it was begotten by peter ? by no means : for if peter begot john's substance , then john's substance is begotten , tho his son james begot it not ; and consequently it cannot be said to be an unbegotten substance , in any respect whatsoever . in short , they would have us to say ; john's substance is unbegotten , because it was begotten by peter , and not by john's son james . i deny , that 't is a proper , or a true way of speaking : for if the substance has been begotten by any whomsoever ; it must never after be called unbegotten , on this absurd account , that it was not begotten by james , but by peter . farther , whereas mr. hooker saith , the substance of god , with this property to be begotten , or to be of the father , maketh the person of the son : i ask , is then the substance of god begotten ; i pray , who begat it ? they must answer , the father ! but did the father beget the substance of god ? do they not say , that the self-same substance that is in the father , is also in the son ? but if so , then if the father begat the substance of the son , or of god , he begat his own substance . can any one beget his own substance ? is it not a contradiction , a manifold contradiction ? is it not as much as to say , he was before he was ? he that begets his own substance , begets himself : but he that begets himself , is thereby supposed to have been before he was . i know , it hath been said by some divines , god is self-originated or self-begotten . but 't is utterly false ; they ought to have said , he is unoriginated or unbegotten . as god is not originated or begotten , by another ; so much less by himself : not by another , for then that other must be before him , at least in order of nature ; not by himself , because then he must be before he was . but to finish with mr. hooker , i will show his followers , that in pursuance of his explication , they will be forced to say ; that as the father begat the son , so the son destroys the father . and i make challenge to them all , to rescue their master's explication from that fatal consequence . begotten doth always destroy unbegotten ; when once a person or thing is begotten , that self-same thing or person can be no longer unbegotten . if therefore the substance of god unbegotten , maketh ( as mr. hooker contends ) the person of the father ; and the self-same substance begotten , maketh the person of the son : it unavoidably follows , that the generation of the son is the destruction of the father ; because the property or characteristick of the father , even unbegotten , is destroyed out of the divine substance , by the characteristick of the son , which is begotten . unbegotten ( that is to say , the father ) remains no longer in the divine substance ; if begotten ( that is , according to hooker , the son ) hath taken place in it . o that our learned opposers would vouchsafe , to consider these things impartially : that they would not reckon 't is their glory , to defend received doctrines , only because they have been long received , and by many ; as if prescription or numbers could alter the nature of truths and untruths . which ( i pray ) is more honourable , to own a clear and necessary truth ; or to set one's self to darken and to obstruct it ? i confess the latter requires more wit , especially against an able and dexterous defendant ; but 't is the other that deserves greater praise , especially before god , because it argues sincerity and justice . but i pass to the last sort of trinity , the mystical trinity . of the mystical trinity , or the trinity of the mobile . the poor common people are first made to believe , by the help of corrupted copies , and false translations of the bible , that 't is a scripture-doctrine ; that there is a trinity of divine persons , an almighty father , an almighty son , and an almighty spirit distinct and different ( in number ) from both father and son. but because this ( at the very first sight ) appears contrary to reason and common sense ; therefore in the next place they are told , that they must consider this doctrine , as a mystery , impossible indeed for us to understand , yet necessary to be believed , because god hath said it . how many things , say these teachers , are there in the works of nature , which we understand not , no more than we can understand the trinity : and yet we believe them to be , as assuredly ; as if there were no difficulty , in conceiving how they should be . as , that there are antipodes , whose feet are opposite to our feet , and who walk with their heads downwards , with respect to our parts of the world. again , that a spirit can move a body from place to place : tho reason first assures us , that there can be no motion without a resistance ; and then , that a pure spirit can meet no resistance , from matter or bodies . also , that the parts of matter or bodies hold together ; tho no cause can be assigned for it , but what appears immediately to be unsufficient , nay ridiculous . all these are great truths , and we believe them , even contrary to the verdict of reason : how much more ought we to believe the trinity , which hath been propounded to us , as an article of faith , in the word of god it self , tho our fallible and frail reason reclaims , and kicks perhaps against it ? when the socinians , say these gentlemen , have accounted for all the mysteries of nature and art ; let them begin to object to the trinity , that 't is a mystery , and that it hath sundry contradictions to reason : but till they do the first , 't is nothing else but a bold impiety to insist on the other . it must be confessed , sir , that this is the most plausible pretence ; the strongest hold , as well as the last resort of our opposers : when we have drove them from all other posts , here they take sanctuary . i will therefore take care to remove this occasion , and cover of error . i say , . i might leave it wholly to dr. s — th , to answer this pretence of some of his party . at p. , and , &c. of his animadversions , he shows at large , what is a mystery ; he saith , that a mistery is a truth revealed by god , above the reach of human reason to find out , or to comprehend . he vindicateth this definition , part by part ; he saith , p. . first , a mystery is a truth ; by which , saith he , i exclude every thing from being a mystery , which is absurd , or contradictions . now we desire nothing else of our oppo●●●● , but that they would abide by this account of mystery ; that 't is not something absurd , or contradictory , but only some secret revealed by god , because it was above human capacity to discover it , and sometimes also even to comprehend how it can be . for there is a vast difference between my not being able to conceive how a thing should be , and a clear apprehension and sight that it cannot be . there are ( it may be ) mysteries , which we cannot comprehend how they should be : but that three divine persons , or three distinct almighty and all-knowing persons , should be but one almighty , but one all-knowing , or but one god , a man ( who considers but with never so little intention and sincerity ) clearly sees , that it cannot be . in short , that 't is not a mystery , but ( as dr. s — th speaks ) an absurdity and a contradiction . in a word , we do not reject the doctrines of the trinity and incarnation , because they are mysteries ; but because they are plain contradictions to reason and common sense , and consequently untruths : for ( without doubt ) reason and truth are but two names , for the same thing ; and clear reason is no other thing , but clear truth . . i consider , that what will equally serve to excuse all the nonsense , and impossible doctrines , that are to be found among men ; we cannot admit of it , as a defence of the ( pretended ) trinity and incarnation : especially in opposition to such powerful proofs , both from scripture and reason ; as may be , and actually are alledged against those doctrines . a papist , for example , does ( with equal colour ) alledg this pretence , for his transubstantiation . he says , 't is a scripture-doctrine , delivered in these express words , this is my body : and how many things are there in the works of nature , which we comprehend not , no more than we can comprehend the miracle of the transubstantiation ; and yet we believe them to be , as assuredly , as if there were no difficulty in conceiving how they should be , or that they can be . such as the antipodes ; and that a pure spirit can ●●●ve a body , in which it findeth no resistance ; and that the parts of matter or bodies are continuos , or hold together : and many the like . thus do the papists argue ; and i deny , that this pretence can be wrested from them , by any trinitarian : for 't is the same defence that the trinitarian makes for his doctrines of the trinity and the incarnation . our opposers will not vouchsafe , so much as to hear catholicks and lutherans , when they plead mystery , for the transubstantiation or the consubstantiation : i desire of them therefore , to give me but one reason , why that plea is not as good in those controversies , as in these of the trinity and incarnation . the author of two dialogues , concerning the trinity and the transubstantiation , finding himself pressed with this difficulty , answers to this effect , that there are a great many more texts of holy scripture for the trinity , than are pretended for the transubstantiation . but this is no solution of the proposed difficulty : for 't is not at all the question , which doctrine hath most texts alledged for it ; but only , whether the pretence of mystery , be not a plea as rational and allowable , against all the exceptions made against the transubstantiation , as an impossible , inconceivable and contradictory doctrine ; as 't is to the same exceptions , when urged by the socinians against the incarnation or trinity ? but whereas that author insists upon an answer , wholly foreign to this difficulty ; and is so careful to bring together , from cardinal bellarmine , all the texts alledged for the trinity : he is desired to name to us so much as one text for either of those doctrines ; that is not given up to the socinians , by some of the most learned interpreters and criticks of his own party , as indeed no proof of the trinity , the incarnation , or the divinity of the son or spirit . what avails it , for a man to talk of the great number of texts , which he can alledg ; when the ablest persons of his own party , do ( in the mean time ) ow● the unsufficiency of every one of them in particular ? if he thinks he has cause to deny , that the socinians have this great advantage on their side ; whenever he shall do it publickly , i will bear the reproach , if i do not justify what i have said , by citation of particular authors of the first note and rank among our opposers . . our opposers urge , that there are ( and the soci●●●●s themselves believe ) a great many mys●●●●●s in nature ; of which no human reason can give an account , nay reason objects against them , and professedly contradicts them : as that a pure spirit can move a body , in which it meets no resistance ; that bodies or matter consist of indiuisible parts ; and such like . well , suppose the socinians should grant these , or other unaccountable mysteries , which not only are not comprehended , but are contradicted by reason : what then ? why , then they are very inconsiderate , to deny ( as they do ) the trinity and incarnation ; on this account , that 't is contrary to reason , or implies contradictions and absurdities . but our opposers should have thought better of this objection , before they laid so great a weight on it ; even the weight of their whole cause . for tho we should grant , that we believe some mysteries of nature or art , against which reason objects , and many ways contradicts them ; yet is this no plea for the trinity , or the incarnation . for if we believe natural or artificial mysteries , 't is because we plainly see that so the thing is : we see or we feel , or have some other undeniable proof of the thing ; some such proof , as no rational man will or can resist . doth any man believe misteries , or wonderful tales , contrary to his reason , and the reason of all other men ; without a most manifest and uncontestable proof of them ; without some such proof or proofs , as undeniably evince the thing so to be ? but will our opposers pretend , they have any such proofs for the incarnation or trinity ; such manifest , such evident , such uncontestable proofs , that no sober man , or no reasonable man can except against them , or refuse to admit of them ? i do not think they will pretend to it , if it be but for this only reason , because the socinians are confest to be a rational and learned party . are those evidence or proofs uncontestable , which are rejected , not without some scorn , by some of the learnedest , and most unsuspected of their own party ? are they uncontestable , that not only may be interpreted to another sense , but also are either otherways read in the best copies of the hebrew and greek , or may be otherways translated from those languages ; and all this , by confession of the more ingenious of our opposers themselves ? briefly , we say , mysteries there are ; and it may be such mysteries , as are even contradicted by reason ; that is , are in some respects contradictions to our present ( short-sighted and frail ) reason : but when we believe there are some such mysteries , it is because they appear to our senses ; or are proved to us by some such either reason or authority , as no reasonable man , much less any number of such men , does or can deny to be uncontestable . and otherways , all the unwarrantable nonsense in the world may be imposed on us , under the pretence and cloak of mystery . but now the doctrine of the trinity , hath not only no uncontestable proofs ; but the pretences for it are so feeble , that none of them can be named , but is not only rejected , but despised by some of the learnedest of our opposers themselves . they would perswade us to acknowledg a mistery , full of contradictions to the clearest reason , and to indisputable texts of holy scripture ; and supported in the mean time , only by some texts that may be interpreted to a rational sense , that is , to a sense that hath nothing contrary either to reason , or to the unquestionable parts or texts of the holy scripture . for peace sake , we would do so , if it were some light matter that they urged on us : but when the question is , about one or more gods , one or more divine persons , we judg it adviseable , not to be too facile in admitting such dangerous mysteries ; mysteries that would destroy the allegiance and homage that we all owe to the one true god. i have done , sir , with the explications of our opposers . you see what they are : dr. s — th's explication is only an absurd socinianism ; or unitarianism disguised in a metaphysical and logical cant. dr. wallis his explication is an ingenious sabellianism ; and in very deed differs from unitarianism , no more than dr. s — th's , that is to say , only in the wording . dr. sherlock's is such a flat tritheism , that all the learned of his own party confess it to be so ; and dr. s — th hath written a very accurate book to prove it so . dr. cudworth's is a moderate arianism ; the ariani molles ascribed as much to the son , as this doctor doth : and he denies as much to the son , as they did ; even an equality of power , and authority with the father . mr. hooker's is a trinity , not of persons , but of contradictions : and he hath advanced such a son , as of necessity destroys his father . what the mystical divines teach , cannot be called an explication ; they deny all explications : we must say therefore 't is samaritanism ; for what our saviour says of the samaritans , by way of reproof and blame , that these gentlemen profess concerning themselves , that they worship they know not what . these , sir , are the doctrines that we oppose ; i shall leave it with you , whether it be without cause . before i conclude , i beg your leave to say two words to mr. basset , who hath answer'd ( or thinks he has answered ) to the brief history of the unitarians : and to dr. fulwood and dr. edwards , men of dignity in the church ; but who have not thought it below them , to use the very vilest language , and the basest and most ungrounded scandals , that their malice to our persons , and their ignorance of the points in question between us and the church , could suggest to them . these two doctors tell their readers , that the unitarians deny the omniscience of god , or that he fore-knoweth contingent events : that they deny his omnipresence , making him to be present in all places , only by his knowledg , and his power ; that they ascribe the same degree of power and knowledg , and pay the self-same worship to the lord christ , whom they affirm to be a meer man , which they ascribe or pay to almighty god ; and hereby , say these doctors , they are guilty of an idolatry that is equally evident and abominable . they pretend to prove this charge out of the writings of socinus , smalcius , and some others of the party . i say now ; . that their quotations out of socinus and the rest , are ( for a great pa●● of them ) as false and disingenious as those ●● dr. wallis were : as any one will see , who shall take the pains to consult the authors themselves . . they make it to be a great heresy in some socinians , that they deny there is a certain fore-knowledg of contingent events : they say 't is a denial of god's omniscience . and yet all men know , that very many of the most learned trinitarians , have been of the same opinion ; antients as well as moderns , protestants as well as catholicks . nor have these doctors so much as offered at an answer to the reasons of socinus and crellius , concerning a conditional knowledg in god. . that god is omnipresent , not in his essence or person , but by his knowledg and power ; is also held by divers learned trinitarians : and it must needs have been the opinion of those fathers , who either were anthropomorphites ; or held that god is a body , not a spirit . . these doctors have written against the socinians , by occasion of the english books , that have been lately published , by those of that perswasion : they should therefore have attacked the doctrine of those books ; they should have described our opinions out of our own writings , not from the books of foreigners . the english socinians sincerely believe , that god is truly omniscient ; that he foreseeth all events , how contingent soever they may be to us . they believe the real omnipresence of god ; or that he is present in his essence or person in all places , and not only by his power , knowledg or ministers . they honour , or if we must use that word , they worship the lord christ ; neither with the same sort , nor with the same degree of worship , which is due to god : they worship or honour him , with their minds , only as one who is highly exalted by god , above all principality and power , and every name that is named ; and to whom god hath given to be head over all things to the church . in a word , they neither pay a higher worship , nor impute a greater power or knowledg to the lord christ , than the most learned , and the far greater number of trinitarians , impute and pay to the human nature ( the meer human nature ) of jesus christ , in his present state of exaltation . we have said these things so often in our late books ; we have defended them so earnestly , that none but persons of little honesty , or great inconsideration , would object to us such opinions as these before-mentioned . but these gentlemen had a longing mind to be authors ; and who should they signalize themselves upon , so popularly , as upon the socinians : if they have got reputation by their books , that is , by weak arguments and strong calumnies ; it is with so very few , that i do not think they will reap an advantage by it . but one of them urgeth , that socinus was in this dangerous heresy , that the soul of man , after the death of his body , is in a state of inactivity and unperception ; in a word , neither perceives nor lives , till the resurrection of the body : at which time , it receiveth immortality , by the meer grace or gift of god ; but is not , of its own nature , immortal . i do acknowledg , that this seems to be the opinion of f. socinus ; but , i believe , of very few unitarians besides . but this error was common to him , with some of the fathers : the learned monsieur du pin has noted , that justin martyr , irenaeus , minutius foelix and arnobius were in this sentiment . there was no reason therefore to object this , to socinus ; as if it were a peculiar opinion of his ; much less to the english unitarians , who never defended it ; nor , that i know of , do any of them hold it . as to mr. basset , there are two things very remarkable , in his answer to the brief history of the unitarians : the meanness and dulness of the book it self , it being written with no vivacity , wit , or elevation of thought ; and the undecent insolence of the author . his book being such as it is , if the brief history cannot shift for it self , against that reply to it ; the historian is resolved it shall take its fortune : he is perswaded , that when a discerning man has read mr. basset's answer ; if he again looks over the brief history , he will ( at least ) as much approve of it , as at first . mr. basset has said nothing , that can in the least shake the reputation of the brief history ; unless his reader will believe him , when he charges the historian with false quotations of authors . to this the historian answers ; that he hath not made one false or mistaken citation : but mr. basset sometimes not understanding the authors that are quoted , for they are greek and latin ; and sometimes mistaking the sense of the historian , which he doth very frequently ; it hath happened hereupon , that he hath charged the historian with his own either ignorances or inadvertences . but i am not at leisure to write a vindication , every time that negligent and ignorant scriblers mistake my meaning ; or the sense or the authors by me alledged . i reckon it to be his insolence , that a person who had nothing to offer on these questions ; but what was very trivial and vulgar ; should yet give disrespectful language , without any the least provocation given by the historian . he saith , for instance , that indeed the foreign socinians have been learned and subtile men ; but he cannot say so concerning the english : but for the epistler , so he calls the writer of the brief history , because 't is written in four letters ; he saith , poor wretch ought to have imploy'd his small talent to honester purposes , and not have sought for reputation only by his nonsense , his follies , and his impieties . this was a mortification indeed , c●ming ( as it does ) from so great and worthy a hand : but the comfort is , we are apt to be more advised , and better'd also by our humiliations . and yet i am still of opinion , that as mr. basset thought it requisite to answer the brief history after the great victory gained over it by dr. sherlock : so there will not want many others , who will judg it no less than necessary ; to give other answers to it , after this triumph of mr. basset . but however that be , i answer to mr. basset , as moses did to pharaoh , glory over me ; i am resolved mr. basset shall have the self-satisfaction , that he hath mauled the epistler for ever . for i will not catch flies , nor spend my artillery upon mud-walls ; when i happen on some such second , as dr. sherlock found up against the jesuits , mr. basset may hear from me , and not before , i will not ask pardon , sir , for the length of this letter ; for you see to how many it was necessary to make some answer : but i ought not to forget , to give you my thanks and respects , for the liberalities and favours , which you have done to your humble servant . a letter to the publisher from another hand . sir , i heartily thank you for the perusal of this most learned and judicious letter , which i return you ; and i congratulate the worthy author , whom the divine wisdom has made an instrument for the vindicating of his glorious and incommunicable attribute of unity , which he has in several tracts even demonstrated , not only by clear and express scriptures and obvious reason , but also now at length from the confessions of the trinitarians themselves , the infringers of it . for whilst each one condemns the several explications of the rest , as either inconsistent with the unity , or the trinity , they do all in their turns bear witness to the unitarians , that their opposition to the trinitarian doctrine is well-grounded and reasonable , and consequently their doctrine of the unity the truth of god. for if each one of their explications does either introduce the worship of three gods , or the heresy of sabellianism , as they call it , the turning the son and holy ghost into names and operations without any real distinction of persons , or things answering those distinct names , as it plainly appears they do ; then it undeniably follows , there is no such trinity as they imagine , but a numerical unity of person and essence in god , as the unitarians hold ; and as some trinitarians contend in their opposition one to another . it remains then that the trinitarian worshippers , especially the common people , do seriously and in the fear of the one most high god , consider , what notions , conceptions , or idea's they have , of an infinite and almighty holy ghost distinct from the almighty father and producer of them : for they cannot possibly escape the condemnation of one of the highest crimes , even the worship of three infinite real gods , or two imaginary ones , or two names without notions ; that is , they know not what , as this author expresses it ; condemnation i say , not only by the unitarians ( who worship the father only as god in the highest and strictest sense of that term ) but also by all the trinitarians , that hold not the same opinion , or have not the same notion . i know the times of ignorance god winketh at , as well now , as before the preaching of the gospel ; but after he has made his unity manifest , and vindicated it from the scholastick subtilties and absurd distinctions , that have been invented to hide the truth , he then commands all men , to whom this evidence comes , to repent . inconsideration or negligence will not now excuse . men must not say or think ( as they commonly do ) this point is too high for me to determine ; for they have already determined it , whilst they profess to believe in , and to worship three equal ones , a father , a son , and a spirit . neither can they alledg the universality of the trinitarian faith : for besides ( as this author observes ) the worshipping of many gods was formerly , and is now far more universal ; we see that this opinion and worship , which soever it be , is condemned by at least four to one of those that go under that common name of trinitarians . the rise of these divers and contrary explications has been this ( as is observed by the author in that which now obtains ) that learned men looking narrowly into former explications , have found them inconsistent with the oneness of god , and therefore have devised somewhat either more obscure , that would hide the contradiction , or somewhat more consistent with the unity , tho it destroyed the trinity ; or more consistent with the trinity , tho it destroys the unity , as dr. sherlock has done . and perhaps others like him may devise other hypotheses , taking it for granted from the prejudices of early education and customary thinking , that the trinity is a fundamental of christianity . but we see here they labour in vain to reconcile manifest contradictions : and in believing the son and holy spirit to be equally god with the father , they offend against express scriptures and clear reason , upon the account of their own reasonings upon obscure texts ; and therein transgress the plain principles , both of natural light and revelation , which require , . that nothing be held for truth contrary to evident and fundamental truth . and , . that obscure passages are to be interpreted by clear passages , and the current of scripture , and not otherwise . the jews walking contrary to these principles , was the cause of rejecting christ and christianity , and it is indeed the ground of all error whatever . in vain do men press a great many texts ( that have , even in the opinion of learned trinitarians , another meaning ) to prove that the son and holy ghost are god ; till they can reconcile that inference to plain scripture and evident reason . in vain does the author of the snare broken ( who could not overcome the prejudices of his education and converse ) perswade men to lay aside their philosophy , and wholly to betake themselves to a scriptural consideration of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; by which i understand , they must take the words of scripture without understanding them , or reconciling them to other scriptures , or even the current of scripture or common reason . do they think that scripture is to be interpreted contrary to it self ? or , that divine wisdom has made the belief of contradictions necessary to salvation ? it seems strange that christians should be very zealous in the punctilio's of the worship of god , ceremonies of posture , gesture or apparel ; forms of addresses to god , the wording of faith to an iota ; and yet go on in the worship of one god the father , and of two distinct from him , god as perfectly as he ; and in which their worship terminates equally with him . they can love god the father with all their hearts and strengths , and two persons distinct from him with the same all : they can give all to one , and all to another , and all to a third , and never question the possibility of it ; as if there were a trinity in unity in every man ; that his own heart were three hearts , to be bestowed all and entirely upon each of three objects , and yet be but one heart still . but whither am i carried ? this author needs none of my notes or illustrations : and indeed both he and all others that have labour'd in this controversy , may surcease their pains henceforth , and leave what they have already said to the judgment and conscience of all considerate and sincere men. i am , sir , yours , &c. the life of faith in two sermons to the university of oxford, at st. mary's church there, on the th of january / and june the th following / by john wallis ... wallis, john, - . approx. kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from -bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : - (eebo-tcp phase ). a wing w estc r ocm this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons . universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase , no. a ) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set ) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, - ; : ) the life of faith in two sermons to the university of oxford, at st. mary's church there, on the th of january / and june the th following / by john wallis ... wallis, john, - . [ ], p. printed by james rawlins, for thomas parkhurst, and are to be sold by amos curteine ..., london : . reproduction of original in huntington library. created by converting tcp files to tei p using tcp tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between and available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the , texts created during phase of the project have been released into the public domain as of january . anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. % (or pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf- unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p , characters represented either as utf- unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng bible. -- o.t. -- hebrews x, -- sermons. faith -- sermons. sermons, english -- th century. - tcp assigned for keying and markup - spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images - melanie sanders sampled and proofread - melanie sanders text and markup reviewed and edited - pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion the life of faith. in two sermons to the university of oxford at s t. mary's church there ; on the th . of january , / . and june the th . following . by john wallis , d. d. one of his majesty's chaplains in ordinary , and professor of geometry in the university of oxford . london , printed by james rawlins , for thomas parkhurst : and are to be sold by amos curteine , bookseller in oxford , . the life of faith. hebr. . . but the just shall live by faith. life is that of which we are all fond. and on the contrary , death is ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) that which , of all , we most dread . ( skin for skin , and all that a man hath will he give for his life . ) insomuch that life is commonly put for happiness ; and death for misery . behold i have set before you ( saith moses ) life and good , death and evil : and again , i have set before you life , and death ; blessing , and cursing : therefore choose life , that thou and thy seed may live . that is , that you may be blessed . and jeremy , much to the same purpose , ( but more literally : ) behold i set before you the way of life , and the way of death . and , when god at first threatened , in the day that thou eatest thereof , thou shalt dy the death : that which we commonly call death ( though it were a part ) was but a small part , of that threatening . the whole of it , was , that he should be miserable . and , though he did not dy the same day ( as to what we commonly call death , ) yet he did , that day , become miserable . and so had he , and all his , continued to be ; if god had not found out a way to restore us , from that death , to a life of happiness . and what that is , the text tells us ; the just shall live by faith. true it is , that death , in the proper sense , is a great evil ; and it was so intended by god , when he did at first threaten it , as a part of that misery , which was to follow upon sin. ) and even the death of a friend , as well as our own , may justly be looked upon as a great affliction . but , thus to dy , is a much less evil , than ( as the apostle speaks ) to be dead while we live. and it is an allay to our sorrow , ( as well in reference to our own death , as to that of those we love , ) that , he who believeth in the lord , though he be dead , yet shall he live : and , who soever liveth and believeth in him , shall never dy. you easily apprehend , that , when christ saith , he shall never dy ; he did not mean it of a natural death ; for , thus , it is appointed to all men , once to dy : ) but thus rather , he that hath part in the first resurrection , on such the second death hath no power . or , if that expression may seem to be of a doubtfull sense , ( as being involved in the obscure phrase of a mystical prophesy ; ) yet , that at least is plain , that , if we live after the flesh , we shall dy ; but if , through the spirit , we mortifie the deeds of the body , we shall live. for , to be carnally minded , is death ; but , to be spiritually minded , is life and peace . and this is the life , which the text speaks of . which is begun is grace , and perfected in glory . and such a life is that , which the just shall live by faith. god so loved the world , that he gave his only begotten son , that who so ever believeth in him , should not perish , but have everlasting life . ( that is , that he should be eternally happy . ) he that believeth on the son , hath everlasting life ; and he that believeth not the son , hath not life ; but the wrath of god abideth on him . for the just shall live by faith. but , if any man draw-back , my soul ( saith god ) shall have no pleasure in him . the first place where we meet with this , the just shall live by faith , is in habak . . . and we have it cited ( as a saying very considerable ) three times in the new testament , rom. . . gal. . . and here hebr. . . and , in all the four places , we have the words just in the same order : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . justus ex fide vivet ; ( that of faith standing in the middle of the other two words , and capable of being referred to either ) the just , by faith , shall live. and may therefore be indifferently read , the just by faith , or by faith shall live . ( justus ex fide , or ex fide vivet . ) nor need we be much solicitous , whether of the ways we read it . for it may well enough have an aspect both ways . but though , in all these places , the words ly in the same order , yet with a different emphasis ; according as the context , and the scope of the place direct . in the first place ; the emphasis seems to ly upon the word just , or righteous ; as contradistinguished from those who are otherwise . his soul that is lifted up , is not upright in him ; ( and consequently , not pleasing to god : ) but the just shall live by faith. where he shews the advantage that the just or righteous have ( as to the case there spoken of ; ) before those who are not so ; those who 's heart is lifted up , or standeth out , and refuseth to submit it self to god and trust in him . and to the same purpose , in the place before us : where we have a like opposition , or contradistinction , between the just or faithful , and those who are not so . the just shall live by faith : but , if any man draw-back ( saith god ) my soul shall have no pleasure in him . where we have ( as in the other place ) a promise to the just and faithful ; but with a direct exclusion of those who are otherwise ; who draw-back or revolt from him , or stand-out against him , or believe not in him . ( which come much to the same pass . and the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , of a like sense , in divers places of the new testament , is by interpreters indifferently expressed by disobedience , or vnbelief . ) and this place ( in the epistle to the hebrews ) though it may , in some words , seem to differ from that in habakkuk ; yet is , by expositors , generally supposed to have a particular respect thereunto . nor need we ( as some would perswade us ) to change the reading of the hebrew text , to make it agree with the greek ; but it might well enough be so rendered as the greek hath it , though the hebrew were then so read as now it is . as is well shewed , by a learned writer of our own , in his notes upon maimonides's porta mosis . so that , how comfortable so ever the text may be , or the promise therein made , to those that are truly righteous , and believe in christ : it affords small comfort to those that are wicked and unbelievers , who ( while they so continue ) are quite debarred from it . much like to the pillar of the cloud , which was between the israelites and egyptians ; it gave light to the one , but to the other was a cloud and darkness . or ( without such metaphor or mystical expression , ) as we are plainly told ( isai. . ) say ye to the righteous , it shall be well with him ; for they shall eat the fruit of their doings : but , wo to the wicked , it shall be ill with him ; for the reward of his hands shall be given him . in the other two places ; rom. . . and gal. . . the emphasis seems to ly on the word faith , the just , shall live , by faith ; or , the just , by faith , shall live . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . for , here , the main point in question was , ( in both epistles ) concerning justification to life ; whether by works , or by faith. and the conclusion was , that , by the deeds of the law , shall no flesh be justified in the sight of god ; ( for by the law , cometh the knowledge of sin : ) but , being justified by faith , we have peace with god , through our lord jesus christ. in confirmation of which truth , the apostle cites this testimony , out of habakkuk , for it is written ( saith he ) the just shall live by faith. and proves it further , from the examples of abraham and david . who were justified ( he tells us ) not , by works ; but , by faith : to whom god imputed righteousness , with works . thus in the epistle to the romans . and , in like manner , in that to the galatians ; he argues , that abraham's believing was accounted to him for righteousness : and , that , in him , the gentiles also are justified by faith : and do , thereby , become the children of faithful abraham . and this he there also confirms by the same testimony : that no man is justified by the law , in the sight of god , is evident ( he tells us , ) for the just shall live by faith ; or , the just by faith , shall live . that is , being justified by faith , we shall obtain life ; or , become happy . ( being justified by faith , we have peace with god. ) so that the stress of the proof from this testimony , is laid upon those words by faith. not , of works : but , by faith. we have now therefore dispatched these two things from these words : first , that this happiness , whatever it be , belongs only to the just , the righteous , the godly person ; and to no other . that is , to those whom god , in favour , shall repute so . and therefore it concerns us , if we would partake of this happiness , to make sure to be of this number . that we be such as whom god will account righteous . otherwise , ( how ever we may flatter our selves , or what ever opinion others may conceive of us , ) god tells us , his soul shall have no pleasure in us . secondly , that it is by true faith in jesus christ , and no other way , that we can be reputed just or righteous in gods sight . not , for any righteousness of our own : not by works of righteousness which we have done . our works perhaps may look glorious in the sight of men ; but not in the eyes of god , ( that we should , in his sight , be justified by them. ) our works may serve to justifie our faith. ( we may shew our faith by our works ; and by works is faith made perfect : ) but it is our faith must justifie us . abraham believed god ( as there is follows ) and it was imputed to him for righteousness . if abraham were justified by works ( saith s. paul , ) he had whereof to glory ; but , not before god : but abraham's believing god ( for so it follows ) was accounted to him for righteousness . and this god would have so to be ; that himself might have all the glory of his grace : and , that man may have nothing to glory in ; nothing to boast of . now to him that worketh ( as there it follows ) the reward is not reckoned of grace , but of debt : but , to him that worketh not , but believeth on him that justifieth the vngodly ; his faith is counted to him for righteousness . and david allso ( as he further argues ) describeth the blessedness of that man , to whom god imputeth righteousness , without works ; ( that is , not upon the account of works : ) saying , blessed are they , who 's iniquities are forgiven , and who 's sins are covered : blessed is the man to whom the lord will not impute sin . not , he that hath no sin , ( for then no man would be blessed ; ) but , to whom it is not imputed . who ever therefore would be thus accounted righteous in gods sight ; must be contented to disclaim his own righteousness , as to any thing of merit therein : and accept of this imputed righteousness , on the account onely of christs righteousness and merits : to the benefit of which we are intituled by faith in him . so far is the doctrine of s. paul , from the popish doctrine of merits , and supererogation ; as if we were able to do ; no onely as much as is sufficient ; but more than is necessary , to make us just on the account of works . but when we thus exclude the merits of good works , as to our justification : we do not deny the necessity of them , as to our practice . for it is not every faith , ( or every thing which a presumptuous wicked person shall call faith , ) that will justifie us in the sight of god : but , such a faith as works by love ; and by works is faith made perfect . not , an idle , lazy faith ; but , an operative , a working faith ; a faith that purifieth the heart . a living , a lively faith : ( but , faith without works is dead : and can , in no other sense , be called faith ; than as a dead man , or the picture of a man , may be called a man. ) a faith in the heart , which doth produce holyness in the life . ( for , without holyness no man shall see god. ) for it was never the design of s. paul , ( nor of our church neither , when shee saith , wee are justified by faith onely ; ) to derogate from the necessity of good works : but he doth directly assert it . and he doth ( not without some indignation ) disclaim that consequence , that some would ( slanderously ) fasten upon his doctrine of free grace , and justification by faith onely . what shall we say then ? shall we continue in sin , that grace may abound ! god forbid . and , as to those ( for some such there were ) who ( as a consequence of his doctrine ) did affirm , that he said , let us do evil that good may come thereof : he says , they do slanderously report it ; and , that their condemnation is just . but you will say , if we be justified ( as our church tells us ) by faith onely ; what need is there of holyness , or a godly life ? i say ; much every way . for we must be sanctified ( as well as justified ) if ever we be saved . and though justification and sanctification go allways together ; ( for god justifies none , whom he doth not also sanctify : ) yet the notions of the one and the other , are very different . and , whatever some would slanderously insinuate , of those who exclude good works from justification ; as if they were enemies to good works ; and held , that by faith a man may be saved let his life be never so wicked : it will be found in experience , that they are not less zealous of good works , who think that holyness belongs to sanctification , than those that do thus calumniate them . and ( very often ) they who talk most , of being justified by good works , have least of them to shew . 't is ( i know ) the business of the papists , to confound the notions of justification and sanctification ; to make way for their justification by inherent righteousness ; that is , ( if they would speak out ) by holyness . ( for , what else is inherent righteousness ? ) now , that we are sanctified by holyness , no man denies : but is it by holyness therefore that we are justified ? or , is not this to make justification and sanctification , all one . and truly the papists have some reason so to do . for it is a doctrine by which they get money : as being the foundation of indulgences and popish pardons ; upon purchasing , out of the popes treasury , somewhat of the merits of other men ( who are supposed to have had enough and to spare ) for those who have none of their own . but , why any of us , should be fond of that doctrine , who have no such bargains to drive , ( and that directly against the doctrine of our own church ) i do not see . and indeed the papists themselves ( how much soever they talk of the necessity of good works for justification , ) do rather hold , there is no necessity of them at all ; ( either to justification , or salvation . ) for there is no man so wicked , and devoyd of holyness and good works : but that , by virtue of their priests absolution , or at lest by the popes indulgence , he may go directly to heaven , without any thing of holyness of good-works ( other than giving money to a priest , ) by their doctrine ; ( without so much as touching at purgatory by the way . ) 't is but , by way of commutation , paying so much money ( in stead of holyness and a good life ) and all is safe . however ; since it is ( amongst us ) agreed on all hands ( for i know of no protestant that doubts it ) that there is a necessity of holyness , and the practice of good works and a godly life ; ( if not upon the account of justification , at lest upon the account of sanctification : ) let us all make it our business , to be fruitful therein . and if we cannot agree upon the punctilio , on what account it is necessary ; let us at lest agree upon the practise , of holyness and a godly life . in so doing ; we shall approve our selves to god , adorn his gospel ; make our own calling and election sure ; obtain the testimony of a good conscience in our own breast ; and pass the more comfortably toward the completion of that happiness , which the text promiseth ; that the just , shall live , by faith. and thus i have briefly run over the doctrine of the text ( with some consequents thereof ) according to the two empases allready mentioned . there is a third ( to be after mentioned ) but ( before i leave these , and come to it , ) i shall further amplify ( by way of application ) on each of them . and first , as to that emphasis on the word just ; ( the just shall live by faith : ) which restrains the benefit of this promise ( whatever it be ) to the just or righteous person . especially being attended with an exclusive of those that be otherwise , as here it follows , but if any man draw-back , my soul shall have no pleasure in him . and therefore , if we would be entituled to be benefit , we must make sure of the qualification ; that we be just and righteous persons . where allso we are not to consider the word just in a strict acceptation ; so as onely to denote justice strictly taken , ( as contradistinguished to holiness , temperance , and other virtues ; ) but , as comprehensive of all that is necessary to denominate a person , a just or righteous man , a good man , a man ( as here the phrase is ) in whom the lord will have pleasure ; or whom he will be well pleased with . for , though a good man , a gracious man , an holy man , a just or righteous man , a man after gods own heart , are different names in scripture ; yet are they but as so many inadequate conceptions of the same thing , and all denote the same person ; and ( as other concretes ) are often predicated one of another , and one put for another . as in mat. . . joseph being a just man , and not willing to make her a publick example , was minded to put her away privily . that is , a good man , a kind man , a merciful man. for the moderation here intimated , ( as contradistinguished to what severity might have been used , ) was rather an act of mercy , than of strict justice . but it was a just man , a good man , a vertuous man , that used this moderation . and so is the word just , in the text , to be understood ; as comprehensive of all those graces and virtues necessary to make a good man. and here , if ever , that saying will hold good , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . justice is comprehensive of all virtue . so that it is not inough here to say , i do no man wrong , or , i live honestly among my neighbours ; ( though that be good : ) but , art thou endued with all virtue ? and , all the graces of gods spirit ? and dost accordingly live a godly , righteous , and sober life ( as our church phraseth it , ) or ( as st. paul , more largely ) denying vngodliness and worldly lusts , live soberly , righteously , and godly in this present world ? looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearance of the great god , and our saviour , jesus christ ; who gave himself for us , that he might redeem us from all iniquity , and purify to himself a peculiar people , zealous of good works ? if not : it is not the name of christian , or a pretended faith , that will secure against a wicked life . and he that lives a vicious , wicked life ; whether he pretend to be saved by faith , or to be saved by works ; he shall be saved by neither , while he continues so . s. paul reckons up a great catalogue of such livers , cor. . ( under the title of vnjust or vnrighteous , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) know ye not that the vnrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of god ? be not deceived ; neither fornicators , nor idolaters , nor adulterers , nor effeminate , nor abusers of themselves with mankind ; nor thieves , nor covetous , nor drunkards , nor revilers , nor extortioners , shall inherit the kingdom of god. and , if any find himself within this catalogue ( or other the like ; ) let him take heed , to make sure of what follows : such were some of you ; but ye are washed , but ye are sanctified , but ye are justified , in the name of the lord jesus , and by the spirit of our god. observe ; they must be sanctified , ( as well as justified . ) no vnclean thing may enter there . secondly ; as to that emphasis on the words by faith , ( in contradistinction to works ; ) which s. paul principally pursues in the business of justification , ( in the epistles to the romans , and to the galatians , where this text is cited : ) our church directs in a good even way ; between the popish doctrine of merits , and the loose practice of licentious livers . that is ; we should so practise good works ; as yet not to trust in them , to be justified by them ; either in whole , or in part. as to justification ; she tells us , in the th article , (a) that we are justified by faith onely ; and that this is a wholsome doctrine , and full of comfort . and , as to good works ; she tells us , in the th article (b) that , though they do not justifie , ( but follow after justification ; ) yet are they pleasing and acceptable unto god ; are the necessary fruit of a true and lively faith ; and by which it s known as a tree by its fruit. and in the homily or sermon to which the article refers , she tells us the same more fully . that there can no man , by his own acts , works , and deeds , ( seem they never so good ) be justified , and made righteous before god : but every man of necessity is constrained to seek for another righteousness or justification , to be received at gods own hands : that is to say , the forgiveness of his sins and trespasses . — that this justification or righteousness , which we so receive of gods mercy and christs merits , embraced by faith ; is taken , accepted , and allowed of god , for our perfect and full justification . — that ( all the world being wrapped in sin , by breaking of the law , ) god sent his onely son our saviour christ into the world , to fullfill the law for vs ; and , by shedding of his most pretious bloud , to make a sacrifice , and satisfaction , or ( as it may be called ) amends , to his father , for our sins ; to asswage his wrath and indignation , conceived against us for the same . — that sinners , ( when they turn again to god unfeignedly , ) are washed , by this sacrifice , from their sins in such sort , that there remaineth not any spot of sin , that shall be imputed to their damnation . that this is that justification or righteousness , which s. paul speaketh of , when he saith , no man is justified by the works of the law , but freely by faith in jesus christ ; and again he saith , we believe in jesus christ , that we be justified freely by the faith of christ , and not by the works of the law ; because that no man shall be justified by the works of the law. that , although this justification be free to vs ; yet it cometh not so freely to us , that there is no ransom paid therefore at all . but — god hath tempered his justice and mercy together ; that he would neither by his justice condemn us to the everlasting captivity of the devil , and his prison of hell , remedyless for ever without mercy ; nor , by his mercy , deliver us clearly , without justice , or payment of a just ransom . — and , whereas it lay not in us that to do ; he provided a ransome for us ; that was , the most precious body and blood of his own most dear and best beloved son jesus christ. who , beside this ransome , fullfilled the law , for us , perfectly . with much more to the same purpose . shewing , that christ alone , hath payd the whole ransome , and made full satisfaction , to god's justice ; and , that our righteousness or good works come not in for any share or part thereof ; as if , by them , we should , at lest in part , be justified . this doctrine , i know , is not pleasing to the socinians , nor to the papists . not to the socinians : because they deny that any such satisfaction is made to gods justice at all . for , if they should allow , that , christ alone were able to make , a sufficient satisfaction , for the sins of all : they must allow him to be more than man. and therefore , in order to the denying of his divinity , they deny his satisfaction too . nor to the papists : for , though they allow a satisfaction to justice ; yet they would have this to be done , at lest in part , by our selves : to make way for purgatory ; and , consequently , for popish pardons . for , if we must pay , part of the debt , our selves , ( christ having not payd the whole , ) and have not payed it in this life ; we must either pay it in purgatory ; or else ( by way of commutation ) pay money for the popes pardon , to be excused from it . but wee , who are not concerned for either of these ; as neither denying christs divinity ; nor being obliged to maintain purgatory : have no reason to depart from the language of our own church . now , to make this the more clear , our church observes further , that there are three things which must go together in our justification . vpon gods part ; his great mercy and grace . vpon christs part ; justice ; that is , the satisfaction of gods justice , or the price of our redemption , by offering of his body , and shedding of his blood ; with fullfilling the law , perfectly and throughly . and , upon our part ; true and lively faith in the merits of jesus christ ; which yet is not ours , but by gods working in us . so that , in our justification , is not onely gods mercy and grace ; but his justice also : which the apostle calls , the justice of god : and it consisteth , in paying the ransome , and fullfilling the law. and so , the grace of god , doth not shut out the justice of god , in our justification ; but onely shutteth out the justice of man ; that is to say , the justice of our works , as to be merits of deserving our justification . and therefore s. paul declareth here , nothing upon the behalf of man , concerning his justification , but onely a true and lively faith ; which nevertheless is the gift of god , and not mans onely working , without god. and yet that faith , doth not shut out repentance , hope , love , dread , and the fear of god , to be joyned with faith in every man that is justified : but it shutteth them out from the office of justifying . so that , though they be all present together in him that is justified ; yet they justify not all together . nor the faith allso doth not shut out the justice of our good works , as necessary to be done afterwards , of duty towards god ; ( for we are most bounden to serve god , in doing good deeds , commanded by him in his holy scripture , all the days of our life : ) but it excludeth them , so that we may not do them to this intent , to be made good by doing them . for all the good works that we can do , be unperfect , and therefore not able to deserve our justifiction : but our justification doth come freely , by the meer mercy of god. and of so great and free mercy ; that , whereas all the world was not able of their selves , to pay , any part , towards their ransome ; it pleased our heavenly father of his infinite mercy , without any our desert or deservings , to prepare for us the most precious jewels , of christs body and blood ; whereby our ransome might be fully payd , the law fullfilled , and his justice fully satisfied . so that christ is now the righteousness of all them that truly do believe in him . he , for them , payd the ransome by his death . he , for them , fullfilled the law , in his life . so that now , in him , and by him , every true christian man may be called , a fullfiller of the law : for as much as that which their infirmity lacked , christs justice hath supplied . i have recited these words the more fully ; that you may clearly see , what is the doctrine , and language of the church of england . and this , i hope , we all take to be good doctrine . for my part , i think it is . i might add , if it were necessary , a great deal more : as that , where it tells us , that man cannot make himself righteous by his own works ; neither in part , nor in whole . for that were the greatest arrogancy and presumption of man , that antichrist could set up against god ; to affirm , that a man might by his own works , take away and purge his own sins , and so justifie himself . but justification is the office of god only ; and is not a thing which we render unto him , but which we receive of him ; — by his free mercy , and by the only merits of his most dearly beloved son , and our only redeemer , saviour and justifier , jesus christ. but i leave those , who would see more of it , to seek it , in the first , second , and third parts of the sermon of salvation ; the first , second , and third parts of the sermon of faith ; and the first , second , and third parts of the sermon of good works . and , indeed , the nature of the thing will not bear it ; that any works of our own should , even in part , justify us . for justification being an act of god , remitting our sins , for the ransome and satisfaction made to his justice : it cannot be , that any thing which we can now do , can be ( any part of ) such ransome or satisfaction . for all that we can do , is but ( part of ) what is due for the present . ( as our saviour tells us ; when we have done all ; we are unprofitable servants ; we have done but what was our duty to do . ) and there is nothing of surplusage , which might accrew , toward satisfaction for what is past . like as a tenant , who is run deep in arrears of rent ; cannot , by paying ( part of ) the growing rent for the future , make satisfaction for the arrears allready incurred . for , this growing rent was due allso . if it be said , ( as perhaps it may , ) that , on this account , we must renounce our faith allso . for neither doth faith , satisfie gods justice , or deserve our justification : i say so too ; that faith as a grace , or faith as a work , doth not justifie us . but onely as , by it , we embrace the righteousness of christ ; by which righteousness alone ( so embraced ) we can be justified . and i say so the rather ; because our church says so too ; in these words : the true understanding of this doctrine , we be justified freely by faith without works ; or , that we be justified by faith in christ onely ; is not , that this our own act , to believe in christ ; or , this our faith in christ , which is within us , doth justify us ; ( for that were to count our selves to be justified by some act or vertue that is within our selves : ) but the true meaning thereof , is ; that , allthough we hear gods word , and believe it ; allthough we have faith , hope , charity , repentance , dread and fear of god within us ; and do never so many works thereunto ; yet we must renounce the merit of all our said vertues , of faith , hope , charity , and all other vertues and good deeds , which we either have done , shall do , or can do ; as things that be far too weak ; and insufficient , and unperfect , to deserve remission of our sins and our justification ; and therefore we must trust onely in gods mercy , and that sacrifice which our high-priest and saviour jesus christ the son of god once offered for us on the cross , to obtain thereby gods grace , and remission of sins , original and actual . — and , as great and as godly a vertue as the lively faith is , yet it putteth us from it self , and remitteth or appointeth us unto christ , for to have , onely by him , remission of sins , and justification . so that our faith in christ ( as it were ) saith unto us thus ; it is not i that take away your sins , but it is christ onely ; and , to him onely , i send you for that purpose ; forsaking therein all your good vertues , words , thoughts , and works , and onely putting your trust in christ. — nevertheless , because faith doth directly send us to christ for remission of our sins ; and that , by faith given us of god , we embrace the promise of gods mercy , and of the remission of our sins , ( which thing no other of our vertues or works properly doth : ) therefore scripture useth to say , that faith without works doth justify . so that , according to the doctrine of our church , neither our other works and graces ; nor even faith it self as a work , or as an habit or grace in us , doth justify us : but onely as it accepteth and embraceth the righteousness of christ , for which alone our sins are remitted , and we justified ; not for any thing done by us . which accepting or embracing the promise of god , and salvation by christ therein offered ; is not so much an act of the understanding , assenting to a truth , ( for thus the devils believe , and wicked men ; ) as , an act of the will , accepting of it , and consenting to it , and trusting in it ; which the devils and wicked men have not . this being the language of our church ; i would not willingly depart from it : or gratifie the papists so far , as to join with them in reproching our church , as decrying good works , because we say , we are not justified by them . if any shall yet say , that , when they affirm , we are not justified by faith onely , but by works allso ; they mean not , that either the one or the other doth merit gods favour and the remission of our sins ; but onely , that both faith and works are necessary to the party justified : and , that , by justification , they mean , all that is required to make one a good man , and one qualified for heaven and salvation ; which cannot be without these . i say : the meaning is good ; but , so to speak , is not to speak distinctly ( and like a scholar ) but to speak confusedly , and to jumble together those things , which , in themselves , are very distinct. for , in order to salvation , there are many other things necessary , beside justification . there is election , regeneration , justification , adoption , sanctification , and ( as the fruits hereof ) a holy life , with perseverance therein to the end . of which divines use to speak distinctly ; and consider , separately , what belongs to each . election , is the act of god ; which we are not curiously to pry into : nor can we know it otherwise , than as the effect discovers it in time . justification , is an act of god allso ; and ( as to a person peccant ) it is the remission of sins ; upon which we are , in gods account , reputed as just or innocent ; and this onely for the satisfaction which christ hath made , not for any work of ours . and this satisfaction of christ , is ( by us ) embraced by faith ( accepting this salvation offered by christ , ) not , by any other grace . adoption , is an act of god likewise ; whereby he reputes us his children , and heirs of his kingdom : which is , for the merits of christ , purchasing heaven for us ; whereby we are entituled to that purchased possession . and this , by us , is accepted by faith allso . and all those are relative acts , ( of god towards us ; ) rather then works wrought in us . but regeneration and sanctification , are works of god , wrought in us , by his spirit ; ( and produce not one a relative , but a real change : ) whereby is wrought in us a new nature , ( or as the scripture calls it ) the new man , or the new creature : ) whereby holyness , and the graces of gods spirit , are begun , and increased gradually ; till we come to that of the perfect man ; to the measure of the stature of the fullness of christ ; to that perfection which we shall attain in glory . and the practise of holyness , and a godly life , ( toward god and toward man , ) are the fruit and effects of such holyness and sanctification ; and necessary allso to salvation . so that holyness and a good life ; with the works of piety , charity , and other good deeds ; are indeed necessary to salvation ; but belong properly to sanctification , rather than to justification . and i would ask those men who choose to speak otherwise ; whether they think that , beside justification , there is such a thing as sanctification ? the papist ( if he would speak out ) must say roundly , there is not . for , when they say , we are justified by inherent righteousness ; that is , by holyness : they leave nothing for sanctification . but we , who think that justification and sanctification ( though of the same person ) be different notions : why should we not rather refer sanctify to sanctification . if it be said , that the justified and the sanctified person , are the same : and therefore we need not so nicely distinguish between justification and sanctification . i say ; 't is true , the persons be the same : but the notions be different . and , though we may truly say justus est sanctus , or justificatus est sanctificatus ; yet not , justificatio est sanctificatio . ( he that is justified is sanctified ; but not , that justification is sanctification . ) and a little logick would teach a fresh-man , that concretes may be predicated one of another , when the abstracts may not . we may say , that homo est animal , but not that humanitas est animalitas : or , that homo est albus , but not humanitas est albedo . if , lastly , it be thought advantageous to the practise of holyness and a godly life , to say , that we are justified by it . i say ; neither is this necessary . for this is as well done by preaching the necessity of regeneration and sanctification ; as without which we cannot hope for salvation . and then , the exercise of holiness and a godly life , comes in properly in its own place ; as the necessary effect of sanctification . and in this capacity it is that our church ( without derogating any thing from the necessity of them ) doth place good works ; as the necessary fruits of that faith which justifies ; and a pretense of faith , without these , she esteems to be , not faith , but fancy . and therefore , though shee exclude them ( as hath been said ) from the office of justifying ; yet thinks them necessary to be joined with faith in every person that is justified . and makes it the office and duty of every christian man unto god , — not to pass the time of this present life unfruitfully , and idly , ( not caring how few good works we do , to the glory of god , and the profit of our neighbours ; ) much less , to live contrary to the same . — for that faith ( she tells us ) which bringeth ( without repentance ) either evil works , or no good works ; is not a right , pure , and lively faith ; but a dead , devilish , counterfeit , and faigned faith ; as s. paul and s. james call it . for even the devils know , and beleeve , that christ was born of a virgine ; that he fasted fourty days and fourty nights , without meat and drink ; that he wrought all kind of miracles , declaring himself very god ; they beleeve also , that christ , for our sake , suffered most painfull death , to redeem from everlasting death ; and that he rose again from death the third day : they beleeve , that he ascended into heaven , and sitteth on the right hand of the father , and at the last end of this world , shall come again , and iudge both the quick and the dead . these articles of our faith , the devils beleeve : and so they beleeve all all things that be written in the new and old testament to be true : and yet , for all this faith , they be but devils , remaining still in their damnable state , lacking the very true christian faith. for the right and true christian faith is , not onely to believe that holy scripture , and all the foresaid articles of our faith , are true : but also to have a sure trust and confidence in gods merciful promises , to be saved from everlasting damnation by christ : whereof doth follow , a loving heart to obey his commandements . and this true christian faith , neither any devil hath : nor yet any man , which in the outward profession of his mouth , and in his outward receiving of the sacraments , in coming to the church , and in all outward appearances , seemeth to be a christian , and yet in his living and deeds sheweth the contrary . so that our church is far from allowing an idle , lasy life ; much less a sinful and wicked life , to accompany faith : but tells us , that , where there are , faith is not . there is indeed ( she tells us ) a faith which in scripture is called a dead faith : which bringeth forth no good works ; but is idle , barren and unfruitful ; which is , by s. james compared to the faith of devils . — and this is not properly called faith : — ( as a dead man , is not a man. ) — but , as he thus readeth caesar 's commentaries , beleeving the same to be true , hath thereby a knowledge of caesar 's life , and notable acts , because he beleeveth the history of caesar : yet is not properly sayd , that he beleeveth in caesar ; of whom he looketh for no help or benefit . even so , he that beleeveth , that , all that is spoken of god in the bible , is true ; and yet liveth so vngodly , that he cannot look to enjoy the promises and benefits of god : although it may be sayd , that such a man hath a faith and belief to the words of god ; yet it is not properly sayd , that he beleeveth in god ; or , hath such a faith and trust in god , whereby he may surely look for grace , mercy , and everlasting life at gods hand ; but rather for indignation and punishment , according to the merits of his wicked life . if then they phantasy , that they be set at liberty from doing all good works , and may live as they list ; they trifle with god , and deceive themselves . and it is a manifest token , that they be far from having the true and lively faith ; and allso far from knowledge , what true faith meaneth . for the very sure and lively christian faith is , not onely to beleeve all things of god , which are contained in holy scripture ; but allso is an earnest trust and confidence in god. — this true , lively , and unfeigned christian faith , is not in the mouth and outward profession onely ; but it liveth and stirreth inwardly in the heart . — this faith doth not ly dead in the heart ; but is lively and fruitfull in bringing forth good works . — this true faith , will shew forth it self ; and cannot long be idle : for , as it is written , the just man doth live by his faith. — deceive not your selves therefore , thinking that you have faith in god , — when you live in sin : for then your vngodly and sinfull life declareth the contrary , whatsoever you say or think . with much more to the same purpose . shewing the necessity , of good works , to our salvation ; though we be not justified by them . with many serious exhortations to the preacher of them . and this is that safe way , which ( i sayd ) our church directs in this point . to be fruitfull in good works : not , as to be justified by them : but , as the necessary fruits of that faith by which we are justified . thus have i considered the words ( the just shall live by faith , ) according to both these emphases allready mentioned . that on the word just , or righteous , as ( contradistinguished from the wicked : ) and that on the word faith ; as contradistinguished from works , in the point of justification . but ( beside those two already mentioned ) there is yet a third emphasis , of which these words are capable : and which , i think , is principally intended in this place . by life ( as is already shewed ) is meant happyness , ( as , on the contrary , by death is meant misery . ) now the christians life , of happiness , is commonly distinguished into that of grace , and that of glory . that of glory , is to be expected hereafter ; and is the completion of our hapyness , or ( as the apostle calls it ) the end of our hope , even the salvation of our souls . that of grace , is the exercise of our faith , here : which the text calls living by faith. and s. paul , elsewhere , the life which i now live in the flesh , i live by the faith of the son of god. and this , i think , ( though not exclusive of the life of glory ) is that which is here principally ( and most emphatically ) intended , when he saith , the just shall live by faith. and this i judge , not barely from the form of the words themselves , ( which stand equally fair for all those emphases already mentioned : ) but from the scope of content , which lookes this way . for such is the richness of the scripture language , that , comprehensive words , are improvable to different purposes , according as a different accent or emphasis may be putt upon them ; and all included within the general scope of them . now , if we look back to vers. . ( and those that follow , ) we find the apostle paul , whom i take to be the author of this epistle , ( and so doth our church of england , as appears by the title which our translators prefix to it ; ) or , whoever else were the author of it , ( of which we need not here be very solicitous ; ) after he had , before , cleared that doctrine , that the legal offerings and sacrifices , were but types of that one oblation of christ ; and , this , the accomplishment of what was presignified in them : makes this vse , or inference from that doctrine ; having therefore boldness to enter in the holiest , by the bloud of jesus ; by a new and living way , which he hath consecrated for us ; through the vail , that is to say , this flesh : let us draw near , with a true heart , and full assurance of faith ; having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience , and our bodies washed with pure water . where , beside the assurance of faith ; he presseth allso for holyness of life ; both in soul , and body . and that , both singly , and jointly ; in publike , and private . as which we are not onely to practise our selves , but to promote ( as we have opportunity ) in others allso . for so it follows ; and let us consider one another , to provoke to love and good works : not forsaking the assembling of our selves together , as the manner of some is . and , having then intimated the dangers which hereby they might incur ; as reproches , afflictions , spoiling of goods , and the like ; of themselves , and their friends ; ( being made a gazing-stock themselves , and companions of those that were so used ; ) enduring patiently the spoiling of their goods , &c. not onely , from the common practise of wicked and profane men , who are ever prone to scoff at the power of godliness ; ( walking after their own lusts ; having a form of godliness , but denying the power of it : ) but especially at a time and place wherein it was not countenanced by the publike authority ; ( the government being the heathen . ) and , that therefore they had need of patience , that , after they had done the will of god , they might receive the promise . their chief reward not being in present possession , but in expectance onely . yet should they not be discouraged ; for , yet a little while , and he that shall come will come , and will not tarry . the reward will certainly come , in due season , ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at the appointed time , ) and not be put off beyond that : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , it will not be delayed too long , or ( as in habakkuk ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it will not come too late ; but , at the end , it shall speak , and not ly. and , in the mean time , the just shall live by faith. but , if any man draw-back , my soul shall have no pleasure in him . so that the words are , manifestly , a direction and encouragement , for the exercise of our faith , while we are yet but in expectation of the promised reward ; which is , hereafter , to be completed . so to live by faith here , that we be not disappointed of our hopes hereafter . and the same he pursues in the following chapter ; giving us great examples , ( of living by faith , ) and the advantages , ( of so doing : ) in abel , enoch , noah , abraham , sarah , isaac , jacob , joseph , moses , and a many more ; throughout the whole eleventh chapter . and then exhorts them ( in the beginning of the twelfth chapter ) that , being compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses they should themselves do , as those before had done . the great doctrine of the text therefore , is this , that it is our duty , and it is our privilege , to live by faith. that is , to live in a constant exercise , of that grace , upon all occasions . it is our duty , which we ought to do ; and it is our privilege , that we may do it . it is our duty , to trust in god : and it is our privilege , that we have a god to trust in . nor doth this duty , and privilege , concern these onely to whom this epistle was particularly directed ; the christian hebrews . but it looks backward ; to the first ages of the world : and wider , than the jewish nation . i say , first , it looks backward to the first ages of the world. nor onely before the coming of christ ; but even before the establishment of the jewish church . to abel , enoch , noah , ( before abraham ; ) and then , to abrabraham , isaac , jacob , joseph , ( before moses . ) all which are sayd to live by faith. and even by the same faith , to which he doth there exhort the christian hebrews . it was the same christ , the same gospel , ( though not so clearly reveiled : ) and the same eternal life which they expected , ( though they were more in the dark , as to the particulars ; and the distinct ways and methodes of bringing it to pass . ) and , as the first threatening ( in the day that thou eatest thereof , thou shalt surely dy , ) extended to spiritual and eternal death , as well as the natural ; ( for we are not to suppose , that god inflicts a greater punishment than what he threatened : ) so the life there promised ( by way of insinuation , ) and elsewhere expressed , ( he that doth them , shall live in them ; ) must be understood in a like sense ; ( not of temporal promises onely , but of spiritual and eternal . and the apostle expounds it , if the same life ( or what is equivalent ) to be obtained ( by the first covenant ) upon condition of obedience ; and ( by the second covenant ) by faith in christ. that no man is justified by the law in the sight of god , is evident ; for the just shall live by faith : and the law is not of faith ; but , the man that doth them , shall live in them . the same life , or blessedness ; though by different ways attainable . and the apostle , here , shews ; that it is the same faith , by which we beleeve to the saving of our souls ; and by which the elders obtained a good report . and by faith abraham ( with isaac and jacob , heirs with him of the same promise , sojourned in the promised land , as in a strange countrey ; ( of which , though promised to them , they had no other enjoyment , than mere strangers : ) for he looked for a city , who 's builder and maker was god ; ( another kind of city , than those on earth . ) all these died in faith , not having received the promises ; ( which were therefore such as were to be enjoyed , after death ; ) but seeing them afar off , and were perswaded of them , and embraced them , and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims upon earth , ( this being not the countrey they sought for : ) for they that say such things , declare plainly , that they seek a countrey , ( such a countrey as yet they had not . ) and truly , if they had been mindful of such a countrey as that from whence they came ; they might have had opportunity to have returned ; but now ( 't is manifest ) they desire a better countrey ; that is , an heavenly . wherefore god is not ashamed to be called their god , ( the god of abraham , isaac , and jacob ; ) for he hath prepared a city for them . by all which , the apostle doth not only declare ( that they expected an heavenly happiness , ) but argues strongly , that it must needs be so . and , by faith , moses ( he tells us ) esteemed the reproches of christ , greater riches , than the treasures of egypt : for he had respect to the recompense of reward ; as seeing him that is invisible . others were tortured , not accepting deliverance ; that they might obtain a better resurrection . others had tryal of ( or did undergo , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , expertisunt , ) cruel mockings ; of bonds and imprisonment ; were stoned , were sawn asunder ; were slayn with the sword , &c. and all these having obtained a good report through faith ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) received not the promise , ( their faith was exercised on better promises , than of what they here received ; ) god having provided for them better things ; that they without us should not be perfect : ( the promises to them , and those to us , being the same . ) again ; as this duty and privilege ( of living by faith ) extended backwards ( to the times before christ ; ) so , it extends wider than the nation of the jews . ( a blessing which the gentiles are particularly concerned in : and which we , this day , celebrate ; the epiphany , or the manifestation of christ to the gentiles . ) for the blessing of abraham is come upon the gentiles also , through jesus christ : that we might receive the promise of the spirit , through faith. and the scripture foreseeing ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) that god would justify the heathen through faith ; preached before ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did before hand preach the gospell ) to abraham , saying , in thee that all nations be blessed . so then , they which are of faith , the same are the children of abraham ; they which be of faith , are blessed with faithfull abraham . and are therefore of the number of those ( as there it follows ) who shall live by faith. now , if it be asked , what it is thus to live by faith : it is too large a task , for one sermon , to give a full account of it . for allmost the whole bible , and the practise of the saints in all ages , are but a comment on it . i shall therefore content my self , to give a short account of some of the chief heads thereof . to live by faith , therefore , is , first , to beleeve the word of god ; to give credit to the truthes of god , or things by him declared ; how unlikely soever they may seem to be , and however different from the common sentiments of natural men , or what the light of nature alone could teach us . for , though there be nothing in divine truths contrary to what the light of nature ( truly understood ) may teach us : yet there may be some things much above it ; which , without revelation , cannot be known . thus ; by faith we beleeve , that the worlds were made , by the word of god ; that things that are now seen were made , not of things that do appear . that is , that the now visible world was not made up of such things as we now see : or , that there was no praeexisting matter ( such as we now see ) of which it was made ; but was indeed made of nothing . which however contrary to the sentiments of philosophers ( ex nihilo nihil , in nihilum nil posse reverti , ) that nothing can be made out of nothing : yet , when god hath told us , that it is so ; we are to give full credit to it . there is indeed nothing from the light of nature contrary hereunto ; why we should disbeleeve it , when it is reveiled : but yet we are sayd to know it by faith , because it is above what nature alone could have taught . for , when we see this glorious fabrick of the world : we might well admire it ; but could never know , whence it was , if god had not told us . for though naturalists have , with a great deal of reason , talked of ( a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or causa prima ) a common maker , or first cause ; which should give original to all things else : yet this was but , either from some faint remains of an ancient tradition , from adam and noah downward to after ages : or , atmost be conjectural , and groping in the dark ; and guessing at this , as a more likely supposition , than , that it had allways been ; or , should take its beginning from a fortuitous concurse of atomes . which yet the wits of this age , as they would be thought , ( or the fools rather , ) would now cry-up as the more rational : without considering , if they must at lest allow eternity to matter ; why not rather , to a wise and knowing agent : ) onely , because their wickedness , hath made them think it their interest , that there be no god ( to call them to account for it : ) and therefore would fain perswade themselves , that there is none . and think there is nothing so absurd , which they would not rather beleeve , than that there is a god. and , what is sayd of the creation of the world ; may be equally applyed to the immortality of the soul ; the resurrection of the body , and the eternal state of bliss or misery hereafter ( according as men have , or have not , approved themselves to god ; ) and others of like nature . of all which , what ever faint conjectures , or doubtful traditions , the heathen might have from the light of nature : they were yet much in the dark , till immortality was brought to light , by the gospel . not that i take pleasure , to decry , disparage , depreciate , or invalidate , that light which nature and reason afford us , toward reveiled truthes . for this , i think , we ought rather to cherish , to enforce , and improve what we can , ( rather than to enervate or elude ; ) as of great subserviency to that of faith. for , while we study to elude these arguments ; we are so far doing their work , who would elude the scripture too . for , even where we cannot ( from nature alone ) conclude an absolute certainty ; so as to stop the mouths of those that love to cavil , or ( as the apostle speaks ) list to be contentious : yet , if this afford us ( from considerations natural and moral ) probable arguments , and a multitude of them , all concurring to shew , that it is not impossible , not improbable , but very likely , that these things may be so ; it is a great preparative to the beleeving of a revelation , that says it is so . and such arguments , we find , the apostles did oft make use of , to very good purpose , and with very good success . a cloud of witnesses ( though each singly may seem but cloudy , ) may afford a considerable light ; ( like the stellae nebulosae in the via lactea . ) and probable arguments , though not singly demonstrative ; yet , where there be many of them , and those concurrent , ( and nothing to the contrary , ) experience tells us , in affaires of all natures , create at lest violent presumption , and oft obtain a firm assent . and 't is seldome we have a greater evidence , either for determining civil affairs , or for stating the hypotheses of nature . there is none of us can doubt , but that there is such a place as rome : though we have not seen it , and though , of all those who have told us so , there is no one who might not possibly have told a ly. but , a concurrence of many probabilities , passeth for a sufficient proof . and such arguments , how ever we now look upon them as not demonstrative ; were yet of such force with the heathens ( who had no better light to determine them ) at lest with the wisest of them ; that they judged it a matter , at lest , of great probability , if not of absolute certainty , that the souls of men are immortal , and , that there is a state of rewards and punishments after this life . who shall therefore rise up in iudgement , with the men of this generation , and condemn them ; who disbeleeve it under a greater light. but , when all is done ; the fullest and clearest evidence , is from revelation : whereby , what , to reason , was very probable , is , to our faith , made certain . the jews indeed had some better knowledge of these things , than the gentiles had . not onely their great rabbi's ; but even ordinary persons , and those of the other sex ; according to that of martha , concerning lazarus , i know that he shall rise again in the resurrection , at the last day . and the sadduces ( before the resurrection of christ , and the full discovery of the gospell , ) expostulating with christ , concerning the resurrection ; is an argument , that , though themselves did disbeleeve it , it was an opinion commonly received by the rest of the jews , that the dead should rise again . but they had it by revelation ; not , by natural light onely . now these great and momentous truthes , which god hath vouchsafed thus to make known , we are to beleeve by faith. and that not onely so as to give credit to them , as matters of news ; for , thus , the devils beleeve ; and tremble : ) but , so to beleeve , as to live sutably ; so to live , as becomes those who beleeve such things . secondly ; as we are thus ( in general ) to beleeve the word of god : so , particularly , to beleeve the commands of god ; and , so to live , as becomes those that beleeve these to be god's commands : that is , to obey them , and conform our selves unto them ; however contrary to our perverse inclinations . if christ command us , to deny our selves ; to take up our cross and follow him ; to sell all ( if need be ) and give to the poor ; to leave house , or brethren , or sisters , or father , or mother , or wife , or lands , for his sake and the gospell ; yea , or life it self ; to pull out a right eye , or cut off a right hand , in case they offend , ( or part with what is as dear to us as these : ) we must obey it . thus ( among the many examples in the following chapter , ) by faith abraham , being called of god , obeyed ; and went out he knew not whither , ( forsaking his countrey , and his fathers house , in obedience to gods command ; ) and sojourned in the land of promise , as in a strange land. by faith abraham , when he was tryed , offered up isaac : and , he that had received the promises , offered-up his onely begotten son ; of whom it was sayd , that in isaac shall thy seed be called . without disputing , how this was consistent with the bowels of a father ; or , how unacceptable news it would be to sarah , when she should hear it ; or , how consistent with that great promise ( wherein all the nations of the earth were concerned , ) that in his seed , ( that is , in isaac , and what should proceed from him , ) all the nations of the earth should be blessed : he presently addressed himself to this hard task , to the obedience of this unexpected command : leaving it to god ( who , he knew , was able , ) to reconcile his own promise , with his command . by faith , moses , chose rather to suffer affliction with the children of god , than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season : esteeming the reproach of christ , greater riches , than the treasures of egypt . on the same account , the three children , would rather venture on a firy furnace ; and daniel , on the lyons den ; than not obey the commands of god. which here ( i suppose ) the apostle intimates , when he tells us of those who ( by faith ) stopped the mouths of lyons , and quenched violence of fire . others were tortured ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) not accepting deliverance ; endured cruell mockings , and scourgings , bonds and imprisonments ; were stoned , were sawn-asunder , were tempted , ( or burned alive , * ) were slain with the sword ; they wandered about in sheep-skins and goat-skins ; in deserts , and mountains , in dens and caves of the earth ; were destitute , afflicted , tormented , &c. rather than not obey the commands of god. and thus , through faith , obtained a good report . s. paul allso , as to himself , i go bound ( sayth he ) in the spirit to jerusalem , not knowing the things that shall befall me there ; save that the holy ghost witnesseth , in every city , that bonds and afflictions abide me : but none of these things move me ; neither count i my life dear unto me ; so that i may fullfill my course with joy , and the ministry which i have received of the lord jesus . nor would he be disswaded ( though he knew thus much ) from going thither ; being ready ( he tells us ) not only to be bound , but to dy at jerusalem , for the name of the lord jesus . so great an incentive there is in faith , to the obedience of gods commands . thirdly ; as we are thus to give heed to the commands of god ; so , to the threatenings of god likewise , and this is a part of our living by faith allso . by faith noah , being moved with fear , prepared an ark , for the saving of his house . he being warned of god , of things not yet seen , ( that the world should be destroyed by a deluge , though as yet there appeared no likelihood of it , ) gave credit to that threatening ; ( while others , its like , scoffed at it ; and at him too , for giving credit to it ; ) and accordingly ( by gods direction ) took care to avoid it , as to himself and his family , while others perished in it : by which he condemned the world , and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith. and i choose to give instances , all along , in such examples as are here cited in the following chapter ( heb. . ) because all that cloud of witnesses are there designedly brought-in as a confirmation of what is here asserted , that the just shall live by faith. thus solomon likewise tells us to the same purpose ; a wise man feareth , and departeth from evill , ( forbears the evill of sin , and avoids the evill of punishment ; ) but the fool rageth and is confident , ( he runs-on without fear or wit ) a prudent man foreseeth the evil , and hideth himself : but the simple pass on and are punished . ( like as it was , when moses , from god , threatened the plague of hail in egypt ; who so feared the lord , amongst the servants of pharaoh , made his servants and his cattell to flee into houses : but who so regarded not the word of the lord , ( as not beleeving it , ) left his servants and cattel in the field ; which were destroyed by the hail ; which smote all that was in the field , both man and beast . now solomon's wise man , is the good man ; and his fool , is the wicked man. he that makes a mock of sin ; to whom it is a sport to do mischief . who goes on ( as solomon speaks of the wanton young-man ) as an ox to the slaughter , and a fool to the correction of the stocks : till a dart strike through his liver ; as a bird that hasteth to the snare , and knoweth not that it is for his life . not , like the men of niniveh ; who repented at the preaching of jonas : who , when jonah preached , yet forty days , and niniveh shall be destroyed ; beleeved god , and proclaimed a fast , and that every one should turn from the evill of his ways ; for who can tell ( say they ) if god will turn and repent , that we perish not ? but rather , like lot 's sons in law , when he warned them of the destruction then coming on sodome ; he seemed to them as one that mocked ; ( and accordingly they mocked at him ; they looked upon him as one that talked idly , or but in jest ; ) till , in good earnest , god rain'd fire and brimstone on them , and destroyed them . much at the same rate with those scoffers who ( as s. peter tells us ) should come in the last days ; walking after their own lusts : laughing at gods threatenings , and saying ( scoffingly ) where is the promise of his coming ? for , since the fathers fell asleep , all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation : ( the grave fathers , that talked of these things , be dead and gone ; and the world goes on , as it was wont to do , notwithstanding their threats . ) who if they be told , from god , by his ministers , that , except they repent , they shall all likewise perish : they look upon them ( as those did on lot ) as a company of brain-sick men , that talk idly ; till suddain destruction come upon them ; as a thief in the night ( which they did not expect ; ) and , as pain on a woman in travail ; which they cannot escape . who first , walk in the way of the vngodly , and stand in the way of sinners ; and then sit in the seat of scorners . till at length ( when 't is too late ) they shall ( with those in wisdome ) be convinced of their own folly , and value the righteous , whom before they despised : when , with anguish of spirit , they shall say within themselves , ( of him , whom before they had in derision , and a proverb of reproach , ) we fools , accounted his life madness ; and his end without honour . but , how is he numbred among the children of god , and his lot is among the saints ! while , we have wearied our selves in the way of wickedness and destruction ; and have not known the way of the lord. who , when they hear the words of the curse ; bless themselves in their heart , saying , i shall have peace , though i walk in the imagination of my heart , adding drunkenness to thirst ; ( i shall do well enough , though i take my pleasure : ) but the lord ( saith moses ) will not spare that man , ( he will shew him no mercy , ) his jealousy shall smoak against him , ( who sins thus presumptuously , and promiseth himself peace , notwithstanding gods threatenings ; ) and all the curses written in this book , shall light upon him . the lord will separate him unto evil , out of all the cities of israel , ( he will single him out , to make him an example : ) that others may hear , and fear , and do no more presumptuously . these are those who beleeve not the threatenings of god ; nor fear to incur his displeasure . but , happy is the man that feareth allways : that so feareth , as to depart from evill . he that so feareth the threatenings of god , as to avoid his judgments . and thus to fear , is to live by faith. fourthly ; as we are to beleeve the threatenings of god : so to beleeve the promises of god allso : and so to beleeve them , as to rest upon them ; to fetch strength and comfort from them . and this is one great part of a christians living by faith. and of this also , we have examples in the chapter following . by faith , abraham , sojourned in the land of promise ( the promised land , ) as in a strange countrey ; dwelling in tabernacles as not taking up his rest there , ) with isaac and jacob heirs with him of the same promise : looking for a city which hath foundations , ( a firm and well founded city , instead of tbose flitting tabernacles , ) who 's maker and builder is god. and his trusting to these promises made him so cheerfully to obey those commands . by faith , sarah , received strength , and obtained a child , when she was past age : because shee judged him faithful who had promised . by faith in the promise , she was the better qualifyed , to receive the accomplishment of it . by faith , isaac , blessed jacob and esau concerning things to come . himself beleeving the truthe of them . by faith , joseph , when he died , made mention of the departure of the children of israel out of egypt , ( as beleeving the promise of the land of canaan , ) and gave commandement concerning his bones . with many more , whom i forbear to mention : who all by faith , trusted to the fullfilling of those promises which god had made . and here allso ( as we said before ) we must so beleeve , as to act accordingly . and what the hebrews say of their language , ( verba sensus connotant affectum , ) is true of other languages too : words of speculation , imply suitable action . we must so beleeve the promises of god , as to trust in him , to rest upon him , to depend on him , who hath so promised . a christian faith , is not so much fides , as fiducia : not barely an act of the vnderstanding , but of the will and affections . and 't is generally agreed ( by better criticks , than those that laugh at it , ) that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( which are the scripture-phrases ) is somewhat more than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . and answers to what in the old testament , is called trusting in god , or putting our trust in him. it is not onely deo credere ; but deo fidere or considere ; ( deo se credere : ) to trust god , to commit our selves to him ; as the phrase is ( psal. . ) the poor committeth himself to thee ; or , ( as the margin reads it , out of the hebrew , ) leaves himself to thee . or ( to the same purpose ) leanes upon thee ( innititur deo , ) as we have it phrased elsewhere . commit thy works unto the lord : trust in the lord with all thy heart ; and leane not to thy own vnderstanding . commit thy way unto the lord , trust in him , and he shall bring it to pass : or ( as the margin tells us it is in the hebrew ) roll thy way upon the lord , ( devolve restuus in deum : ) and ( as there it follows ) rest on the lord , and wait patiently for him ; ( roll thy self on the lord , and rest in him , and wait patiently : ) for evil-doers shall be cutt off ; but those that wait on the lord , shall inherit the earth . if any object ( as i find some have done ) against this language ( as less significative , and improper to express the nature of faith , and the workings thereof , ) because , to rest in god , and rely on him , to depend upon him , to lean on him , to commit or leave our selves to him , to roll our selves upon the lord , ( and the like scripture expressions ) are but metaphors . 't is true , they are so . but so is allso the greatest part of humane discourse . and , if we bar metaphors , we must exclude the greatest part of what is sayd or written . whatever author we look into ; we shall hardly find one sentence , that hath not , in it , more tropes than one. when the psalmist says , the lord is my rock , my fortress , my strength in whom i will trust ; my bucler , my horn of salvation , and my high tower : these are all metaphors ; but their meaning is easily understood . and when we trust a friend , upon his word , to help us in distress ; and tell him , we rest upon him , we rely upon him , we depend on him , we commit our business to him , and leave it with him ; expecting that he will not fail us , or disappoint us , and suffer us to be vndone , to be overcome , to be run-down , to be ruined : these are all metaphors ; but , of frequent use , and as easily understood , and more emphatically significative , than if we should study for proper words , ( or coin new ones , when we find none ready made to our hands , ) to signify the same , as fully , without trope . and , if we should , according to the farsy of the age , ( which affects exotick words , of latin or french extraction , rather than good old english , though to the same sense , ) instead of resting and relying , make use of acquiescence and recumbence ; the case is still the same ; at lest , the modish and romantick speakers should not find fault with it . nor should we look upon it , as canting , to make use of such language as the wisdom of god thinks fit to teach us in holy writ ; and which ( as is said ) we do commonly make use of ( without scruple ) in all humane affaires . bur further ; as living by faith on gods promises , implies a trusting to him , or resting on him : so it implies allso a fetching strength from him ; and a supply of grace , for the performance of what duties he requires of us . our saviour tells us , that , as the branch cannot bear fruit of it self , except it abide in the vine , ( and receive supply of sap , juice , and nourishment from it : ) so neither we , except we abide in him , ( and accordingly receive supply from him : ) for , without him , we can do nothing . and s. paul tells us , that the life which he lives , he lives by the faith of the son of god ; and that it is not so much himself that liveth , as christ liveth in him . it is of his fullness that we receive grace for grace . 't is the spirit which he giveth us , that is the well of water , springing up to everlasting life . and it is , by faith , that we draw water from these wells of salvation . when we know not what we should pray for as we ought ; it is this spirit that helps our infirmities , and makes intercession for us . when we cannot , of our selves , even think as we ought : it is god worketh in us , both to will , and to do , of his good pleasure . or ( as our church phraseth it ) it is by his speciall grace preventing us , that he puts into our minds good desires ; and , by his continual help , we bring the same to good effect . or ( as s. paul of himself ) i am able to do all things , through christ that strengtheneth mee . now this strength , from god , we fetch by faith. if any man lack wisdome ( and the like we may say of other supplies , ) let him ask of god , and it shall be given him : but let him ask in faith , nothing wavering . yee have not , because ye ask not ; and yee ask and have not , because yee ask amiss . and it is the prayer of faith , that saveth the sick ; ( and the like of other mercies . ) the word preached , did not profit them ( who are there spoken of ) not being mixed with faith , in them that heard it . and , for want of such exercise of faith , we may oft loose those mercies , which otherwise we might obtain . and , even in miraculous cures , there was somewhat of faith requisite , to put them into a capacity of receiving a cure. s. paul , at lystra , seeing the cripple , impotent in his feet , ( and perceiving that he had faith to be healed , ) sayd to him , stand upright . and christ , to mary magdalene ; thy faith hath saved thee . and again , to one of the ten lepers ; thy faith hath made thee whole . and , to the father of the demoniack , praying him to have compassion on them , and heal his son ; if thou canst beleeve , saith christ , all things are possible to him that beleeveth ; who thereupon replied , lord , i beleeve , help my vnbelief ; and obtained the cure. and , contrarywise , of his own countrey-men , it is sayd , he did not ( or , could not do , ) many mighty works there ; because of their vnbelief . and , though miracles be now ceased ; yet the effects of faith are not . and , in pursuance of gods promises , that whatsoever we ask in prayer , beleeving , we shall receive ; we may still expect a suitable supply . especially , if we take it with that limitation , that , if we ask any thing , according to his will ; he heareth us : and will , accordingly , grant us the things we ask ( in faith ) or , at lest , what shall be better for us . and , this is to live by faith. now if thus ( as is sayd ) we can live by faith ; and , while we be faithfull in the discharge of our duty , trust god upon his promises ; and , from him , fetch a supply of strength , and grace ; direction , and consolation : this will naturally work in us . . an humble submission to his will. the will of the lord be done . not , as i will ; but , as thou wilt . . a quiet contentment in every condition . ( it is the lord , let him do what seemeth him good . we are less than the lest of thy mercies . thou hast punished us less than our iniquities deserve . why doth the living man complain ? it is the lords mercy , that we are not consumed , because his compassions fail not . . a patient waiting gods leisure . ( he that beleeveth , maketh not hast. the vision is for an appointed time , and , in the end , it will not ly : though it tarry , wait for it , it will surely come . . an acquiescence in gods wisdome , as to events . ( casting our care upon the lord ; who careth for us . ) not , by a supine negligence , or carelessness , as wholly unconcerned : but , while we are carefull to do our duties , leave the care of success to god ; who hath promised , that , he will not leave us , nor forsake us ; and , that all things shall work together for good , to them that love god. so that , if things be not just as we could wish ; they will at lest by so as god sees better for us . and , if ( singly ) some things may seem , for our hurt ; yet ( taken all together ) they will work together for good. . an assured hope , that , in the end , all shall be well ; how contrary so ever things may seem at present . ( as children of faithfull abraham : who , against hope , beleeved in hope , that he might be the father of many nations : not considering his own body , as now dead ; nor the deadness of sarah 's womb ; nor staggered at the promise of god , through vnbelief : being fully perswaded , that he who promised , was able to perform . and this , both as to the church of god in general , ( that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it . ) and , as to our selves in particular . as knowing , whom we have trusted ; and , that he is able to keep what we have committed to him : that he who hath begun a good work , will perfect it , unto the day of jesus christ : that none is able to pluck us out of our fathers hand : that nothing shall be able to separate us from the love of god , which is in christ jesus our lord : that the lord shall deliver us from evill work ; and will preserve us to his heavenly kingdome : to whom he glory for ever and ever . amen . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a -e job . . deut. . . ver. . jer. . . gen. . . tim. . . joh. . . ver. . hebr. . . rev. . . rom. . . ver. . joh. . , . gal. . . heb. . . hab. . . heb. . . dr. pecock . exod. . , . isa. . . ver. . rom. . . rom. . . rom. . . rom. . , , . gal. . , . ver. . tit. . . jam. . . ver. . ver. . rom. . . ver. . ver. . ver. . ver. . ver. . ver. . gal. . . jam. . . acts . . jam. . . heb. . . artic. . rom. . . rom. . . rom. . . mat. . . theognid . tit. . . ver. . ver. . cor . . ver. . ver. . (a) article ii. ( of the justification of man. ) we are accounted righteous before god , onely for the merit of our lord and saviour jesus christ by faith , and not for our own works or deservings . wherefore , that we are justified by faith onely , is a most wholsome doctrine , and full of comfort ; as more largely is expressed in the homily of justification . (b) article . ( of good works . ) allbeit that good works , which are the fruits of faith , and follow after justification , cannot put away our sins , and endure the severity of gods iudgement ; yet are they pleasing and acceptable to god in christ , and do spring out necessarily of a true and lively faith ; in so much that , by them , a lively faith may be as evidently known , as a tree discerned by the fruit. luk. . . eph. . . eph. . . gal. . . eph. . . pet. . . gal. . . heb. . . ver. . ver. . ver. . ver. , , . ver. . ver. . pet. . . tim. . . heb. . . ver. . hab. . . heb. . . ver. . heb. . heb. . . heb. . , , . ver. , , , . gen. . . levit. . . ezek. . . gal. . , . rom. . , . heb. . . heb. . . ver. , . ver. $ . ver. . ver. . ver. . ver. . ver. . ver. . ver. . ver. . ver. . ver. . ver. $ . january . gal. . . ver. . ver. . ver. . ver. . heb. . . psal. . . tim. . . tit. . . cor. . . mat. . , . luk. - , . joh. . . mat. . - . jam. . . luk. . . mat. . . mar. . . mat. . mar. . . joh. . heb. . . ver. . ver. . ver. . ver. . ver. , . ver. . ver. . ver. . ver. . ver. . ver. . * mr. gataker , ( in his adversaria , cap. . ) thinks that , for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , should rather be read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; because vivicumburium , or burning alive , being a punishment then frequently inflicted on christians ( of which in this catalog of suffrings there is no other mention , ) he thinks it more likely that it should thus be here mentioned ( with such a paronomasia , which the apostle seems to affect ) than that in the enumeration of their torments ) should be here inserted , their being tempted . and our church seems to favour this reading : which , in the second part of that sermon of faith ( where this place is cited at large ) hath it thus ; some have been racked , some slain , some stoned , some sawn , some rent in pieces , some beheaded , some brent without mercy , and would not be delivered , because they looked to rise again to a better state . ver. . ver. . act. . . ver. . ver. . act. . . heb. . . prov. . . prov. . . prov. . . exod. . . ver. . prov. . . prov. . . prov. . . ver. . mat . . luk. . . jonah . . . ver. . ver. . ver. . gen. . . ver. , . pet. . . ver. . luk. . , . pet. . . thes. . . ver. . psal. . . wisd. . . ver. . ver. . ver. . deut. . . ver. . ver. . deut. . . heb. . . ver. . ver. . ver. . ver. . psal . . prov. . . prov. . . psal. . . ver. . ver. . psal. . . joh. . . ver. . gal. . . joh. . . joh. . , , . joh. . . isa. . . rom. . . phil. . . collect for easter week . phil. . . jam. . . ver. . jam. . . ver. . ver. . heb. . . act. . , . luk. . . luk. . . mar. . . ver. . ver. . mat. . . mar. . , . mat. . . joh. . . act. . . mat. . . sam. . . gen. . . ezr. . . lam. . . ver. . isai. . . hab. . . pet. . . heb. . . rom. . . gal. . , . rom. . . ver. . ver. . ver. . mat. . . tim. . . phil. . . joh. . . rom. . . tim. . . a treatise of angular sections by john wallis ... wallis, john, - . approx. kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from -bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : - (eebo-tcp phase ). a wing w estc r ocm this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons . universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase , no. a ) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set ) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, - ; : ) a treatise of angular sections by john wallis ... wallis, john, - . wallis, john, - . treatise of algebra. [ ], p., [ ] leaves of plates : ill. printed by john playford for richard davis ..., london : . appears at reel : as part of wing w : a treatise of algebra. london, . reproduction of original in union theological seminary library, new york. created by converting tcp files to tei p using tcp tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between and available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the , texts created during phase of the project have been released into the public domain as of january . anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. % (or pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf- unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p , characters represented either as utf- unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng geometry -- early works to . - tcp assigned for keying and markup - apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images - mona logarbo sampled and proofread - mona logarbo text and markup reviewed and edited - pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a treatise of angular sections . by john wallis , d. d. professor of geometry in the university of oxford , and a member of the royal society , london . printer's or publisher's device london : printed by iohn playford , for richard davis , bookseller , in the university of oxford , . a treatise of angular sections . chap. . of the duplication and bisection of an arch or angle . i. let the chord ( or subtense ) of an arch proposed , be called a , ( or e ; ) of the double , b ; of the treble , c ; of the quadruple , d ; of the quintruple , f ; &c. the radius , r ; the diameter , r . ( but sometimes we shall give the name of the subtense a , e , &c. to the arch whose subtense it is ; yet with that care , as not to be liable to a mistake . ) ii. where the subtense of an arch is a ; let the versed sine be v : ( where that is e , let this be u. ) which drawn into ( or multiplied by ) the remainder of the diameter ( r − v ) makes r vvq , the square of the right-sine : ( this sine being a mean-proportional between the segments of the diameter on which it stands erect , by ● . ) that is , ( q : ½ b : ) the square of ( the right-sine , or ) half the subtense of the double arch : that is , r v − vq = q : ½ b : = ¼ bq. iii. if to this we add vq ( the square of the versed-sine , ) it makes rv = ( ¼ bq + vq = ) aq. ( and , by the same reason , r u = eq. ) that is , iv. the subtense of an arch , is a mean proportional between the diameter and the versed-sine . v. again , because r v = aq , therefore ( dividing both by r , ) : and ( the square thereof ) which subtracted from aq , leaves the square of the right-sine , ( and , in like manner , , and , and that is , vi. if from the square of the subtense , we take its biquadrate divided by the square of the diameter ; the remainder is equal to the square of the right-sine : and the square-root of that remainder , to the sine it self : and , the double of this , to the subtense of the double arch. vii . accordingly , because therefore ( its quadruple ) and ( and in like manner , that is , viii . if from four-times the square of a subtense , are taken its biquadrate divided by the square of the radius ; the remainder is the square of the subtense of the double arch : and , the quadratick root of that remainder , is the subtense it self . ix . but that is , x. the rect-angle of the subtense of an arch , and of its remainder to a semicircle , divided by the radius ; is equal to the subtense of the double arch. xi . because ; therefore ae = rb = r × ½b : and , r. a : : b. b : and therefore , ( because a e contain a right-angle , as being an angle in a semicircle . ) xii . in a right-angled triangle , the rect-angle of the two legs containing the right-angle , is equal to that of the hypothenuse , and the perpendicular from the right-angle thereupon . and , xiii . as the radius , to the subtense of an arch ; so the subtense of its remainder to a semicircle , is to that of the double arch. xiv . because b , the subtense of a double arch , doth indifferently subtend the two segments which compleat the whole circumference ; and , consequently , the half of either may be the single arch of this double : it is therefore necessary that this equation have two ( affirmative ) roots ; the greater of which we will call a ; and the lesser e : and therefore that is , xv. any arch , and its remainder to a semicircumference , ( as also its excess above a semicircumference , and either of them increased by one or more semicircumferences , ) will have the same subtense of the double arch. for in all these cases , the subtense of the single arch will be either a or e. xvi . because and therefore , and aq rq − aqq ( = bq rq ) = eq rq − eqq : therefore ( by transposition ) aq rq − eq rq = aqq − eqq ; and ( dividing both by that is , xvii . the square of the diameter , is equal to the difference of the biquadrates of the subtenses of two arches , ( which together complete a semicircumference ) divided by the difference of their squares : and this also , equal to the sum of the squares of those subtenses . that is , ( because a e contain a right-angle . ) xviii . in a right-angled triangle , the square of the hypothenuse ( rq ) is equal to the squares of the sides containing the right-angle . ( aq+eq . ) xix . or thus , because b is the common subtense to two segments , which together complete the whole circumference ; and therefore the half of both , complete the semicircumference : if therefore in a circle ( according to ptolemy's lemma ) a trapezium be inscribed , whose opposite sides are a , a ; and e , e : the diagonals will be diameters , that is , r : and , consequently , rq = aq + eq ; as before . xx. hence therefore , the radius ( r ) with the subtense of an arch ( a or e ) being given ; we have thence the subtense of the double arch , b : ( which is the duplication of an arch or angle . ) for , r , a , being given ; we have ( or r , e , being given , we have a = rq − eq : ) and , having r , a , e ; we have , by § . xxi . the radius r , with b the subtense of the double arch , being given ; we have thence the subtense of the single arch , a or e. ( which is the bisection of an arch or angle . ) for , by § , : and therefore rq aq − aqq ( = rq bq ) = rq eq − eqq. and the roots of this equation , , or eq. and , the quadratick root of this , is a , or e. xxii . hence also we have an easie method , for a geometrical construction for the resolution of such biquadratick equations ; or quadratick equations of a plain root , wherein the highest power is negative . ( understand it in mr. oughtred's language : who puts the absolute quantity , affirmative ; and by it self ; and the rest of the equation all on the other side . ) suppose , rq bq = rq aq − aqq , or ( putting p = ½ b , ) rq pq = rq aq − aqq. for , dividing the absolute term rq bq , or rq pq , by the co-efficient of the middle term rq , the result is ¼bq , or pq ; and its root ½ b or p. which being set perpendicular on a diameter equal to r ( the square root of that co-efficient : ) a streight line from the top of it , parallel to that diameter , will ( if the equation be not impossible ) cut the circle , or at least touch it : from which point of section or contact , two streight-lines drawn to the ends of the diameter , are a , and e , the two roots of that ( ambiguous ) biquadratick equation , ( or , if we call it a quadratick of a plain-root , the root of the plain-root of such quadratick equation . ) xxiii . and this construction , is the same with the resolution of this problem ; in a right-angled triangle , the hypothenuse being given , and a perpendicular from the right-angle thereupon , to find the other sides ; ( and , if need be , the angles , the segments of the hypothenuse , and the area of the triangle ½ r b or p r. ) xxiv . or thus : having r and b , ( as at § . ) with the radius r describe a circle ; and therein inscribe the chord b ; and another on the middle hereof at right-angles : ( which will therefore bisect that , and be a diameter : ) and , from both ends of this , to either end of b , draw the lines a , e ; as before . and this construction is better than the former , because of the uncertainty of the precise point of contact or section , in case the section be somewhat oblique . xxv . now if it be desired , in like manner , to give a like construction , in case of such biquadratick equations ( or quadraticks of a plain-root ) where the highest power is affirmative ; ( though that be here a digression , as in all the rest that follow , to § . ) it is thus : suppose the equations aqq − vqaq = vqeq = pqq + vqpq : whose ( affirmative ) roots are aq , and pq ; ( and therefore vq , vqeq , and consequently eq , are known quantities : ) therefore ( by transposition ) aqq − vqaq + vqpq ; and ( dividing by and therefore aq − vq = pq ; and pq + vq = aq : and ( by multiplication ) aqq − vqaq = aqpq = pqq + vqpq = vqeq . xxvi . the equation therefore proposed ( dividing all by vq ) comes to this , that is , . whose roots are , and . namely , . and . and these multiplied into v ( a known quantity ) make aq , and pq : namely , . and and consequently , a is a mean proportional between v and . and p , a mean proportional between v and . therefore , xxvii . and equation being proposed in one of these forms , aqq − vqaq = vqeq = pqq + vqpq : the absolute term ( vqeq ) being divided by the co-efficient of the middle term ( vq ; ) the quantity resulting is ( eq ) whose square-root ( e , ) set perpendicular on the end of a streight line equal to ( v ) the square-root of the co-efficient ; which we may suppose the diameter of a circle , to which that perpendicular is a tangent : on the same center with this circle ( and on the same diameter continued ) by the top of that perpendicular , draw a second circle . the diameter of this second circle , is , by that perpendicular ( e ) cut into two segments , which are the roots of these equations . that is , ; and xxviii . or , ( without drawing that second circle , ) from the top of that perpendicular ( in a streight line through the center of the first , which will cut the circumference in two points , ) to the first section , is ; to the second , xxix . these two roots , multiplied one into the other , become equal to the absolute quantity , . and multiplied into v , become aq , pq : or , thus , p is a mean proportional between v and u ; and a , between v and v+u : or thus , p is a mean proportional between v and ; and ( because by § . aq = pq + vq , ) a is the hypothenuse ( in a right-angled triangle ) to the legs p , v. and this is no contemptible method , for the resolving quadratick equations of a plain-root , wherein the highest term is affirmative . the whole geometrick construction , is clear enough from the figures adjoined ; where yet the circles , ( for the most part ) serve rather for the demonstration , than the construction . xxx . again , ( by the same § . ) and therefore a and e , are also the legs of a right-angled triangle , whose hypothenuse is v + u : which , by p ( a perpendicular on it from the right-angle ) is cut into those two segments . xxxi . from the same construction therefore , we have also the geometrical construction of this problem ; in a right-angled triangle , having one of the legs e , with the farther segment of the hypothenuse v , to find the other segment ; ( and so the whole v + u ; and the perpendicular p ; and the other leg a ; and the whose triangle . ) xxxii . we have thence also this analogy ; and or thus , and xxxiii . if therefore we make v the radius of a circle ; then is a the secant ; p , the tangent ; e a parallel to the right-sine ( in contrary position ) from the end of the secant to the diameter produced . if we make a the radius ; then is p the right-sine , and e the tangent of the same arch ; and v , the sine of the complement , or difference between the radius and versed sine . from hence therefore , xxxiv . the tangent e , and sine of the complement v , being given ; we have the right-sine p , and the radius a. ( but , § , and all hitherto , is a digression . ) xxxv . if in a semicircle on the diameter r , we inscribe b the subtense of a double arch : a perpendicular on the middle point hereof , will cut the arch of that semicircle into two segments , ( whose subtenses are a , e ; ) either of which is a single arch , to the double whereof , b is a subtense . this , as to e , is evident from è , and è : and , as to a , from § of this . xxxvi . but also ( by the same reason , ) the arch β ( the difference of the arches a , e ; ) and b ( the double of either , ) will ( if doubled ) have the same subtense of their double arch. that is , the double of the double ( of either ) and the double of their difference , will have the same subtense . xxxvii . if an arch to be doubled , be just a third part of the circumference ; the subtense of the double , is equal to that of the single arch. ( for the same subtense , which on one side subtends two trients , doth on the other side subtend but one . ) that is , by § , . and therefore ( by transposition ) , and rq = aq. that is , xxxviii . the square of the subtense to a trient of the circumference ( or of the side of an equilater triangle inscribed ) is equal to three squares of the radius . xxxix . again , the same being the subtense of the double trient , and of the double sextant , ( for a trient and a sextant compleat the half , ⅓ + ⅙ = ½ ) the square of the subtense of a sextant , ( eq , ) is the difference of the squares of that of the trient , and ( the diameter or ) that of the semicircumference . that is , rq − aq = eq ; that is , ( by § preced . ) rq − rq = rq = eq : and , e = r. that is , xl. the subtense of a sextant ( or side of the inscribed equilater hexagon ) is equal to the radius . chap. ii. of the triplication and trisection of an arch or angle . i. if in a circle , be inscribed a quadrilater , whose three sides are a , a , a , ( subtenses of a single arch ) and the fourth c , ( the subtense of the triple arch : ) the diagonals are b , b , the subtense of the double ; ) as is evident . but it is evident also , that ( in this case ) a is less than a trient of the whole circumference . ii. and therefore ( the rect-angle of the diagonals being equal to the two rect-angles of the opposite sides , ) bq = aq+ac ; and therefore bq − aq = ac , and . that is , iii. the square of the subtense of the double arch ; is equal to the square of the subtense of the single arch ( less than a trient of the circumference ) and the rectangle of the subtenses of the sngle and treble arch. and therefore , iv. the square of the subtense of the double arch , wanting the square of the subtense of the single arch , ( being less than a trient , ) is equal to the rect-angle of the subtenses of the single and treble arch. and consequently , v. if the square of the subtense of the double arch , wanting the square of the subtense of the single arch ( less than a trient , ) be divided by the subtense of the single arch ; the result is the subtense of the triple arch. vi. because that ( by § . ) ; and , that b+a into b − a is equal to bq − aq : ( as will appear by multiplication : ) . therefore , that is , vii . as the subtense of a single arch ( less than a trient ) to the sum of the subtenses of the single and double arch ; so is the excess of that of the double above that of the single , to the subtense of the triple . viii . again , because ( by § , of the precedent chapter , ) : therefore , : and therefore . that is , ix . the triple of the subtense of an arch ( less than a trient , ) wanting the cube thereof , divided by the square of the radius ; is equal to the subtense of the triple arch. x. but , because the same subtense c , subtends also to another segment of the same circle ; the subtense of whose trient we shall call e : therefore . xi . and because the three arches a , a , a ; and the three arches e , e , e ; complete the whole circumference : ( as is evident ; ) therefore , once a , and once e , complete a trient or third part thereof . therefore , xii . an arch less than the trient of a circumference , and the residue of that trient , ( a , and e , ) have the same subtense of their triple arch. xiii . again , because ( as is shewed already ) ; and therefore rqa − ac = rqe − ec ; and rqa − rqe = ac − ec : therefore , ( dividing both by a − e , ) . ( as will appear upon dividing ac − ec by a − e ; or multiplying a − e into aq+ae+eq . ) xiv . but ( by § , , chap. preced . ) rq is the square of the subtense of a trient ; that is ( by § of this ) of the sum of the arches a and e. therefore , xv. the square of the subtense of the trient of the circumference of a circle , ( or three squares of the radius , ) is equal to the squares of the subtenses of any two arches completing that trient , and the rect-angle of them . that is , ( putting t for the subtense of a trient ) tq ( = rq ) = aq+ae+aq . xvi . but the angle which ae contain , ( as being an angle in the trient of a circle , or insisting on two trients , ) is an angle of degrees . and therefore ( by § . ) xvii . in a right-lined triangle , one of whose angles is degrees ; the square of the subtense to that angle , is equal to the two squares of the sides containing it , and a rect-angle of those sides . ( for , if such triangle be inscribed in a circle , the base of that triangle , will be the subtendent of a trient in such circle ; or rq. ) xviii . if a quadrilater be inscribed in a circle , three of whose sides are a , e , a , ( or e , a , e , ) and the fourth z : each of the diagonals ( by § . ) is t , the subtense of a trient . and therefore ( by § , , , ) ze+aq ( = za+eq ) = tq = rq = aq+ae+eq . and , consequently , ze = ae+eq , and za = aq+ae ; and therefore , z = a+e . and therefore , xix . if to the aggregate of two arches a , e , ( completing a trient , ) be added a third equal to either of them ; z , the subtense of the aggregate of all the three , is equal to the sum of the subtenses of those two . that is , z = a+e . xx. but the same chord z , doth subtend , on the one side , to a trient increased by the arch a ; and , on the other side , to a trient increased by the arch e ; ( as is evident ; ) that is , to an arch which doth as much exceed a trient ( or want of two trients , ) as the arch a or e wants of a trient . therefore , xxi . the aggregate of the subtenses of two arches , which together make up a trient ; is equal to the subtense of another arch which doth as much exceed a trient , ( or want of two trients , ) as either of those two wants of a trient . xxii . the same will in like manner be inferred , if we inscribe a quadrilater whose opposite sides are a , t , and e , t ; and the diagonals tz . for then ta+te = tz ; and therefore a+e = z , as before . xxiii . but if either of the arches to which z subtendeth ( greater than a trient , and less than two trients ) be tripled ; the subtense of this triple , is the same with that of the triple of a or e. for the triple of an arch greater than a trient , is equal to one whole circumference with the triple of that excess . ( for the triple of ⅓+a , is + a . ) now because , when we have once gone round the whole circumference , we are just there where at first we began ; this therefore ( as to this point ) is as nothing ; and the whole distance to be acquired is but the triple of such excess ; and just the same as if onely this excess had been thrice taken . xxiv . as for example : if the arch subtended by z , be β γ δ , ( that is , a trient increased by the arch e ; ) and to this we add a second equal to it , δ ζ θ ; the aggregate β γ δ ζ θ , is the double arch , and the subtense thereof is b , or β θ , ( which is also the subtense of the difference of the arches a , e : ) and if to these two , we add a third equal to either of them θ γ χ ; then is β γ δ ζ θ γ χ , the triple of the arch first proposed ; and the subtense hereof ( that is , the streight-line which joyns the beginning and the end of this triple arch ) is β χ = c ; the very same which subtends the triple of e. xxv . and just the same would come to pass , if for the first arch we take β θ ζ δ ( that is , a trient increased by a , ) to which z is a subtendent likewise . for , taking a second equal to it δ χ γ β θ ; the aggregate β θ ζ δ χ γ β θ ( more than one entire circumference ) is the double arch , and the subtense thereof b as before : and if to these two we add a third equal to either , θ ζ δ χ ; the triple arch is β θ ζ δ χ γ β θ ζ δ χ ; and the subtense hereof ( as before ) β χ or c ; the same with the subtendent of the triple of a. and therefore , xxvi . the triple of an arch greater than a trient , hath the same subtense with the triple of its excess above a trient . and the same ( for the same reason ) holds in arches greater than , , or more trients . xxvii . but note here , that , in this case ; that is , if the arch to be tripled be greater than a trient , but less than two trients , ( for if more than two trients , but less than the whole circumference , it is the same as if it were less than a tri●●●●● ; ) the subtense of the double is less than that of the single . for , in such case , the arch will differ from that of a semicircle ( either in excess or in defect ) by less than ⅙ of the whole circumference . let it be x. if therefore ½ ± x be the single arch , the double will be ± x ; and the subtense thereof ( whether greater or less than one entire revolution ) will be the same with that of x : and therefore ( x being less than ⅙ , ) x will require a less subtense than that of ½ ± x ; that being less than the subtense of a trient , but this greater than it . and the like is to be understood in other cases of like nature . xxviii . supposing therefore , as before , , or ; c must in this case be a negative quantity : or , if we put c affirmative , then must z be negative , ( or less than nothing : ) for bq − zq ( where a greater quantity is to be subtended from a less ) must needs be negative ; that is bq − zq = zc ; where zc being a negative , either z or c must be so too , or else ( putting all affirmative ) zq − bq = zc , and zq = bq+zc . xxix . which is evident also from the diagram ; where , for this reason , zz become diagonals ; and both bb , and zc , opposite sides . and therefore zq − bq = zc , or zq = bq+zc ; and . that is , xxx . the square of the subtense of a single arch , greater than a trient , but less than two trients ; is equal to the square of the subtense of the double arch , together with a rect-angle of the subtenses of the single and triple arch. and , xxxi . the square of the subtense of a single arch ( greater than a trient , but less than two trients , ) wanting the square of the subtense of the double arch ; is equal to the rectangle of the subtenses of the single and triple arch. and therefore , xxxii . if the square of the subtense of a single arch ( greater than a trient , but less than two trients , ) wanting the square of the subtense of the double arch , be divided by that of the single , the result is the subtense of the triple arch : ( or , if divided by that of the triple , the result is that of the single . ) or , xxxiii . if from the subtense of a single arch ( greater than a trient but less than two trients , ) we subtract the square of the subtense of the double arch divided by that of the single ; the remainder is equal to the subtense of the triple . xxxiv . but , because of , or z ) zq − bq ( c ; and zq − bq = z+b into z − b : we have thence this analogy , that is , xxxv . as the subtense of a single arch ( greater than a trient but less than two trients , ) to the aggregate of the subtenses of the single and double ; so is that of the single wanting that of the double to that of the triple . xxxvi . now because ( as we have shewed ) zq − bq = zc ; and ( by § , , chap. preced . ) : therefore : and . that is , xxxvii . if from the cube of the subtense of a single arch ( greater than a trient but less than two trients ) divided by the square of the radius ; we subtract the triple of that subtense : the remainder is equal to the subtense of the triple arch. xxxviii . if the arch to be tripled be greater than two trients , it is the same as if it were less than one trient . ( for the residue of the whole , to which it also subtends , is then less than a trient . ) and therefore the same chord ( suppose a or e ) subtends as well to an arch greater than two trients , as to one less than one trient . xxxix . if the arch to be tripled be equal to a trient ; it is indifferent to whether of the two cases it be referred , ( that of the greater , or that of the lesser , than a trient , ) and the same happens if it be supposed equal to two or more trients , or to one or more intire revolutions . xl. if the arch to be tripled be greater than one or more intire revolutions ; its subtense is the same with that of its excess above those intire revolutions , and to be considered in like manner , which things are evident and need no further demonstration . xli . now what hath been severally delivered concerning the triplication of an arch or angle less than a trient ; and of one greater than a trient , but less than two trients ; ( to one of which cases every arch may be referred , as is already shewed ; ) we may thus , jointly put together . xlii . the difference of the squares of the subtenses of the single and double arch ( whether soever of them be the greater , ) is equal to the rect-angle of the subtenses of the single and triple . ( by § and . ) that is , bq − aq = ac , and zq − bq = zc . and therefore , xliii . if the difference of the squares of the subtenses of the single and double arch , be divided by the subtense of the single ; it gives that of the triple : if , by that of the triple , it gives that of the single . ( by § , . ) that is , . and . and . and , xliv . as the subtense of the single arch , to the aggregate of the subtenses of the single and double ; so is the difference of these subtenses , to the subtense of the triple . ( by § , . ) that is , and xlv . now for as much as ( by § , . ) the three arches a , e , z , if tripled , will have the same subtense of the triple arch c : 't is thence manifest , that such equation as this ( which concerns the trisection of an arch , ) must have in all three roots , as a , e , z : ( for every of these , upon such triplication , will have the subtense of the triple arch , c : ) yet so ; that , where a and e are affirmative roots , z is a negative ; and contrarywise , where this is affirmative , those be negative . that is , in this equation , ; the roots are + a , + e − z. but , in this , ; the roots are − a , − e , + z. and therefore , . and , consequently , arq − ac = erq − ec = crq = zc − zrq . xlvi . since therefore arq − ac = zc − zrq ; and consequently ( by transposition ) zrq + arq = zc + ac ; it is also ( dividing both sides by z + a , ) . ( for z + a into zq − za + aq , is equal to zc + ac ; as will appear by multiplication ; and contrarywise , if this be divided by either of those , the quotient will be the other of them , as will be found by division . ) and in like manner ; because also erq − ec = zc − zrq , therefore zrq + erq = zc + ec ; and . that is , xlvii . of two arches , whereof the one exceeds the other by a trient of the whole circumference ; or else , whereof the one doth as much exceed a trient as the other wants of it ; the squares of the subtenses , wanting a rect-angle of the same subtenses , are equal to the square of the subtense of a trient , or three times the square of the radius . that is , zq − za + aq = rq = tq = zq − ze + eq. xlviii . now the angle contained by the legs za , or ze , ( standing on the chord t , ) is an angle of degrees ; ( as being an angle in the circumference standing on an arch of degrees . ) and therefore , xlix . in a right-lined triangle , one of whose angles is of degrees ; the square of the side opposite to this angle , is equal to the two squares of the sides containing it , wanting the rect-angle of the same sides . ( for any such triangle may be thus inscribed in a circle : ) that is , zq − za + aq , ( or zq − ze + eq , ) = tq = rq . l. the same things ( from § , &c. ) may be thus otherwise inferred . because ( by § ) aq + ae + eq = rq , and ( by § or . ) z = a + e ; therefore zq = aq + ae + eq , and za = aq + ae , ( and ze = ae + eq , ) and therefore zq − za = ae + eq , ( and zq − ze = aq + ae ; ) and consequently zq − za + aq ( or zq − ze + eq , ) = aq + ae + eq = rq . from whence the rest are inferred as before . li. moreover , because ( as is before shewed ) : we may thence infer the following theorems . lii . the difference of the cubes of two legs containing an angle of degrees , divided by the difference of those legs , is equal to the square of the base subtended to it . liii . but if it be an angle of degrees ; the sum of the cubes of the legs or sides containing it , divided by the sum of those sides , is equal to the square of the base . again , liv. the difference of the legs containing an angle of degrees , multiplied into the square of the base , is equal to the difference of the cubes of those legs . lv. but if it be an angle of degrees ; the sum of the legs multiplied into the square of the base is equal to the sum of the cubes of those legs . lvi . again , because ( or and : therefore , ( and , ) and . and therefore , lvii . the difference between the triple of the subtense of a single arch , less than a trient ; and , of the subtense of the triple of that arch ; is equal to the cube of the subtense of that single arch , divided by the square of the radius . and consequently , that difference multiplied into the square of the radius , is equal to such cube . lviii . the sum of the triple of the subtense of a single arch greater than a trient , but less than two trients , and of the subtense of the triple arch ; is equal to the cube of the subtense of that single arch divided by the square of the radius . and consequently , that sum multiplied into the square of the radius , is equal to such cube . lix . because ( as is before shewed ) : or , arq − ac = erq − ec = crq = zc − zrq : therefore the subtense of an arch being given ( as a , e , or z , ) together with the radius r ; we have thence the subtense of the triple arch c. which is , the triplication of an arch or angle . lx. and , contrarywise ; the radius of a circle r , and the subtense of the triple arch c , being given ; we have thence the subtense of the single arch , ( a , e , or z , ) by resolving such a cubick equation . which is , the trisection of an arch or angle . but the geometrical effection thereof is not to be performed by rule and compass ; without the help of a conick section , or some line more compounded . lxi . but then , on the other side ; such cubick equations may be resolved by the trisection of an arch. for , suppose a cubick equation of this form , rqa − ac , ( or rqe − ec , ) = rqc ; whose root a ( or e ) is sought . now if r ( the square-root of a third part of the co-efficient ) be made the radius of a circle , ( that is , ; ) and therein be inscribed c , which is the result of the absolute term divided by the third part of the co-efficient , ( that is , ; ) and either of the arches to which this chord subtends be divided into three equal parts : the chord which subtendeth to one of those parts is an ( affirmative ) root of that equation ; which therefore hath two affirmative roots ; suppose a , and e. lxii . but it hath moreover a negative root ; which is the subtense of either of those arches ( whose chord is a , or e , ) increased by a trient of the whole circumference , suppose z. i say either of those arches ; for the same chord z , which on the one side subtends a trient increased by the arch a , subtends on the other side a like trient increased by e. lxiii . but if the equation be of this form , zc − rqz = rqc : the process is just the same in all points ; save , that then , there is but one affirmative root , z ; and two negatives , a , e. lxiv . but , in both cases , it must be still observed , that the chord c be not greater than r . ( for when this happens , the chord c , as being greater than the diameter , cannot be inscribed in such circle . ) or , ( which is in effect the same ; ) that the square of half the absolute term , be not greater than the cube of a third part of the co-efficient of the middle term . for , the third part of that co-efficient being rq , and the cube thereof r ; and half the absolute quantity ½ rqc , and the square of this ¼ rqqcq ; if this square be greater than that cube , and therefore ( dividing both by rqq ) ¼ cq greater than rq , and ( taking the roots of both ) ½ c greater than r ; then must c be greater than r the diameter , and therefore cannot be inscribed in the circle . and therefore , when this happens , such equations cannot be thus resolved by the trisection of an arch. but they may by ( what are wont to be called ) cardan's rules , ( as i have elsewhere shewed , ) the consideration of which doth not belong to this place . lxv . if an arch to be tripled be a trient ( or two , three , four , or more trients ; ) the triple arch will therefore be one intire revolution , ( or two , three , four , or more intire revolutions ; ) and the subtense of the triple will be nothing ; ( the beginning and end of such triple arch being the same point : ) that is , , ( or . and therefore , , . and rq = aq = eq = zq. that is , ( as was before shewed ) lxvi . the square of the subtense of a trient , ( or of the side of an equilater inscribed triangle ) is equal to three squares of the radius . lxvii . if an arch to be tripled be a quadrant ; it is manifest that the subtense of the triple , is equal to that of the single . ( for the same chord , subtendeth , on the one side , to three such arches ; and , on the other side , but to one . ) that is , ; and therefore ; and rq = aq. that is , lxviii . the square of the subtense of a quadrant ( or of the side of an inscribed quadrate ) is equal to two squares of the radius . lxix . the same may be inferred , from the bisection of a semicircumference . for the subtense of that being r ; and therefore ( by § , chap. preced . ) or , ( putting e for the remainder of that quadrant to the semicircle ) . or , ( because , in this case e = a , ) . therefore rq = aq , as before ; and . lxx . but if the arch to be tripled be of a semicircle ( and so , greater than a trient , ) the subtense of the triple will be the same with that of the single ; but with a contrary sign , ( by § ; ) and therefore ( by § . ) ; that is , , or zc = zrq , and zq = rq , and z = r . which is the third , or negative root , of the last mentioned equation , ; beside the two affirmatives a , e , the subtenses of the two quadrants : this being equal to the aggregate of both , with the contrary sign . lxxi . moreover ; because the same subtense ( before mentioned , ) c = a , subtends not onely to the triple of a quadrant on the one side ; but also , on the other side , to the single quadrant ; to a third part of this therefore the root e is to be also a subtendent : ( that is , to an arch of degrees . ) that is , . lxxii . and , because ( by § . ) aq + ae + eq = rq , and ( by § . ) aq = rq ; therefore ae + eq = rq. and therefore ( by resolving this equation ) . and therefore , . that is , lxxiii . as the subtense of a quadrant , to the subtense of a trient wanting the radius ; so is the radius , to the subtense of the semi-sextant ; or , of degrees : or , lxxiv . as the side of the ( inscribed equilater ) tetragone , to the difference of the sides of the trigone and hexagone ; so is the radius , to that of the dodecagone . ( understand it of the inscribed equilater figures ; and so afterward in like cases . ) lxxv . and because ( as before ) : therefore , , or , into rq. and so , eq. that is , lxxvi . as the radius , to the excess of the diameter above the subtense of degrees , ( or side of the inscribed trigone : ) so is the square of the radius , to that of the subtense of degrees ; or of the side of the dodecagone . and therefore , ( that of rq to eq , being duplicate to that of r to e. ) lxxvii . the proportion of the radius , to the difference of the diameter and the side of the inscribed trigone ; is duplicate to that of the radius , to the side of the inscribed dodecagone . and therefore , lxxviii . the ( radius or ) side of the hexagone , and of the dodecagone , and the difference of the diameter from that of the trigone , are in continual proportion . lxxix . and ( because into into r , ) the excess of the diameter above the subtense of the trient , multiplied into the radius ; is equal to the square of the subtense of degrees , or the semisextant . lxxx . the same are found by bisecting the sextant ; ( for a quarter of the trient , or half the sextant , is the same ; ) in this manner , lxxxi . if e be put for the subtense of degrees , and a for that of the residue to a semicircumference , or of degrees ; then because the subtense of a sextant , or the double arch of e , is r ; therefore ( by § , chap. preced . ) : and rqq = rqaq − aqq = rqeq − eqq : and ( by resolving that equation ) into into r , = aq , and eq. that is , lxxxii . the squares of the subtenses of , and of degrees ; are equal , that to the sum , this to the difference , ( of the diameter and side of the inscribed trigone ) multiplied by the radius . lxxxiii . again , for as much as c = a subtends as well the triple of the arch a of degrees , as the triple of the arch e of degrees ; therefore is the subtense of a trient increased by the arch a or e ; that is , as well of degr . = + , as of = + . which was before concluded at § . ( for z here , is the same with a there ) and zq ( as there aq , ) into rq. lxxxiv . and the same is yet again found by subducting into rq ) the square of the subtense degrees , out of ( rq ) the square of the diameter : ( because + = degrees , complete the semicircumference : ) for if from rq we subduct , there remains , or , into rq , the subtense of degrees ; and therefore also of degrees . chap. iii. of the quadruplation and quadrisection of an arch or angle . i. if in a circle be inscribed a quadrilater , whose opposite sides are a , a , ( the subtenses of a single arch ) and b , d , ( the subtenses of the double and quadruple ) the diagonals will be c , c , ( the subtenses of the triple ) as is evident . ( but it is evident also , that , in this case , the arch a , is less than a quadrant of the whole circumference . ) ii. and therefore ( the rect-angle of the diagonals being equal to the two rect-angles of the opposite sides ) cq − aq = bd. and therefore , and that is , iii. the square of the subtense of the triple arch , wanting the square of the subtense of the single arch ( less than a quadrant ) is equal to the rect-angle of the subtenses of the double and quadruple . and , divided by either of these , it gives the other of them . iv. but c+a into c − a is equal to cq − aq. and therefore , that is , v. as the subtense of the double arch , is to the sum of the subtenses of the triple , and of the single ( this being less than a quadrant ; ) so is the excess of the subtense of the triple above that of the single , to that of the quadruple . vi. and because ( by § , chap. preced . ) ; and therefore : therefore . vii . but ( by § and , chap. . ) . and therefore . ( for if be divided by , it is : and this again divided by rq − aq , is : but this last division being by rq − aq , whereas ( according to the value of b ) it should be divided only by the square root hereof , therefore we are to restore a multiplication by that root ; which makes it . ) viii . and then , turning the equation into an analogy , . that is , ix . as the cube of the radius , to the subtense of the single arch ( less than a quadrant ) multiplied into the double square of the radius wanting the square of the subtense , so is the subtense of what this arch wants of a semicircumference , to the subtense of the quadruple arch. x. or thus ; ( dividing the two first terms by rq , ) . that is , xi . as the radius , to the double of the subtense of the single arch ( less than a quadrant ) wanting the cube of that subtense divided by the square of the radius : so is the subtense of what that single arch wants of the semicircumference , to the subtense of the quadruple arch. xii . but ( by § , chap. preced . ) . and therefore , xiii . as the radius to the excess of the triple arch above that of the single ( less than a quadrant : ) so is the subtense of what that single arch wants of a semicircumference , to the subtense of the quadruple arch. xiv . the same may be thus also demonstrated : because ( by § , chap. . ) , is the subtense of the double arch of a : therefore ( by the same reason ) , the subtense of the double arch of b ; that is , of the quadruple arch of a. xv. and , because : therefore , for rq − bq , we may put , or : and the quadratick root hereof , multiplied into makes as before , xvi . we may also , to the same purpose , ( and with the same event , ) inscribe a quadrilater , so as that a , d , and a , b , may be opposite sides , and b , c , diagonals . for then bc − ba = da. and therefore into will equal da. that is , . and ; as before . but of this we shall say more at § . &c. xvii . but , for as much as the same d , subtends not only the quadruple of the arch a , but also the quadruple of the arch e , ( which therefore , together with the arch a , will complete a quadrant of the whole circumference : ) it may in like manner be shewed , that : and therefore , xviii . an arch less than a quadrant , and the arch which this wants of a quadrant , have both the same subtense of the quadruple arch , d. and , accordingly , ae , are two affirmative roots of that equation . xix . but there are yet two other roots ( but both negative , as will after appear ) of the same equation ; ( which we will call p , s ; ) whereof one subtends a quadrant increased by the arch a ; the other , a quadrant increased by the arch e. for it is manifest ( by what is said at § , chap. preced . ) that these also must have the same ●●btense of the quadruple arch , with a and e. for four times ¼+a , is + ● , and will therefore have the same subtense with a . and the like of four times ¼+e , which is + e , whose subtense is the same with that of e . ( and the like will follow , in case two , three , or more quadrants be thus increased . ) and consequently , xx. an arch greater than a quadrant , ( or than two , three , or more quadrants ) will require the same subtense of its quadruple arch , with its excess above a quadrant , ( or above these two , three , or more quadrants . ) xxi . but the same p , subtends as well to a quadrant increased by the arch of a , as to three quadrants wanting the said arch ; as also to a semicircumference ( or two quadrants ) increased by the arch of e , or wanting that arch. ( as is manifest to view by the scheme . ) and , in like manner , s subtends as well to a quadrant increased by the arch of e , as to three quadrants wanting that arch ; as also to a semicircumference ( or two quadrants ) increased by the arch of a , or wanting that arch. xxii . now , that p , s , are negative roots , will thus appear . for , supposing ( for instance ) ; and p , a subtendent of an arch greater than a quadrant : ( but , less than three quadrants ; otherwise it is the same as if it were less than one quadrant : for the same chord which subtends an arch greater than three quadrants , subtends also to less than one : ) p will in this case be greater than the subtense of a quadrant , and therefore rq − pq a negative quantity ( because of greater quantity subtracted from a lesser ; ) and therefore also p must be negative , that so rqp − pc ( compounded by the multiplication of two negatives ) may be a positive quantity , and therefore the whole affirmative also . ( and what is said of p , holds in like manner of s. ) xxiii . but if we chuse to make p affirmative , then must , be negative : and therefore ( changing the signs ) , affirmative . ( and the like of s. ) but , of this , more afterwards . xxiv . but for what reason , the equation , or , hath two affirmative roots a , e ; and two negatives p , s ; for the same reason will the equation , or , have two negatives a , e ; and p , s , affirmatives . xxv . if now we consider the quadrilater , whose said opposite sides are a , a , and e , p ; then ( because the arches a , e , do together make up a quadrant ) the diagonals q , q , are subtenses of a quadrant , ( or sides of an inscribed square ) and therefore ( by § , chap. preced . ) qq = rq , and . xxvi . and therefore qq − aq = rq − aq = ep ; and consequently , and . xxvii . but the same p doth also subtend a semicircumference wanting the arch of e : and therefore and . xxviii . and ( by the same reason ) taking a quadrilater whose opposite sides are e , e , and a , s ; we have the diagonals and qq − eq = rq − eq = as . and consequently ( because the arches a and s do complete the semicircumference ) ; and . xxix . now because ( as at § . ) ; therefore . and therefore rqeq − eqq = pqeq = rqq − rqaq + aqq ; and aqq + eqq = aqrq + eqrq − rqq . ( and , in like manner , because ; therefore ; and rqaq − aqq = sqaq = rqq = rqq − rqeq + eqq ; and aqrq + eqrq − rqq = aqq + eqq. ) xxx . now the legs a , e , contain a sesquiquadrantal angle , or of degrees : ( as being an angle in the peripherie , standing on an arch of three quadrants : ) and therefore , xxxi . in a right-lined triangle , whose angle at the top is degrees , if the double of the aggregate of the squares of the legs containing it , ( aq + eq , ) wanting the square of the base ( qq = rq , ) be multiplied into the square of the base ( rq ; ) the product ( aqrq + eqrq − rqq = aq + eq − rq into rq , ) is equal to the biquadrates of the legs ( aqq + eqq. ) so that , xxxii . from hence appears , a convenient method for adding of biquadrates . xxxiii . the subduction of biquadrates , may ( with a little alteration ) be performed almost in the same manner . but it is more conveniently done by multiplying the sum of the squares , by the difference of them . ( for aq + eq into aq − eq is equal to aqq − eqq. ) but that is a speculation not of this place . xxxiv . again , in such triangle ( whose angle at the top is of degrees ) if the double of the aggregate of the squares of the legs , be multiplied into the square of the base ; the product is equal to the aggregate of the biquadrates of all the sides . for , since aqrq + eqrq − ( qqq = ) rqq = aqq + eqq ; therefore aqq + eqq + qqq = aqrq + eqrq = aq + eq into ( rq = ) qq. xxxv . again , because ( as at § , . ) and therefore , and rqq − rqaq + aqq = pqeq = pqrq − pqq. therefore pqq + aqq = pqrq + aqrq − rqq . ( and in like manner , because ; and therefore , and rqq − eqrq + eqq = sqaq = sqrq − sqq : therefore , sqq + eqq = sqrq + eqrq − rqq . ) xxxvi . but both a , p , and also e , s , contain a semiquadrantal angle , or of degrees : ( as being an angle in the periphery standing on a quadrantal arch ; ) and one of the angles at the base , obtuse . and therefore , xxxvii . in a right-lined triangle , whose angle at the top is of degrees , or half a right-angle ( one of the other being obtuse ) if the double of the aggregate of the squares of the legs ( as pq + aq ) wanting the square of the base ( qq = rq ) be multiplied into the square of the base ( rq ) the product ( pqrq + aqrq − rqq = pq + aq − rq into rq , ) is equal to the biquadrates of the legs , ( pqq + aqq , ) in like manner , sq + eq − rq into rq , = sqrq + eqrq − rqq = sqq + eqq. so that xxxviii . here is another method of adding biquadrates . xxxix . and likewise ; in such triangle , whose angle at the top is of degrees , ( and one of the other obtuse , ) if the double of the aggregate of the squares of the legs , be multiplied into the square of the base ; the product is equal to the biquadrates of all the sides . for , because pqrq + aqrq − rqq = pqq + aqq ; therefore pqq + aqq + ( rqq = ) qqq = pqrq + aqrq = pq + aq into ( rq = ) qq. and , because sqrq + eqrq − rqq = sqq + eqq , therefore sqq + eqq + ( rqq = ) qqq = sqrq + eqrq = sq + eq into ( rq = ) qq. xl. furthermore ; if in a circle be inscribed a quadrilater , whose opposite sides are s , a , and q , q , and the diagonals p , p , ( as in the scheme ; ) then pq − ( qq = ) rq = sa . and therefore , : and : and therefore , , and . and consequently pqq − pqrq + rqq = aqsq = rqaq − aqq = rqsq − sqq. xli . and , by the same reason , if a quadrilater be inscribed whose opposite sides are e , p , and q , q ; and the diagonals s , s : then sq − ( qq = ) rq = ep : and therefore , : and : and therefore , : and . and consequently , sqq − sqrq + rqq = pqeq = pqrq − pqq = eqrq − eqq. xlii . and either way , we may conclude , sqq + pqq = sqrq + pqrq − rqq . xliii . but p , s , contain half a right-angle , or angle of degrees ; ( as being an angle in the periphery standing on a quadrantal arch ; ) and both the other angles acute . and therefore , xliv . in a right-lined triangle , whose angle at the top is degrees , or half a right angle : ( and both at the base , acute : ) if the double of the aggregate of the squares of the legs ( as sq + pq ) wanting the square of the base ( qq = rq ) be multiplied into the square of the base ( rq ) the product ( sqrq + pqrq − qq = sq + pq − rq into rq ) is equal to the biquadrates of the legs . ( sqq + pqq. ) xlv . and this is a third method of adding biquadrates . xlvi . and likewise , in such triangles , ( whose angle at the top is of degrees , and both the others acute , ) if the double of the aggregate of the squares of the legs , be multiplied into the square of the base ; the product is equal to the biquadrates of all the sides . for , since sqq + pqq = sqrq + pqrq − rqq , therefore sqq + pqq + ( rqq = ) qqq = sqrq + pqrq = sq + pq into rq . xlvii . these theorems thus demonstrated severally ; whether the angle at the top be of degrees , or of degrees ; and this whether the triangle be acute-angled , or obtuse-angled , ( to either of which we may refer the rectangled ; ) may be thus reduced to these generals . xlviii . in a right-lined triangle , whose angle at the vertex is either of degrees , or of ● degrees ; the double aggregate of the squares of the legs containing it , wanting the square of the base , multiplied into the square of the base , is equal to the biquadrates of the two legs . ( which is the addition of biquadrates . ) by § , , . xlix . and that double aggregate of the squares of the legs , multiplied into the square of the base , is equal to the biquadrates of all the three sides . by § , , . l. now , the equation , ( at § . ) aqrq + eqrq − rqq = aqq + eqq ( and the other like to it at § , . ) is a quadratick equation of a plain root : whereof the root is rq ; the co-efficient of the middle term , aq + eq ; which is therefore equal to the sum of two quantities , whose rect-angle is equal to the absolute quantity aqq + eqq. li. if we therefore order this according to the rule of other equations of the same form ; and , accordingly , from aqq + aqeq + eqq ( the square of half the co-efficient aq + eq ) we subtract ( the absolute quantity ) aqq + eqq ; the remainder is aqeq : and the square root of this ( ) added to , or subducted from , half the co-efficient aq + eq , gives the root of that equation . lii . but , of this ambiguous equation , 't is evident that we are to make choise of the greater root , in the case of § : because the angle at the vertex ( degrees ) is greater than a right-angle ; and therefore the square of the base ( qq ) is to be greater than ( aq + eq ) the squares of the two sides containing it . and therefore . that is , liii . if to the squares of the legs containing an angle of degrees , ( or three halfs of a right-angle , ) we add the rect-angle of those legs multiplied by ; the aggregate is equal to the square of the base . liv. in the same manner may be shewed , that the equations of § . pqq + aqq = pqrq + aqrq − rqq , ( or sqq + eqq = sqrq + eqrq − rqq , ) and of § . sqq + pqq = sqrq + pqrq − rqq ; are quadratic equations of a plain root rq . but , in all these ( 't is manifest ) the lesser root is to be chosen , because the angle at the vertex ( being of degrees ) is less than a right angle ; and therefore the square of the base less than the two squares of the legs . and therefore , the root , ; and ; and . that is , lv. if from the squares of the legs containing an angle of degrees ( or half a right-angle , ) we subtract the rect-angle of these legs multiplied by : the remainder is equal to the square of the base . lvi . or we may put both together , thus : if to the squares of the legs , bè added , if they contain an angle of degrees ; or subtracted thence , if they contain an angle of degrees ; a rect-angle of those legs multiplied into : the result is equal to the square of the base . by § , . lvii . we are next to note , that the subtenses e and p , as also a and s , ( whose two arches do together make up a semicircumference , ) do ( by § , chap. . ) require the same subtense of the double arch : and therefore much more , the same subtense of the quadruple . that is , is the subtense of the double arch both of e , and of p : and , of the double arch of a , and of s. lviii . the subtense therefore of the triple arch of e , ( less than a quadrant , and therefore , much more , less than a trient , ) is , ( by § , , chap. preced . ) as being the square of the subtense of the double arch , wanting the square of the subtense of the single arch eq , divided by the subtense of the single arch e. lix . but the same subtense of that triple arch , ( by § , , chap. preced . ) is . lx. therefore and , the aggregate of the subtenses of the triple and single . lxi . which may also be thus proved : because pq + eq = rq ( as being in a semicircle , ) and therefore pq = rq − eq , and pqe = rqe − ec , or pqe − rqe = rqe − ec. therefore is the subtense of the trible ; and the aggregate of the subtenses of the triple and single . lxii . and , by just the same reason , is the subtense of the triple arch of a : and the aggregate of the subtenses of the triple and single . lxiii . now the arch of p , ( a quadrant increased by a , it s greater segment ) being greater than a trient , but less than two trients ; the subtense of its triple arch is ( by § . chap. preced . ) and . ( by § . chap. preced . ) lxiv . and therefore , the subtense of the triple arch ; and , the difference of the subtenses of the single and triple ; that is , the excess of the subtense of the single above that of the triple . lxv . but the arch s ( a quadrant increased by its lesser segment e ) because it may be either lesser or greater than a trient , according as the arch e is less or greater than degrees ; the subtense of the triple arch will be either , if the arch s be less than a trient ; or , if greater , . and , accordingly , , will be either the sum or difference of the subtenses of the single and triple arch , according as s is less or greater than a trient . lxvi . moreover ; having shewed ( at § . ) that in a quadruplication of an arch less than a quadrant , cq − aq = bd , ( as wherein the subtense of the triple is greater than that of the single ; and therefore c , c , diagonals , and a , a , opposite sides : ) now , if the arch to be quadrupled be greater than a quadrant , ( but less than three quadrants ) as that of p or s ; the subtense of the single will be greater than that of the triple . for , supposing the single arch to be ½ ∓ a ( and a less than ¼ ) the triple will be ½ ∓ a ; the subtense of which will be the same with that of ½ ∓ a ( for one whole revolution is , in this case , equivalent to nothing ; ) and this ( so long as a remains less than ¼ ) will be farther ( either in excess or defect ) from a semicircumference ( and therefore require a less chord , ) than ½ ∓ a. lxvii . and therefore , in this case , p , p , ( or s , s , ) become diagonals , and c , c , opposite sides . and , consequently , pq − cq = bd ( and sq − cq = bd ; ) and . that is , lxviii . the square of the subtense of an arch greater than a quadrant ( but less than three quadrants ) wanting the square of the subtense of the triple arch ; is equal to the rect-angle of the subtenses of the double and quadruple . and therefore , divided by one of these , it gives the other . lxix . but p+c into p − c , is equal to pq − cq. and therefore , . ( and , in like manner , ) that is , lxx . as the subtense of the double arch , to the aggregate of the subtenses of the triple , and of the single ( greater than a quadrant , but less than three quadrants ; ) so is the excess of the subtense of the single arch above that of the triple , to the subtense of the quadruple . lxxi . since therefore the subtense of the triple arch p = ⅓+a ( being greater than a trient ) is ; whose square is : if this be taken from pq , and the remainder ( ) divided by ( as at § ; ) the result is . that is , dividing it first by , and the result by rq − pq , or by − pq+ rq , and then restoring a multiplication by ) lxxii . and therefore ( changing the equality in an anology ) . lxxiii . the same will happen if we take the arch s = ⅓+e . for though this may be either greater or less than a trient , according as e is greater or less than degrees ; and ( accordingly ) the triple thereof , either , or : yet this doth not alter the case at all ; for , either way , the square of it is the same . and therefore ( making the subduction and division , as § . ) . and . that is , lxxiv . as the cube of the radius , to the subtense of an arch greater than a quadrant ( but less than three quadrants , ) multiplied into the square of the subtense , wanting two squares of the radius ; so is the subtense of its difference from a semicircumference , to the subtense of the quadruple arch. lxxv . or thus ; or , . that is , lxxvi . as the radius , to the cube of the subtense of an arch ( greater than a quadrant , but less than three quadrants ) divided by the square of the radius , wanting the double of that subtense ; so is the subtense of the difference from a semicircumference , to the subtense of the quadruple arch. lxxvii . or thus , because ; and also ( in case the arch s be also greater than a trient ) . therefore , ( and ) that is , lxxviii . as the radius , to the aggregate of the subtenses of the triple arch and of the single ( this being greater than a trient , but less than two trients , ) so is the subtense of its difference from a semicircumference , to the subtense of the quadruple arch. lxxix . but if the arch s ( though greater than a quadrant ) be less than a trient ; or greater than two trients , but less than three quadrants : that is , . and therefore , that is , lxxx . as the radius , to the subtense of an arch greater than a quadrant , but less than a trient ( or greater than two trients , but less than three quadrants ) wanting the subtense of the triple arch ; so is the subtense of its difference from a semicircumference , to the subtense of the quadruple arch. lxxxi . all which are evident from the scheme ; where the chord d subtends the quadruple of the arches of a , e , p , and s : and b subtends the double of the arches e and p , and b the double of the arches of a and s. lxxxii . and , in the quadrilater whose sides b , d , be opposite and parallel ; and c , c , opposite sides ; and p , p , diagonals ; pq − cq = bd , and . and likewise , in the quadrilater wherein b d are opposite and parallel ; c c opposite sides ; and s s diagonals ; sq − cq = bd , and . lxxxiii . and , in the same figure , where not only the arch of p , but of s also , are supposed greater than a trient ; two of the chords s , s , ( as well as p , p , ) cut the chord d. lxxxiv . but in the other figure , where the arch of s is supposed ( greater than a quadrant , but ) less than a trient ; the case is somewhat different . for here b ( the subtense of the double arch of s ) falling on the other side of d ( the subtense of the quadruple , ) the chord d is not cut by any of the chords s. lxxxv . but it comes to the same pass , for these two chords s s ( whether they cut or not cut the chord d , ) being no ingredients of the inscribed quadrilater , ( but serve only to shew that b is the subtense of the double arch ; ) it is however , sq − cq = bd . lxxxvi . the same things as before , may be yet otherwise demonstrated ( and more commodiously ) in this manner ; namely , if instead of the quadrilater whose four sides and two diogonals are a , a , c , c , b , d ; we take a , a , b , b , c , d ; ( taking the subtences of the single and double , twice ; but , of the triple , and quadruple , once : ) with almost the same variety of cases , as before . for , lxxxvii . if the subtense of the single arch be a ( or e , ) less than a quadrant ; then a , b , and a , d , will be opposite sides ; and b , c , diagonals . and therefore , cb − ab = ad. and consequently into : equal to ad. that is , . and , as before . and for the same reason , . and . lxxxviii . if the subtense of the single arch be p ( or s ) greater than a quadrant , and even greater than a trient : ( but less than two trients : ) then b , c , and b , p , ( or b , s , ) will be opposite sides ; and d , p , ( or d , s , ) diagonals . and therefore bc+bp = pd , ( or bc+bs = sd . ) and consequently , into equal to pd . that is , . and as before . and , by the same reason , bc+bs = sd ( if s also be greater than a trient ) and . lxxxix . but if the single arch be that of s ( greater than a quadrant , but ) less than a trient ; ( or p greater than two trients , but less than three quadrants ; ) then b , c , and d , s , are opposite sides ; and b , s , diagonals . and therefore , bs − bc = ds. and consequently , into . that is , . and : as before . and in like manner , bp − bc = pd ( if the arch of p be greater than two trients , which is the same as if less than one ; ) and . xc . from all which ariseth this general theorem : the rect-angle of the subtenses of the single and of the quadruple arch , is equal to the subtense of the double multiplied into the excess of the subtense of the triple above that of the single , in case this be less than a quadrant ( or more than three quadrants ; ) or , into the excess of the subtense of the single above that of the triple , in case the single be more than a quadrant but less than a trient ( or more than two trients , but less than three quadrants ; ) or , lastly , into the sum of the subtenses of the triple and single , in case this be more than a trient , but less than two trients . that is , ad : = b into c − a ; if the arch of a be less than a quadrant , or greater than three quadrants . a − c ; if it be greater than a quadrant , but less than a trient ; or greater than two trients , but less than three quadrants . a+c ; if it be greater than a trient , but less than two trients . xci . and , universally , . that is , if the difference of rqa and a c ( whereof that is the greater if the single arch be less than a quadrant , or greater than three quadrants ; but this if contrarywise ; ) divided by rc , be multiplied into product is equal to d. xcii . and therefore , . that is , xciii . as the cube of the radius , to the solid of the subtense of the single arch into the difference of the square of it self , and of the double square of the radius : so is the subtense of the difference of that single arch from a semicircumference , to the subtense of the quadruple arch. xciv . now what was before said : ( at § , chap. . ) that the subtense of an arch , with that of its remainder to a semicircumference ( or of its excess above a semicircumference ) will require the same subtense of the double arch ; is the same as to say , that , from any point of circumference , two subtenses drawn to the two ends of any inscribed diameter , ( as a , e , ) will require the same subtense ( b ) of the double arch. xcv . and what is said : ( at § , , chap. preced . ) that the subtense of an arch less than a trient , and of its residue to a trient ( as a , e , ) and of a trient increased by either of those , ( as z , ) will have the same subtense of the triple arch ; is the same in effect with this , that , from any point of the circumference , three subtenses drawn to the three angles of any inscribed ( regular ) trigone ( as a , e , z , ) will have the same subtense ( c ) of the triple arch. xcvi . and what is said here : ( at § , . ) that the subtense of an arch less than a quadrant , and of its residue to a quadrant , ( as a , e , ) and of a quadrant increased by either of these , ( as p , s , ) will have the same subtense of the quadruple arch : is the same with this , that , from any point of the circumference , four subtenses drawn to the four angles of any inscribed ( regular ) tetragone , ( as a , e , p , s , ) will have the same subtense ( d ) of the quadruple arch. xcvii . but the same holds , respectively , in other multiplications of arches ; as five subtenses from the same point , to the five angles of an inscribed ( regular ) pentagon ; and six , to the six angles of an hexagon ; &c. will have the same subtense of the arches quintuple , sextuple , &c. for they all depend on the same common principle , that a semicircumference doubled , a trient tripled , a quadrant quadrupled , a quintant quintupled , a sextant sextupled , &c. make one entire revolution ; which as to this business , is the same as nothing . and therefore , universally , xcviii . from any point of the circumference , two , three , four , five , six , or more subtenses , drawn to so many ( ends of the diameter , or ) angles of a ( regular ) polygone of so many angles , however inscribed , will have the same subtense of the arch multiplied by the number of such ends or angles . and therefore , cxix . an equation belonging to such multiplication or section of an arch or angle , must have so many roots ( affirmative or negative ) as is the exponent of such multiplication or section . as two for the bisection , three for the trisection , four for the quadrisection , five for the quinquisection : and so forth . c. and consequently , such equations may accordingly be resolved , by such section of an angle . as was before noted ( at § , chap. preced . ) of the trisection of an angle . chap. iv. of the quintuplation and quinquisection of an arch or angle . i. if in a circle be inscribed a quadrilater , whose sides a , f , ( the subtenses of the single arch and the quintuple , ) be parallel ; b , b , ( subtenses of the double ) opposite : the diagonals will be c , c , ( the subtenses of the triple , ) as is evident from the figure . but it is evident also , that , in this case , the single arch must be less than a quintant ( or fifth part ) of the whole circumference . ii. and therefore ( the rect-angle of the diagonals being equal to the two rect-angles of the opposite sides , ) cq − bq = af. ( and by the same reasons cq − bq = ef. ) that is , iii. the square of the subtense of the triple arch , wanting the square of the subtense of the double arch , is equal to the rect-angle of the subtenses of the single and of the quintuple ; the single arch being less than a fifth part of the whole circumference . iv. and therefore , if it be divided by one of them ; it gives the other . that is , ; and . ( and , in like manner ; and . v. but c+b into c − b is equal to cq − bq. and therefore , that is , vi. as the subtense of the single arch ( less than a fifth part of the whole circumference ) to the aggregate of the subtenses of the triple and double ; so is the excess of the subtense of the triple above that of the double , to that of the quintuple . vii . and because ( by § . chap. . ) ; and therefore . and ( by § . chap. . ) therefore , and . that is , viii . if , to the quintuple of the subtense of an arch less than a quintant , wanting the quintuple of the cube of the same subtense divided by the square of the radius , be added the quadricube ( or fifth power ) of the same subtense divided by the biquadrate of the radius ; the result is the subtense of the quintuple arch. ix . the same may be otherwise thus evinced ; taking a quadrilater whose opposite sides are a , a , and f , c ; and the diagonals d , d. and therefore , dq − aq = cf. ( and , in like manner , dq − eq = cf. ) that is , x. the square of the subtense of the quadruple arch , wanting the square of the subtense of the single arch ( less than a quintant , ) is equal to the rect-angle of the subtenses of the triple and quintuple . and being divided by either of these , it gives the other of them . xi . and ( because d+a into d − a is equal to dq − aq , ) ( and ) that is , xii . as the subtense of the triple arch , to the sum of the subtenses of the quadruple and of the single ( this being less than a quintant , ) so is the difference of these , to the subtense of the quintuple . xiii . but , ( by § , chap. preced . ) . and therefore , which abated by aq , leaves . and this divided by ; gives . as before , xiv . the same , is a third way , thus evinced ; inscribing a quadrilater , whose opposite sides are a , c , and a , f ; and the diagonals b , d. and therefore ac+af = bd ; and bd − ac = af. ( and in like manner , bd − ce = ef. ) that is , . the rect-angle of the subtenses of the double and quadruple arch , wanting that of the subtenses of the single ( being less than a quintant ) and of the triple ; is equal to the rect-angle of the subtenses of the single and quintuple . and , being divided by either of these , gives the other of them . xvi . and therefore , ( and ) that is , xvii . as the subtense of a single arch ( less than a quintant , ) to that of the double ; so is that of the quadruple , to the aggregate of the subtenses of the triple and quintuple . xviii . but . and therefore , into . likewise , ; and therefore , . and therefore , . and . as before , xix . or , we may thus compute it : because ( as before ; ) therefore . and therefore , ( subtracting , ) . as before , xx. the same way , a fourth way , be thus evinced ; inscribing a quadrilater whose opposite sides are b , f , and b , a ; and the diagonals c , d. and therefore ba+bf = cd , and cd − ba = bf . ( and , in like manner , cd − be = bf . ) and . that is , xxi . the rect-angle of the subtenses of the treble and quadruple arches , wanting that of the subtenses of the double and single ( this being less than a quintant , ) is equal to that of the subtenses of the double and quintuple . and being divided by the one , it gives the other . xxii . and therefore , ( and ) that is , xxiii . as the subtense of the double arch , to that of the triple , so is that of the quadruple , to the aggregate of the subtenses of the single ( being less than a quintant ) and of the quintuple . xxiv . but ; and . therefore , . likewise , : and therefore , . and consequently , . and ( dividing by : ) . as before , xxv . or , we may thus compute it : because : therefore , ( dividing by ; ) . and . as before , xxvi . or thus ; because ba+bf = cd ; and therefore , : and also , : and : therefore , ; and this multiplied by , makes : and . as before . xxvii . but if the arch to be quintupled be just the fifth part of the whole circumference , ( and consequently the quintuple arch one intire revolution ; ) the subtense of that quintuple will vanish , or become equal to nothing . xxviii . and therefore , in this case , . and so rqqa − rqac + acq = ; and rqq − rqaq + aqq = ; or , rqq = rqaq − aqq ; or , . which is a quadratick equation , whose root is , and the co-efficient of the middle term r , and the absolute quantity rq . xxix . therefore , ( by resolving the equation ) : . xxx . of which ambiguous equation , the lesser root is to be chosen , that is , ; and therefore , , the subtense of a quintant . that is , xxxi . the radius multiplied into , is equal to the subtense of a quintant , or of degrees . xxxii . the same may be otherwise thus inferred : if , in a circle , be inscribed a regular pentagon ; whose side a shall be reputed as the subtense of a single arch : it 's evident that the subtense of the duple , and of the triple , will be the same . ( for the same chord which on the one side , subtends the duple , doth on the other side , subtend the triple . ) and therefore , . and . and . and therefore , . and therefore , ( as before ) ; and so onward as above . xxxiii . now because ( as is already shew'd ) : this therefore will be the subtense of a sesquiquintant ( or one quintant and an half , or three tenth parts , ) that is , of degrees : as being that arch which with the quintant doth complete the semicircumference . that is , xxxiv . the difference of the squares of the subtenses of the trient , and of the quintant , divided by the radius ; is equal to the subtense of the sesquiquintant , or degrees . ( for rq is the square of the subtense of the trient ; and aq , of the quintant ; and the difference of these rq − aq divided by the radius , is the subtense . ) or thus , xxxv . if from the triple of the radius r , be subducted the square of the subtense of a quintant divided by the radius ; the remainder is the subtense of a sesquiquintant , or degrees . . xxxvi . but the square of the subtense of a quintant so divided , is ( as before ) ; which therefore subtracted from r , leaves r the subtense of degrees . xxxvii . now , if the radius be cut in extream and mean proportion , the greater segment thereof is ( by . el. . ) to which if r be added , we have ( the subtense of degrees as before ; ) and therefore , xxxviii . if the radius being cut in extreme and mean proportion , the greater segment thereof , be added to the whole radius ; the sum is equal to the subtense of degrees . xxxix . yet again ; if , of a pentagone so inscribed , the side a be considered as the subtense of a single arch ; the same will also be the subtense of the quadruple . ( for the same chord subtends on the one side to one quintant , and on the other side to four such . ) xl. and therefore , in this case , . and rca = rqa − ac into . that is , rc = rq − aq , into . and ( the square hereof ) rcc = rcc − rqqaq + rqaqq − acc ; or rcc − rqqaq + rqaqq − acc = . xli . now this last equation , if divided by rq − aq = , will afford this equation ; rqq − rqaq + aqq = . xlii . and therefore rq = aq ; is one of the plain roots of that equation . and therefore , , which is the subtense of a trient . ( which is true , because also the quadruple of a trient , hath the same subtense with the single trient . ) xliii . but there are also two other plain roots included in the resulting equation rqq − rqaq + aqq = ; or rqq = rqaq − aqq. for , xliv . the lesser of them is ; the square of the subtense of a quintant . as before , xlv . the greater of them is ; the square of the subtense of a double quintant , or of a triple , ( as we shall see afterward ) that is , of , or of degrees . for the quadruple of these also , will have the same subtense with that of the single . for ⅖ × = ⅗ = + ⅗ . and ½ × = / = + ⅖ . where the excess above the entire revolutions ( which are here equivalent to nothing ) is ⅗ , or / , both which have the same subtense ( as at § . ) over that of the single arch ; that is , ⅖ , or ⅗ . xlvi . since therefore ( as is shewed ) , is the square of the subtense of a quintant ; the square of the subtense of its residue to the semicircumference must be . which is therefore the square of the subtense of ( = − . ) and the quadratick root thereof as was also before shewed . xlvii . and for as much as is the subtense of degres , that is of degrees above a quadrant ; let this subtense be s , and the subtense of degrees , ( which is the excess above a quadrant ) e. therefore , ( by § , chap. preced . ) . and therefore , . and ( by resolving that equation ) . the lesser of which roots is here to be chosen , because e is the lesser of the two s , e. xlviii . but ( as is shewed ) , and therefore , and , and therefore , , ( half the square of the subtense of a quintant , ) whose square root is . and therefore , ( the less root being here of use ) , the subtense of degrees . xlix . the same arch of degrees , is also the complement of a quintant to a quadrant . and therefore if the subtense of a quintant ( or degrees , being less than a quadrant , ) be called ; and the subtense of its complement to a quadrant ( or of degrees ) e : then ( by § . chap. preced . ) . and therefore , . and ( resolving the equation , ) . l. but , and therefore , ( half the square of the subtense of the sesquiquintant , or degrees ; ) and the square root thereof . and . and therefore , , the subtense of degrees , as before . that is , li. the subtense of the sesquiquintant , or of degrees , ( that is , the greater segment of the radius cut in extream and mean proportion , increased by the entire radius , ) multiplied into ( for , ) wanting the subtense of the quintant multiplied also into ( for into ) is equal to the double of the subtense of degrees . ( and half thereof , equal to that subtense . ) or , lii . the difference of the subtenses of the sesquiquintant and of the quintant , ( or of degrees , and of degrees ) divided by , is equal to the subtense of degrees . that is , that difference is double in power to this subtense , ( duplum potest , ) or , the square of that , is double to the square of this . liii . but , the subtenses of the quintant and sesquiquintant , ( that is , of , and of degrees , which together complete the semicircumference ) multiplied the one into the other , ( or the rectangle of them , ) divided by the radius ; is equal to the subtense of the double arch of either . for , by § , chap. r ) ae ( b. that is , of , or of degrees . that is , of the double , or triple quintant , ( these two having the same subtense . ) that is , . that is , liv. the radius multiplied into , is equal to the subtense of the biquintant , and of the triquintant ; that is , to the subtense of , and of degrees . lv. and the square of this subtracted from the square of the diameter , leaves the square of the subtense of degrees ; ( as being what degrees wants of a semicircumference , and what exceeds it . for − = = − . ) and the square root thereof is that subtense , . that is , lvi . the greater segment of the radius cut in extream and mean proportion , is the subtense of degrees . that is , of half a quintant , or the side of the inscribed decagon . lvii . but we had before shewn ( at § . ) that this added to the radius ( which is the subtense of degrees , or side of the inscribed hexagon , ) is equal to the subtense of degrees , or sesquiquintant : therefore , lviii . the aggregate of the subtenses of degrees , and of degrees , ( that is , the sides of the inscribed decagon and hexagon , ) is equal to that of degrees ; ( that is , of the sesquiquintant , or three tenths . ) lix . if therefore to the subtense of degrees , , be added that of degrees , it makes , or . that is , lx. the subtense of the semiquintant ( or degrees ) and of the sesquiquintant ( or degrees ) added together , are in power quintuple to the radius , ( that is , the square of that aggregate is equal to five squares of the radius . ) for , . lxi . and their difference is equal to the radius . for , . lxii . and the rectangle of them , is equal to the square of the radius . for , . lxiii . and the sum of their squares is triple to the square of the radius . ( or , equal to the square of the side of the inscribed trigone . ) that is , . lxiv . and the difference of their squares , is in power quintuple to the square of the radius , ( or , equal to five squared squares of the radius . for , . lxv . again , the sum of the squares of the subtenses of the quintant and biquintant ( or of degrees , and of degrees , ) is quintuple to the square of the radius . for , . lxvi . and the difference thereof , is in power quintuple to the biquadrate of the radius . for , . lxvii . and the rectangle of them , is quintuple of the biquadrate of the radius . for , . lxviii . we have therefore ( as hath been severally demonstrated ) these subtenses , answering to their several arches , or portions of the whole circumferences , viz. lxix . by the like method we may find the subtenses of , , , , of the whole circumference : ( as likewise of , , , , ) for the residue of ⅕ to a quadrant ( or excess of above a quadrant ) is ; and therefore the subtense thereof is , ( as is shewed before at § . ) or ( which is equivalent ) . or , . and the residue to this to the semicircumference is ; whose subtense therefore is . or , . again , the residue of to a quadrant ( or the excess of ⅖ above a quadrant , ) is ; whose subtense therefore is . or , . and the residue of this to a semicircumference is ; whose subtense therefore is . or , . for , in such cases , the same value may be expressed in very different ways . ( all which may be easiy proved by computation , in like manner as those before going ; and like corollaries easily deduced from them . ) and the remainders of these to the whole circumferences ( , , , , ) have the same subtenses with them . lxx . we have therefore , now , these subtenses , for the arches and portions following . degrees of arches . portions of the whole . subtenses . lxxi . now if all these arches be compared with the trient ; and the sums and differences of them so compared be observed : we shall thence have a great many more subtenses , by what is before delivered , at § , , chap. . as for example , lxxii . suppose the subtense of degrees to be , and the subtense of ( = − ) to be e. then , ( by § , chap. . ) aq+ae+eq = rq ; and therefore , ae+eq = rq − aq. and ( by resolving the equation ) . lxxiii . but , and . therefore , the subtense of degrees , and therefore also of degrees . lxxiv . in like manner : suppose ( as before ) a the subtense of degrees ; and z the subtense of ( = + . ) then ( by § , chap. . ) zq − az+aq = rq ; and zq − az = rq − aq. and ( resolving the equation ) . the subtense of degrees , and therefore also of degrees . that is , lxxv . if the subtense of a trient , be increased by the greater segment of such subtense cut in extream and mean proportion ; and thereunto be added , or taken from it , the subtense of a quintant : the result is , in case of addition , the double subtense of and of degrees ; in case of subtraction , the double subtense of and of degrees . or thus , lxxvi . if to the greater segment of the subtense of a trient ( cut in extream and mean proportion , ) be added the sum , or difference of the subtenses of the trient and of the quintant : the result is , the double subtense , in the first case , of and of degrees ; in the latter case , of and of degrees . for , , is the half of the subtense of a trient ( ) increased by its greater segment is so cut . and , is half the subtense of a quintant . lxxvii . and the squares of these subtenses , subtracted from rq , give us the squares of the subtenses of their differences from a semicircumference . that is , of and of degrees ( whereby and come short of a semicircumference ; and whereby and exceed it . ) for = − = − ; and = − = − . lxxviii . again , suppose the subtense of a biquintant , or degrees , ( which is also the subtense of a triquintant , or degrees ) being greater than a trient , to be and the subtense of = − = − , to be a : and the subtense of = − = − , to be e. therefore , ( by § , chap. . ) zq − za+aq = zq − ze+eq = rq ; and ( zq being greater than rq , ) zq − rq = za − aq = ze − eq. and resolving the equation ) , the subtense of degrees if connected by + ; or of degrees , if by − . ( that is , , in the first case ; and , in the latter . ) that is , lxxix . if to the subtense of a biquintant be added , or taken from it , the greater segment of the subtense of a trient ( cut in extream and mean proportion ; ) it gives , in the first case , the subtense of , and of degrees ; in the latter , that of , and of degrees . lxxx . and by these again ( by subducting the squares of their subtenses from rq ) we have ( the squares of ) the subtenses of their difference from a semicircumference , whether in excess or defect . as of = − = − , and of = − = − . lxxxi . and if in like manner we compare also the rest of those at § , with the subtense of a trient ; we shall thence have the subtenses of these arches , degrees of arches . − = − = − = − = − = − = ± = + = + = + = of the residue to the semicircumference . of the residues to the whole circumference . . . . . . . . . . . lxxxii . so that ( by these here , and those at § ● . ) we have subtenses for every sixth degree of the whole circumference : and consequently the right sines ( as being the half of those subtenses ) for every third degree of the semicircumference . and this by the solution of quadratick equations only , without the help of cubicks or superior equations . and between these may in like manner , be interposed as many more as we please , by the continual bisection of arches . lxxxiii . we return now to pursue the former inquisition which hath been intermitted . the equation formerly proposed at § , for the quinquisection of an arch , ; beside the two primary roots a and e , contains yet three other roots , ( by § , , chap. preced . ) answering to three other chords drawn ( from the same point with a and e ) to three other angles of the inscribed pentagon : which we shall call l , m , n : whereof l subtends a quintant increased by the arch of a , ( or three quintants increased by the arch of e ; ) n subtends a quintant increased by the arch of e , ( or three quintants with the arch of a ; ) m subtends two quintants increased by either of those arches a or e. for every of these arches , if quintupled , will have the same subtense ( of the quintuple ) f , as well as the quintuple of the arches a or e. lxxxiv . of these three , ( in case a and e be supposed affirmative roots , ) l and n will be negative ; but m , affirmative . but contrarywise , in case a and e be supposed negative : for then l , n , will be affirmative , and m negative . for , lxxxv . when the single arch is less than a quintant ( or greater than four quintants ; ) or when it is greater than two , but less than three ; the subtense of the triple arch will be greater than that of the double . ( as is easie to apprehend , or may be proved if need be , in like manner as we have formerly done in like cases ; as is after shewed at § , &c. ) lxxxvi . and therefore , if a ( or e , ) be the subtense of the single arch ; then cq − bq = af , ( or cq − bq = ef , ) will be an affirmative quantity , ( as at § . ) lxxxvii . and , in like manner , if m be the subtense of the single , ( greater than two quintants , but less than three , ) cq − bq = mf , will be also affirmative . lxxxviii . but when the single arch is greater than a quintant , but less than two , or greater than three , but less than four : the subtense of the double will be greater than that of the triple . lxxxix . and therefore , if the subtense of the single be n , then cq − bq = nf , will be negative . xc . and in like manner , if it be l ; then cq − bq = lf will be also negative . xci . that therefore , l , n , may have affirmative values ( as well as f , ) we must put the equations thus , bq − cq = nf ; and bq − cq = lf . and , if so ; then the value of the other three roots will be negative . xcii . but if the single arch be just a quintant ( or two , three or more quintants ) the subtense of the double will be equal to that of the triple . and therefore , ( putting v or x , for the subtense of the single , ) cq ∼ bq = vf = o ; or cq ∼ bq = xf = o. the subtense of the quintuple ( in this case ) vanishing to nothing . xciii . now that , for the arches a , e , m , the subtense of the triple is greater ( or at least not less ) than that of the duple ; but contrarywise for the arches l , n ; is easie to apprehend upon a little consideration . for if the arch a , or e , be to degrees ; b is ; c , : if that be ; b is ; c , : if a be ; b is ; c , : if a be ; b is ; c , . ( and hitherto is no doubt , because we are not yet past a semicircumference ; and , till then , as the arches increase , the chords increase also ; though not when we are past degrees . ) if a be ● ; b is = − ; c , ● = + . so that yet the chord of c , though past a semicircumference , is greater than that of b , because nearer to a semicircumference , or degrees ; ( for this doth less exceed it , than that wants of it . ) and so 'till we come to degrees , ( or / ● of the whole ) for then b is = − , and c , = + ; where the distance is equal , and accordingly the chord of the triple equal to that of the double . but when we be past a quintant , that of the triple becomes less ; for if the single arch n = ● / + e be ; b is = − ; c , = + ; and this doth therefore more exceed , than the other comes short of it ; and hath therefore the shorter chord . so likewise , if n be ; b is = − ; c , = + : if n be , b is ; c , = + : if n be ; b is = + = − ; c , = + = − : where the triple is farther from a semicircumference , as more exceeding it ; and nearer to a whole revolution ( which is equivalent to nothing ) as approaching nearer to it ; and therefore the chord of the triple , less than that of the double : so , if n , or l be ; b is = + = − ; c , = − = + . if l = ⅕ + a be ; b is = + = − ; c , . and therefore that b , the greater chord : and so it will be 'till we come to degrees ( or ⅖ ) when again they will become equal ; for then b will be = + = − ; and c = = + = − ; which doth as much surpass a whole revolution as the other wants of it ; and doth as much want of a third semicircumference as the other exceeds the first ; and therefore their chords become equal . but after this , the chord of the triple doth again become the greater : for if m the single arch be ; b will be = + = − ; c , = + = − : if m be ; b is = − ; c , = + : if m be ; b is ; c , is = + : if m be ; b is = + ; c , = + ; where the arch c ( as farther remote from an intire revolution ) requires the greater chord . and so onward 'till we come to , ( or ⅗ ) where the chords of b and c do again become equal , for b will be = + ; c , = − ; where the arch b doth as much exceed one revolution , as c wants of two ; and therefore require equal chords . after this , the arches l , n , from to , have the same chords with those of l , n , from backward to , ( as being their complements to a whole revolution , ) and the same chords of their doubles and triples , with the doubles and triples of those ; and therefore ( as there ) the chords of the duple greater than those of the triple . and from thence to ( which is an entire revolution ) the chords are the same with those of a and e , ( as being the remainders of these to an intire revolution ) and therefore here also , the chord of the triple is greater than that of the duple . xciv . all which depends on this general consideration ; ( which equally serves for all such comparings of arches and their subtenses ; and is therefore to be taken notice of , once for all . ) that is , xcv . arches equally distant from the beginning or end of ( one or more ) entire revolutions , have equal subtenses , ( for the same chord doth indifferently subtend both or all of them ; ) but those which are less distant from such beginning or end , have the lesser subtenses ; ( as nearest approaching to nothing . ) xcvi . again , arches equally distant ( whether in excess or defect ) from , , , ( or any odd number of ) semicircumferences , have equal subtenses , ( for here also the same chord subtends both or all ; ) but those which are less distant from such semicircumferences , have the greater subtense , ( as nearest approaching to that of a semicircumference , or degrees , the greatest chord of all . ) xcvii . 't is manifest therefore , that , if the arch e or a be not greater than degrees , and consequently the triple arch do not exceed one semicircumference , that of the treble ( as nearest approaching to it ) will be greater than that of the double . and though a be greater than degrees ; that of the triple will yet be the greater , 'till this do as much exceed a semicircumference as the double comes short of it : that is , 'till ½ a = deg. or ½ of the whole circumference ; that is , 'till a = ⅕ , or degrees . and what is said of e and a less than ● / , doth equally hold of ⅘ + a = − e , and ⅘ + e = − a , which have the same chords with e and a ; and their double and treble , the same with the double and treble of e and a. xcviii . but if n , or l , the single arch exceed ⅕ , suppose ⅕ + e or ⅕ + a ; the subtense of the double will be the longer . for the subtense of ● / being the same with that of ⅗ = − ⅖ ; that of n = ⅖ + e will be longer than it , as nearer approaching to ½ ; ( 'till n or l = ½ , that is , n or l = ¼ or degrees ; ) but that of n = ● / + e less than it , as nearer approaching to intire revolution . and even when l exceeds ½ , yet l will have the less chord , as nearer approaching to intire revolution ; 'till it become equal to it ; that is , l = , and l = ⅓ , or deg. and even after this , 'till l do as much exceed , as l comes short of it ; that is , 'till ½ l = ; or l = ⅖ or degrees . but then ( as before at a or n = ⅕ ) the chords will be equal ; for then the double is ⅘ = − ● / ; the treble / = + ⅕ . and what is said of n = ⅕ + e , or l = ● / + a ; holds equally true of n = ● / + a , or l = ● / + e ; ( that is of − n , or − l ; ) as having the same chords with those . xcix . but when m the single arch exceeds ● / , suppose ⅖ + e ; the chord of the treble will again be longer than that of the double . for the treble of ⅖ as much exceeding , as the double of it comes short of , revolution ; the treble of ⅖ + e will more exceed it , ( approaching nearer to the third semicircumference ) and the double want less of it , ( approaching nearer to revolution , ) 'till m = ● / ; that is , m = ½ or degrees . and what is said of m = ⅖ + e less than ½ ; holds also of m = ⅖ + a = ● / − e : which doth as much exceed a semicircumference , as the other comes short of it . c. 't is manifest therefore , that for the arches a , e , less than ⅕ , or more than ⅘ ( but less than revolution ; ) and again for the arch m , more than ⅖ but less than ● / ; the chord of the triple is greater than that of the double ; by § , . but , for the arches l or m , more than ⅕ but less than ⅖ ; or more than ⅕ , but less than ⅘ ; the chord of the double is greater than that of the treble ; by § . but in case the single arch be ⅕ , ⅖ , ● / , ⅘ ; ( or any number of quintants , ) the chords of the double and treble are equal . and the same method may be pursued in other like comparisons of arches and chords . ci. now , ( to return where we left off at § . ) what hath been particularly delivered , may be collected into this general . namely , ( putting o for the subtense of the single arch ) c q ∼ b q = o f ( by § , , . ) and . and . that is , cii . the difference of the squares of the subtenses of the triple and double arches , is equal to the rect-angle of the subtenses of the single and quintuple . and that difference applied to either of these , gives the other . ( which is a general to that of § . ) namely , if o be interpreted of a , e , m ; then c q − b q = o f , and . if , of l , n ; then b q − c q = o f , and . if , of v , x ; then b q ∼ c q = v f = . and . or , b q ∼ c q = x f = , and . ciii . again , because c q ∼ b q = c + b into c ∼ b ; therefore , o. b + c : : b ∼ c. ( interpreting c ∼ b , of c − b , for a , e , m ; but of b − c , for l , n. ) that is , civ . as the subtense of the single arch , to the aggregate of the subtenses of the double and triple ; so is the difference of these , to that of the quintuple . ( which is a general to that of § . ) cv . but ( by § , chap. . ) ; and therefore , : and ( by § , chap. . ) ; and therefore : from hence therefore , we may have the value of c q ∼ b q = o f , and of , sutable to each case . namely , cvi. if the arch o be less than ⅕ , or more than ⅘ ; ( that is , from , to ° and from , to . ) or more than ⅖ but less than ⅗ , ( that is , from , to ° ) there is : and . and o to be understood of a , e , and m. cvii . but if the arch o be more than ⅕ but less than ⅖ ; or more than ⅗ but less than ⅘ ; ( that is , from degrees to , and from to : ) then is , : and . and o to be interpreted of l , n. cviii . that is , ( to reduce all to a brief synopsis ) and , in the common term ( or point of connexion ) of these intervals , it is indifferent to whether of the two to refer them : as at degrees , to e or a ; at ° to a or n ; and so of the rest . cix . hence follows this five-fold equation ; containing five roots . r q q e − r q e c + e q c = r q q a − r q a c + a q c = ( r q q f = ) − r q q n + r q n c − n q c = − r q q l + r q l c − l q c = + r q q m − r q m c + m q c. cx . now because r q q a − r q a c + a q c = r q q e − r q e c + e q c ; therefore , ( by transposition ) r q q a − r q q e = r q a c − r q e c − a q c + e q c : and ( dividing all by a − e , ) . cxi . but ( by § , , , chap. . ) , and therefore , : therefore , : that is , . cxii . and again , because ( as will appear by division ) : therefore , a q q + a c e + a q e q + a e c + e q q = r q q. cxiii . but the angle contained by a , e , is of degrees . ( as being an angle in the circumference insisting on an arch of degrees , or ⅘ of the whole . ) therefore , cxiv . the difference of the quadricubes of the legs containing an angle of degrees , or divided by the difference of those legs , is equal to ten biquadrates of the radius of the circumscribed circles . ( by § . ) that is , ( by § . ) cxv . the biquadrates of the legs containing an angle of degrees , together with the three means proportional between these biquadrates , is equal to ten biquadrates of the radius of the circumscribed circle . cxvi . but now the base of this triangle , being the side of an inscribed equilater pentagon , or subtense of degrees ; is , ( by § . ) ; and therefore the square of this ; and , its biquadrate , : which is , to r q q , as to ; or as . therefore , cxvii . the difference of the quadricubes of the legs containing an angle of degrees , divided by the difference of those legs , or the biquadrates of the legs containing such angle , together with the three means proportional between these biquadrates ; is , to the biquadrate of the base subtending that angle ; as . cxviii . again , because ( by § . ) r q q m − r q m c + m q c = ( r q q f = ) r q q a − r q a c + a q c ( m being greater than a ; ) therefore ( as at § , , , ) . and : cxix . and ( by the same reason ) . and . cxx . and also , because ( by § . ) − rqql + rqlc − lqq = ( rqqf = ) − rqqn + rqnc − nqc ; and ( changing all the signs ) rqql − rqlc + lqc = rqqn − rqnc + nqc ( l being greater than n : ) therefore , ( as at § . ) . and . cxxi . but the angles contained by m , a ; and m , e ; and l , n ; are of degrees ; ( as being angles in the circumference insisting on an arch of degrees , or ⅖ of the whole : ) and , as to m , e ; one of the angles at the base , obtuse ; but , as to m , a ; all acute : ( this being an angle in a greater segment ; that , in a less , than a semicircle ; ) and likewise , as to l , n , all acute . therefore , ( as at § , . ) cxxii . the difference of the quadricubes of the legs containing an angle of degrees , divided by the difference of those legs ; is equal to ten biquadrates of the radius of the circumscribed circle . and , cxxiii . the biquadrates of the legs containing an angle of degrees , together with the three means proportional between those biquadrates , is equal to ten biquadrates of the radius of the circumscribed circle . cxxiv . but here the base of this triangle ( subtended to that angle of degrees , ) is the subtense of a biquintant , or triquintant ; that is , of ⅖ = degrees ; or of ⅗ = degrees ; which is ( by § . ) . and the square of this and its biquadrate . which is , to rqq , as to ; or , as to . therefore , cxxv . the difference of the quadricubes of the legs contanining an angle of degrees divided by the difference of those legs ; or , the biquadrates of the legs containing such angle , together with the three means proportional between those biquadrates ; is , to the biquadrate of the base subtending that angle ; as to . cxxvi . again , because ( by § , ) rqqa − rqac + aqc = ( rqqf = ) − rqql + rqlc − lqc ( l being greater than a : ) therefore , ( by transposition ) rqql + rqqa = rqlc + rqac − lqc − aqc. and ( dividing all by l + a , ) . cxxvii . but ( by § , , chap. . ) , and therefore , therefore , . that is , . cxxviii . and again , because ( as will appear by division ) : therefore , lqq − lca + lqaq − lac + aqq = rqq . cxxix . but the angle contained by l , a , is of degrees ( as being an angle at the circumfererence insisting on an arch of degrees , or ⅗ of the whole , ) and one of the other , obtuse . cxxx . and the same is to be said ( for the same reasons ) of n , e , as of l , a. cxxxi . and also , because in like manner ( by § , ) rqqm − rqmc + mqc = ( rqqf = ) − rqqn + rqnc − nqc ; ( m being greater than n : ) therefore , ( by the same methods , ) . and the angle contained by m , n , is of degrees ; and one of the other , obtuse . cxxxii . and just the same ( for the same reasons ) of m , l ; save that here the angles be all acute . cxxxiii . and these are all the cases that can happen , the angle at the vertex being degrees ; for that of the legs v , x ; is to be reduced to that of a , l ; and that of x , x ; to that of l , m ; ( and the like is to be understood of other like cases , where a is extended to the whole quintant , and e vanisheth into nothing . ) therefore , cxxxiv . the sum of the quadricubes of the legs containing an angle of degrees , divided by the sum of those legs , is equal to ten biquadrates of the radius of the circumscribed circle . ( by § , , , . ) and , cxxxv . the biquadrates of the legs containing an angle of degrees , with a mean proportional between those biquadrates , wanting the first and third of three means proportional between them ; are equal to ten biquadrates of the radius of the circumscribed circle . cxxxvi . but the base subtended to this angle of degrees , being the side of an inscribed equilater pentagon ; ( as at § , ) the biquadrate hereof is to rqq as to . and therefore , cxxxvii . the sum of the quadricubes of the legs containing an angle of degrees , divided by the sum of those legs : or , the biquadrates of the legs containing such angle , with a mean proportional between those biquadrates , wanting the first and third of three mean proportionals between them ; is , to the biquadrate of the base subtending that angle ; as , to . cxxxviii . again , because ( by § . ) rqqa − rqac + aqc = ( rqqf = ) − rqqn + rqnc − nqc ; ( n being greater than a ; ) therefore , ( as at § , &c. ) . cxxxix . and , in like manner , because rqqe − rqec + eqc = ( rqqf = ) − rqql + rqlc − lqc , ( l being greater than e : ) therefore , . cxl . but the angles contained by n , a ; or by l e ; are angles of degrees , ( as being angles at the circumference , insisting on an arch of degrees , or ⅗ of the whole . ) therefore , cxli . the sum of the quadricubes of the legs containing an angle of degrees , divided by the sum of those legs , is equal to ten biquadrates of the radius of a circumscribed circle . and , cxlii . the biquadrates of the legs containing an angle of degrees , with a mean proportional between those biquadrates , wanting the first and third of three means proportional between them ; are equal to ten biquadrates of the radius of a circumscribed circle . cxliii . but the base subtended to this angle of degrees , is the subtense of a biquintant , or ( which is the same ) of a triquintant ; that is , of ⅖ or ⅗ of the whole circumference : and therefore , ( as at § ) is to rqq , as to . therefore , cxliv . the sum of the quadricubes of legs containing an angle of degrees , divided by the sum of those legs : or , the biquadrates of the legs containing such angle , with a mean proportional between those biquadrates , wanting the first and third of three means proportional between them ; is , to the biquadrate of the base subtending that angle ; as to . cxlv . now these several theorems thus delivered in particular , may be collected into these generals following . namely , cxlvi . the difference of the quadricubes of legs containing an angle of or of degrees , divided by the differences of those legs : or , the sum of the quadricubes of legs containing an angle of degrees , or of degrees , divided by the sum of those legs : or , ( which is equivalent to those ) the biquadrates of the legs ( in the former case ) with the three means proportional between them ; or , ( in the latter case ) the biquadrates of the legs , with a mean proportional between them , wanting the first and third of three means proportionals : are equal to ten biquadrates of the radius of a circumscribed circle . and , these , to the biquadrates of their respective bases subtending such angle of degrees , or of degrees ; are as to ; but , of the bases subtending such angle of degrees , or of degrees ; as to : or , as to , and to . that is , in the duplicate proportion to ; and of to . cxlvii . and those sides , contain these following angles . sides . deg. a , e. m , a. m , e. l , n. l , a. n , e. m , l. m , n. n , a. l , e. . whereof the four first couple , are sides of like signs ; the six latter , of unlike . cxlviii . the same equations may be thus also considered . because ( by § ) rqqa − rqqe = rqac − rqec − aqc + eqc : therefore , ( dividing all by a − e , and again by rq , ) and ( by transposition ) aq + ae + eq − rq , into rq , = aqq + ace + aqeq + aec + eqq. cxlix . and in like manner ( because m , a , and m , e , and l , n , have also like signs . ) mq+ma+aq − rq , into rq , = mqq+mca+mqaq+mac+aqq . mq+me+eq − rq , into rq , = mqq+mce+mqeq+mec+eqq . lq+ln+nq − rq , into rq , = lqq+lcn+lqnq+lnc+nqq . cl. and therefore , in a right-lined triangle , whose legs contain an angle of degrees , ( as a , e , ) or degrees , ( as m , a , or m , e , or l , n , ) if the squares of the legs , with the rectangle of them , wanting the square of the radius of the circumscribed circle , be all multiplied into five times the square of that radius : the product is equal to the biquadrates of the legs , with three means proportional between those biquadrates . cli . in like manner may be shewed , ( where the signs of the legs be unlike , ) that , lq − la+aq − rq , into rq , = lqq − lca+lqaq − lac+aqq . nq − ne+eq − rq , into rq , = nqq − nce+nqeq − nec+eqq . mq − ml+lq − rq , into rq , = mqq − mcl+mqlq − mlc+lqq . mq − mn+nq − rq , into rq , = mqq − mcn+mqnq − mnc+nqq . nq − na+aq − rq , into rq , = nqq − nca+nqaq − nac+aqq . lq − le+eq − rq , into rq , = lqq − lce+lqeq − lec+eqq . clii. and therefore , in a right-lined triangle , whose legs contain an angle of degrees , ( as l , a , or n , e , or m , l , or m , n ; ) or degrees , ( as n , a , or l , e ; ) if the squares of the legs ; wanting the rectangle of them , and the square of the radius of the circumscribed circle , be all multiplied into five times the square of that radius ; the product is equal to the biquadrates of the legs , and a mean proportional between those biquadrates , wanting the first and third of three means proportional between them . cliii . now all this variety of cases , and deductions from them ; from § , hitherto , ariseth from the first construction , at § . and what is analogous thereunto : where the six lines , for the four sides and two diagonals of the quadrilater , are f , a ; b , b ; c , c. and the variety ariseth from hence , that sometimes c , c , are the diagonals ; and b , b , opposite sides ; sometimes c , c , are opposite sides ; and b , b , diagonals ; according as c or b happens to be greater . cliv. but , by a like method , with some little alteration , we may infer most of the same things ; ( and observe thence like deductions , or others analogous thereunto ; with like variety of cases ; ) from the second construction , at § ; where the six lines are , f , c ; a , a ; d , d. where the variety of cases proceedeth from hence , that sometimes d , d , are diagonals , and a , a , opposite sides ; sometimes d , d , are opposite sides ; and a , a , ( or what answers to them ) diagonals ; according as d , or a , ( or what answers to this , e , l , m , n , ) are greater . clv . and accordingly , the propositions at § , and , may be delivered more generally . namely , clvi . the difference of the squares of the subtenses of the quadruple and of the single arch ; is equal to the rectangle of the subtenses of the triple and quintuple . and , being divided by either of these , it gives the other . and , clvii . as the subtense of the triple arch , to the sum of the subtenses of the quadruple and of the single ; so is the differences of these , to the subtense of the quintuple . whether such single arch be lesser , or greater , or equal to a quintant . clviii . and in like manner , from the third construction , at § . where the six lines are , f , a ; c , a ; b , d. and what is there delivered ( at § , . ) of an arch less than a quintant , may be more generally delivered , thus , clix. the difference of the rectangles of the subtenses of the double and of the quadruple arch ; and , of the single and triple ; is equal to that of the subtenses of the single and quintuple . and , being divided by either of these , it gives the other . and , clx . as the subtense of the single arch , to that of the double ; so is that of the quadruple , to the sum or difference of the subtenses of the triple and quintuple ; according as b , d , happen to be diagonals or opposite sides clxi . and in like manner , from the fourth construction , at § ; where the six lines are , f , b ; a , b ; c , d. and what is there delivered at § , , may be more generally delivered ; thus , clxii . the difference of the rectangles , of the subtenses of the triple and quadruple arches ; and , of the single and double ; is equal to that of the subtenses of the double and quintuple . and , being divided by either , gives the other of them . and , clxiii . as the subtense of the double arch , is to that of the triple ; so is that of the quadruple , to the sum or difference of the subtenses of the quintuple , and single ; according as c , d , happen to be diagonals , or opposite sides . clxiv . and from every of these constructions , may be derived like varietie of cases and consequences , ( with figures suited to those cases : ) as ( at § , &c. ) is done from the first construction . but i forbear to pursue these any farther ; and leave it to any who shall think fit , ( for their own exercise , ) to pursue these as i have done the first . chap. v. of the sextuplation , and sextisection of an arch or angle : and other following multiplications and sections . i. according to the same methods may be had , the sextuplation , septuplation , and other consequent multiplications ; as also the sextisection , septisection , and other consequent sections , of an arch or angle . of which i shall briefly touch at some . ii. the sextuplation , may be had , by tripling the double , or doubling the triple arch. and , accordingly , the sextisection , by bisecting the subtriple , or trisecting the subduple . ( as is of it self manifest . ) and the same holds , in like manner , for multiplications and sections which take their denomination from a compound number . for multiplications and sections successively made , according to the components of such compound number , amount to the same as one by such compound number . iii. but though six were not a compound number , or be not considered as such ; yet may such sextuplation and sextisection be had in like manner as those before . namely , iv. if in a circle be inscribed a quadrilater , whose opposite sides are b , b , subtenses of the duple ; and b , g , subtenses of the duple and sextuple ; and the diagonals d , d , subtenses of the quadruple . then is , dq − bq = bg ; and b ) dq − bq ( g. v. or , let the opposite sides be a , a , and d , g ; and the diagonals f , f. then is , fq − aq = dg ; and d ) fq − aq ( g. vi. or , let the opposite sides be a , b , and c , g ; and the diagonals d , f. then is , df − ab = cg ; and c ) df − ab ( g. vii . or , let the opposite sides be a , c , and b , g ; the diagonals c , f. then cf − ac = bg ; and b ) cf − ac ( g. viii . and therefore , dq − bq = cf − ca. ix . or , let the opposite sides be a , g , and a , d ; the diagonals b , f. then bf − ad = ag ; and a ) bf − ad ( g. x. or , let the opposite sides be b , c , and a , g ; the diagonals c , d. then cd − bc − ag ; and a ) cd − bc ( g. xi . and therefore , bf − ad = cd − bc. xii . it is manifest that from hence may be deduced a great number of equations , and analogies , and great variety of theorems , in like manner , as is done in the chapters foregoing . but i forbear here to pursue them in particular as is there done . xiii . but from every of those constructions , ( the values of b , c , d , f , being known as is above declared , ) we have ( by ordering the equations in due manner , ) . or , . and ( taking the squares of these , ) gqrcccc − gqrqqccaq = rccccaq − rqqccaqq + rqccacc − rccaqcc + rqqaqqcc − rqacccc + aqcccc. xiv . that is , ( dividing all by rq − aq , ) rqqccgq = rqqccaq − rqccaqq + rccacc − rqqaqcc + rqaqqcc − acccc. xv. of this equation there be six plain roots , answering to aq ; the square roots of which , are a. which are so many streight lines from some one point of the circumference , to the six angles of an inscribed regular hexagon . ( so that , any one of them being known , the rest are known also . and the like in all such equations . ) xvi . of these , the two least , a , e , ( which subtend , on the one side , to arches less than a sextant ; and , on the other side to more than five sextants ; ) and the two greatest , x , y , ( which subtend to arches greater than two sextants , but less than four ; ) are affirmative roots ; ( because the subtendent of the double arch is less than that of the quadruple ; and therefore dq − bq an affirmative quantity : ) but the two betwen them i , k , ( which subtend on the one side , to arches greater than one sextant but less than two ; and on the other side , to arches greater than four sextants but less than five ; ) are negatives , ( because of d less than b ; and therefore dq − bq a negative quantity ; ) g being in all , reputed affirmative . xvii . if a chord be subtendent to just a sextant , or two or more sextants ; it is indifferent to whether of the two cases on either side it be referred ; suppose . ( which is to be understood in all cases of like nature . ) and when ever this happens , one of the roots vanish , or become equal to nothing . xviii . for the septuplation or septisection of an arch or angle ; we shall have , according as the quadrilater may be differently inscribed , the subtense of the septuple arch , , or , or , or , or , or , or , or , or . xix . from every of which equations , ( having the values of b , c , d , f , g , known as before , ) we shall have ( by due ordering such equation ) : or , rcch = rcca − rqqac + rqaqc − aqqc. xx. the seven roots of this equation ; are , so many streight lines from some one point of the circumference , to the seven angles of an inscribed regular heptagon . xxi . of these roots ( putting h affirmative , ) the two least are affirmative ; the two next , are negative ; the two next to these , are again affirmative ; and , the greatest negative . xxii . and after the same manner we may proceed as far as we please : collecting the consequent multiplications and sections , by the help of those antecedent . xxiii . and all such as are denominated by a compound number ( as = × , = × , = × = × × , = × , &c. ) may , with more convenience , ( at lest , as to the section , if not as to the multiplication also , ) be performed by two or more operations , according to the components of such compound number . xxiv . but , both these , and those which are denominated from prime numbers , ( as , , , , &c. ) may ( by such inscription of quadrilaters ) be reduced to such equations , as will contain as many roots as is the number from which such multiplication or section takes its denomination . xxv . and , of these , those which are denominated by an even number , will afford equations having plain roots ; the square root of which plains , are the subtenses of the arches . xxvi . but those which are denominated by odd numbers , afford equations whose roots are those subtenses . xxvii . and , of these subtenses ( as well in the one case as in the other , ) the two least ( which i look upon as the principal roots of the equation , ) are affirmatives ( supposing the subtense of the multiple arch to be always put affirmative ; ) the two next greater than these , negatives ; the two next affirmatives ; and so onward , alternately , as long as there be roots remaining : save that , when the number is odd , the greatest of all will be singular , whereas the rest go by couples . chap. vi. of the proportion of the base to the legs of a triangle , according as is the angle at the top of it . i. the noted proposition of pythagoras , ( which is in euclid , è . ) concerning the square of the base equal to the squares of the two legs containing a right-angle : and two more in euclid ( pr. , , è . ) concerning the excess , ( in case the angle at the top be obtuse ; ) or the defect , ( in case it be acute ; ) of the square of the base , compared with the squares of the two legs : and some other propositions in the foregoing chapters , shewing what proportion that excess or defect bears to a rectangle of the legs , in divers cases : gave me occasion to pursue that speculation a little further ; according to the following propositions . ii. if by the legs of a triangle c , d , the angle at the top contained a , be a right-angle , ( or of degrees ; ) and from thence a perpendicular g , on the base , cut this into two segments χ , δ : the two triangles hence arising , χ g c , g δ d , are like to the whole cdb ; ( because of one angle common , the other a right-angle , and therefore the third equal to the third . ) and therefore ( the triangles being here designed by their sides . ) and therefore and therefore , cq+dq = ( bχ+bδ = b : into χ+δ = b : = ) bq. that is , the square of the base is equal to the two squares of the legs containing a right-angle . iii. if the angle a be deg. or / of a right-angle ; and thence be drawn the base two streight lines g , Γ ; making , with it , angles equal to that at the top : the two triangles χ gc , Γδd , are like to the whole cdb , ( because of one angle common , another equal to a , and therefore the third equal to the third ; ) with a triangle between gΓμ equilater ( because each of the angles at the base , and therefore that at the top , are of degrees : ) and the base b = χ+δ+μ . and therefore , and therefore , cq+dq+cd = ( bχ+bδ+bμ = b : into χ+δ+μ = ) b : = bq. that is , the square of the base ( of an angle of degrees ) is equal to the squares of the legs and a rectangle of them . the square of the base ( of an angle of degrees ) is equal to the squares of the legs , wanting the rectangle of them . ( note here , that , by χ , i understand the base to the legs cg ; by δ , that of the legs dΓ ; by μ , that of gΓ ; and , by b , that of cd , which is ever equal to χ+δ±μ , however these parts be intermingled . which where it is +μ , is commonly more obvious to the eye ; but where it is − μ , is more perplex , and will need more consideration to discern ; but it is equally true in both cases . ) the square of the base ( of an angle of degrees ) is equal to the squares of the legs , with a rectangle of them multiplied into vi. if a be degrees : it will in like manner be shewed , that ( because of b = χ+δ − μ. ) into χ+δ − μ = b : = ) bq. that is , the square of the base ( of an angle of degrees ) is equal to the squares of the legs , wanting a rectangle of them multiplied into vii . and , universally , what ever be the angle a ; it will ( by like process ) be shewed : that , . that is , the square of the base ( whatever be the angle at the vertex ) is equal to the squares of the legs , together with ( if it be greater than a right-angle ) or wanting ( if less than such ) a plain , which shall be , to the rect-angle of the legs , as a portion in the base-line , intercepted between two lines from the vertex , making at the base a like angle with that of the vertex , to one of those two lines so drawn . viii . of this we are to give great variety of examples in the following chapter , where this general theorem is applied to particular cases : and which is further improved by these two ensuing propositions . ix . the radius of a circle , with the subtenses of two arches , being given ; the subtense of their aggregate is also given . for , supposing the subtenses of the given arches to be a , e : the subtenses of their remainders to a semicircle , are also had : suppose and . and therefore , inscribing a quadrilater whose opposite sides are a , ε ; and e , α ; one of the diagonals is the diameter = r ; the other the subtense of the sum or aggregate of those arches , suppose . x. the same being given ; the subtense of the difference of those arches is also given . for , having ( as before ) a , α ; e , ε ; r : we have ( by a quadrilater duly inscribed ) the subtense of the difference , . xi . it is manifest also , ( from what is before delivered , ) that the same triangle gΓμ , doth indifferently serve for the angle of degrees and of degrees : and , in like manner , for , and : and so , for any two arches whereof one doth as much exceed as the other wants of a quadrant . for , the angle v is in both the same ; and the angles at the base differ only in this : that , in one , the external angle ; in the other , the internal , ( which is the others complement to two right-angles ; ) is equal to the angle of cd at the vertex . xii . hence it follows : that , of two angles , where the legs of the one are respectively equal to those of the other ; the one as much exceeding a right-angle , as the other wants of it : the square of the base in the one , doth as much exceed the two squares of the legs ; as , in the other , it wants thereof . xiii . and consequently , in any right-lined triangle , ( however inclined , ) the squares of the axis or diameter , and of the half bases twice taken ; are equal to the squares of the legs . for , supposing c , c , the two halfs of the base ; and b , the diameter or axis of the triangle , ( meaning thereby a streight line from the vertex to the middle of the base ; ) and b , β , the two legs : it is manifest , that , of the two angles at the base ( which are each others complement to two right-angles ; ) the one doth as much exceed , as the other wants of , a right-angle : and therefore the square of one of the legs , as bq , doth as much exceed ; as the other , βq , doth come short of ; dq+cq . and therefore , both together , bq+βq = dq+ cq . xiv . and therefore , the base , and axis ( or diameter ) of a triangle remaining the same ; ( however differently inclined : ) the aggregate of the squares of the two legs , remains the same . xv. and the same is to be understood of the squares of tangents , of a parabola , hyperbola , elipsis , ( or other curve line having diameter and ordinates , ) from the two ends of an inscribed ordinate , to the point of the diameter ( produced if need be ) wherein those tangents meet . xvi . the same may be likewise accommodated , to the segments ( of such legs , or tangents , ) cut off by lines parallel to the base . namely , the squares of such segments ( intercepted by those parallels ) together taken , ( the axe of such trapezium remaining the same , ) are the same : whether such trapezium be erect , or however inclined . for such segments , are still proportional to their wholes . chap. vii . application thereof to particular cases . i. if a be a right-angle , ( or of degrees , ) gΓ are co-incident , and μ = . and therefore , . and consequently ( by § , chap. preced . ) . ii. if a = degrees ; then is v ( that is , the angle contained of gΓ ) = degrees : ( as being always the difference of a from two right-angles : ) and consequently gΓμ an equilater triangle , ( for such also are the angles at the base ; each of which is the complement of a to two right-angles : ) and therefore , μ = g ; and bq = cq+dq+cd . iii. if a = degrees : then also is v = degrees , and μ = g , as before . and therefore , bq = cq+dq − cd . iv. if a = . then v = : and therefore , ( by § . ) μq = gq+Γq , that is ( because g = Γ , ) μq = gq ; and and therefore , . v. if a = . then also , v = : and therefore , ( as before ) ; and consequently , . vi. if a = then v = . and therefore , ( by § . ) μq = gq+Γq+gΓ ; that is ( because g = Γ , ) μq = gq , and . and . vii . if a = then v = . and therefore , ( by § . ) μq = gq+Γq+gΓ ; that is ( because g = Γ , ) μq = gq , and . and . viii . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) and therefore , . ix . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) and therefore , . x. if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) and therefore , . xi . if a = − ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) and therefore , . xii . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) and therefore , . xiii . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) and therefore , . xiv . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) and therefore , . xv. if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) and therefore , . xvi . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . and therefore , . xvii . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . and therefore , . xviii . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . and . xix . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . and . xx. if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . and . xxi . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . and . xxii . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . and . xxiii . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . and . and , in like manner , we may proceed to lesser arches , determined by quarters of degrees . for like as here , by help of § , , , , , . we have performed § , , , , , , , , , , , . which proceed to half degrees : so by the help of these , we may proceed to quarters of degrees . and farther if we please : but i shall at present rest at half degrees . moreover , assuming ( as elsewhere proved ) the subtense of degrees , or the side of the inscribed decagon ; namely , . ( by el. . and el. . or , , , chap. . ) we may , from thence , thus proceed . xxiv . if a = then v = . and . and . xxv . if a = then v = . and . and . xxvi . if a = then v = . and μ = ( by § . ) . and . xxvii . if a = then v = . and μ = ( by § . ) . and . xxviii . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . and . xxix . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . and . xxx . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) and . xxxi . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . and . xxxii . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . and . xxxiii . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . and . xxxiv . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . and . xxxv . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . and . xxxvi . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . and . xxxvii . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . and . xxxviii . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . and . xxxix . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . and . xl. if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . and . xli . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . and . xlii . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . and . xliii . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . and . xliv . if a = ½ then v = . and consequently , ( by § . ) . xlv . if a = ½ then v = . and consequently , ( by § . ) . xlvi . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . xlvii . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . xlviii . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . xlix . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . l. if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . li. if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . lii . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . liii . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . liv. if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . lv. if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . and , in like manner , by help of § , , &c. we may proceed to arches determined by quarters of degrees ; and further if need be . again , because the subtense of degrees , is and the subtense of degrees is r : we may thence collect the subtense of their difference , which is that of degrees ; namely , r into ; or . and thence proceed thus , lvi . if a = then v = . and therefore , . lvii . if a = then v = . and therefore , . lviii . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . lix . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . lx. if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . lxi . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . lxii . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) lxiii . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) lxiv . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) lxv . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) lxvi . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . lxvii . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . lxviii . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . lxix . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . lxx . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . lxxi . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . lxxii . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . lxxiii . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . lxxiv . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . lxxv . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . lxxvi . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . lxxvii . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . lxxviii . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . lxxix . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . lxxx . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . lxxxi . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . lxxxii . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . lxxxiii . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . lxxxiv . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . lxxxv . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . lxxxvi . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . lxxxvii . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . lxxxviii . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . lxxxix . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . xc . if a = . then v = . and ( by § . ) . xci . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . xcii . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . xciii . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . xciv . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . xcv . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . xcvi . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . xcvii . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . xcviii . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . xcix . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . c. if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . ci. if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . cii . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . ciii . if a = then v = . and ( by § . ) . civ . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . cv . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . cvi. if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . cvii . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . cviii . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . cix . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . cx . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . cxi . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . cxii . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . cxiii . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . cxiv . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . cxv . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . cxvi . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . cvii . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . cxviii . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . cxix . if a = ½ then v = . and ( by § . ) . and , in like manner , ( by help of § , , &c. , , &c. , , &c. as was shewed at § . ) we may proceed to arches determined by quarters of degrees ; or yet further , if there be occasion . but we content our selves at present to rest at half degrees . having hereby sitted subtenses to every three halves of a degree throughout the semicircle . chap. viii . of the canon of subtenses , and sines ; of tangents also and of secants . from what is delivered in the foregoing chapter ; it is easie to construct a canon of subtenses or chords , in surd roots , to every threehalves of a degree throughout the semicircle . the halves of which subtenses , are the right-sines for every three-quarters of a degree throughout the quadrant . ( and thence , if need be , many canons of tangents and secants , be deduced , in surds roots . ) and hereby , any who please , may either make new tables , in numbers , ( to what accuracy he please , ) or examin those already made . for to every subtense , to be successively sought , there will need but one extraction of the square root ; ( and , sometimes , not this ; ) the rest of the work being dispatched by only addition and subtraction ; or , at most , division also by or . as , for example : supposing the radius of a circle r = . then ( because these , in the same circle be all equal , ) c = d = . and likewise cq = dq = cd = . and b will be the subtense of the angle proposed . therefore , ( by § . ) the square of the subtense of degrees , bq = cq + dq = + = . and the subtense it self : which is had by one extraction of the square root of the number ; continued in decimal parts to to what accuracy we please . suppose proximè . again , ( by § . ) the square of the subtense of degrees , is bq = cq + dq + cd = + + = . and the subtense it self : which is likewise had by one extraction of the square root of . suppose − proximè . the square of the subtense of degrees , is ( by § . ) bq = cq + dq − cd = + − = . and therefore the subtense b = . the square of the subtense of degrees , is ( by § . ) . which is had by adding , to the value of already found at § . that is , . and so by one extraction of the square root of this number , we have the subtense of degrees : namely , proximè . so ( by § . ) the square of the subtense of degrees , is . that is ( by subtracting from the value of already found , ) bq = . ½ proximè . the square root of which , now to be extracted , is proximè . and ( by § . ) the square of the subtense of degrees , is . which is had , by adding to the value of all ready found . that is , . the root of which ( now to be extracted ) is proximè . or thus : because , ( as will appear , either by the squaring of this , or by extracting the square root of the binomial ) having , as before , the value of ; and ( by one extraction now to be made ) the value of ( or , it may be had by multiplying the value of , by that of , already known ; because ) we have thence ; and the half thereof . as before , so ( by § . ) the square of the subtense of degrees , is , ( which is had by subduction only , the value of being found before . ) the square root of which ( now to be extracted ) is the subtense proximè . or thus , ( without extracting a root ; ) because : therefore , ( the values of and being had before : ) by subduction only we have proximè ; and ( the half of this ) proximè : as before , and in the rest , ( taking the propositions or paragraphs as they are before set down in the former chapter , ) there is need but of one extraction of the square root ( and oft-times not of one , ) for finding of each subtense . these subtenses being thus had ; the halves thereof are the right-sines of the half arch. as for example . arches . subtenses . sines . arches . degrees . . + . + degrees . degrees . . − . ½ degrees . degrees . . . degrees . degrees . . ½ . ¼ ½ degrees . degrees . . − . ½ ½ degrees . degrees . . + . ½ degrees . degrees . . . ½ degrees . now follows the table of subtenses in surd roots , answering to each three halves of a degree throughout the whole semicircle ; ( and consequently , of their residuals to a whole circle , whose subtenses are the same with these : ) putting the radius r = , and therefore c = d = , and likewise cq = dq = cd = : with references in the margin to the paragraphs of the former chapter from whence they are derived . and , in like manner , we may proceed to design , by surd roots , the subtenses of arches as small as we please , by a continual bisection of these arches . the halves of which subtenses , are the right sines of the half-arches . but , to design an intire canon of subtenses and sines , answering to each single degree , and the sexagesims or first minutes of such degrees : will ( beside the extracting the square roots , of such surds , in numbers , ) require also the analysis ( in numbers ) of two trisections , and of one quinquisection of an arch. for , the former process reaching no farther than to the subtense of ½ degree ; and consequently to the sine of ¾ of a degree , or of min. = × × : we may thence , by a trisection twice performed ; and a quinquisection once , proceed to the sine of minute . but not by bisections only , or operations thence deduced . but , these operations being so ( as is said ) performed ; the rest of the work is easily dispatched by help of § , . chap. . for finding the subtense of the sum or difference of those arches whose subtenses are already known . chap. ix . of angles compared with they arches on which the stand . i. that the angle of a sector , is proportional to the arch on which it doth insist ; whether such angle be at the center , or at the circumference : and , that such angle at the center , is double to that at the circumference : is shewed by euclide long since ; and is generally known . but not so , in case such angle be any where else , whether within or without the circle . it will therefore be not amiss , to pursue that notion a little farther ; as here followeth . ii. if on the diameter of a circle d f , be formed , at the center c , an angle b a d ; the intercepted arch b d , is proportional to the angle . ( by , . el. . and , el. , of euclid . ) that is , the arch intercepted b d , is such a part of the whole circumference ; as is the angle a , of four right-angles . and accordingly the angle a , is said to be , of so many degrees , as is the arch b d. iii. if b a , d a , the legs containing such angle , after a decussation at c , forming the vertical angle e , be continued , on the other side , to the circumference ; the intercepted arch g f , will , ( by § . ) be equal to b d , ( because of the vertical angle e , equal to a : ) and , consequently , the aggregate of both b d + g f , is double to b d. that is , b d + g f = b d. iv. if at f the end of the diameter , be formed a like angle a ; the intercepted arch h d , is likewise double to b d. that is , h d = b d + g f = b d. because ( by . el. . ) the angle at the center , is double to that at the circumference , on the same arch. or thus , because ( by construction ) f h , g c b , are parallels : ( as making equal angles with f d : ) therefore , h b = f g = b d. and , consequently , h d = h b + b d = f g + b d = b d. ( by § . ) v. if at k , ( any other point of the diameter within the circle , ) such angle a be made , ( with its vertical e : ) the aggregate of the two arches intercepted , f l + m d , is double to b d. that is , f l + m d = f g + b d = b d. for , ( drawing the streight line a m , ) the two internal angles f m l + m f d , are equal to the external m k d = a = h f d ( which is an angle at the circumference . ) and therefore , the arches opposite to those f l + m d , equal to the arch opposite to this h d = b d. ( by § . ) or thus , because f h , l m , be parallels ( as making like angles with f d , ) therefore , f l = h m , and f l + m d = h m + m d = h d = b d. ( by § . ) vi. if at n , a point of the diameter produced , without the circle ; be formed a like angle a ; the difference of the two intercepted arches , q d − p f , is equal to the same h d , or the double of b d. for , p q , f h , being parallels , ( as making like angles with d f produced , ) and therefore , p f = q h : therefore , q d − p f = q d − q h = h d = b d. ( by § . ) vii . the same will hold , though neither of the legs containing the angle do pass through the center , ( and therefore lie not upon a diameter ; ) as i shall now shew in the several cases . viii . if m l , μ λ , make m k μ an angle at k any where , within the circle , let b c β be a like angle at the center , and the legs of this parallel to those of that . and , by the angular point k , draw the diameter f k d. then is ( by § . ) m d + l f = b d : and μ d + λ f = β d. therefore , ( the sum or difference ) m μ ( = m d ± μ d ) + l λ ( = l f ± λ f ) = ( b d ± β d = ) b β. ix . in like manner : if h f η be an angle at the circumference : and , at the center , b c β like to it , and with legs parallel to those : and f d a diameter . then ( by § . ) h d = b d , and η d = β d. therefore , h η ( = h d ± η d ) = ( b d ± β d = ) b β. x. the same is to be understood , in case one of the legs touch the circumference at f , ( the points f , h , being in this case co-incident ; the arch f h vanishing to nothing , and the arch intercepted h η , the same with f η. ) for here also , h f d = b d , and η f d = β d ; and therefore , h f η ( = h f d ± η f d ) = ( b d ± β d = ) b β. xi . in like manner : if q n χ be an angle without the circle , whose legs cut it in p , π : and , at the center , a like angle and like sited b c : and n f d a diameter produced . then ( by § . ) q d − p f = b d , and χ d − π f = β d. and therefore q d ± χ d wanting p f ± π f , that is q χ − p π , is equal to b d ± β d = b β. xii . the same is to be understood , in case one or both of the legs do not cut , but only touch the circle . for then the points p , q ; or π , χ ; ( or both , ) being co-incident ; the rest proceeds as before . for still q d − p f = b d , and χ d − π f = β d ; and therefore , ( the sum or difference ) q χ − p π = b β. xiii . but in case one or both of the legs pass by the circle , and neither cut , nor so much as touch it : it doth not concern the present business ; for such angle doth not insist on a circular arch. the whole therefore ( thus demonstrated ) amounts to this general . xiv . if a circle be cut ( or at least touched ) by two streight lines , making an angle : ( and so , when continued , intersecting each other : ) the sum ( if their intersection be within the circle , ) or difference ( if without , ) of the two arches intercepted by them ( produced , if need be , ) or ( if their intersection be at the circumference ) the single arch by them intercepted ; is double to the arch of a like angle at the center . finis . i ii iii iv v vi vii viii ix x xi xii xiii xiv xv xvi xvii xviii xix xx xxi xxii xxiii xxiv xxv xxvi xxvii xxviii xxix xxx xxxi xxxii xxxiii xxxiv xxxv xxxvi xxxvii xxxviii xxxix notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a -e fig. i. fig. ii. fig. iii. fig. iv. v fig. vi. fig. vii . fig. viii . fig. ix . fig. ix . fig. x. fig. xi . fig. xi . fig. xii . fig. xii . fig. xii . fig. xiii . fig. xiii fig. xiii fig. xiv . fig. xiv . fig. xv. fig. xv. fig. xvi . fig. xv. fig. xvii . fig. xvii . fig. xvii . fig. xviii . fig. xviii . fig. xviii . fig. xix fig. xix fig. xix fig. xix . fig. xx. fig. xvi fig. xxi fig. xxii . fig. i. fig. xi . fig. xxiii . fig. xxiv . fig. xxv . fig. xxv . fig. xxvi . fig. xxvii . fig. xxvii . fig. xxvii . fig. xxviii . fig. xxviii . fig. xxviii . fig. xxviii . fig. xxviii . fig. xxviii . fig. xxviii . fig. xxviii . fig. xxviii . fig. xxix . fig. xxiv . fig. xxx . fig. xxxi . fig. xxxii . fig. xxix . fig. xxix . fig. xxix . fig. xxix . fig. xxix . fig. xxix . fig. xxix . fig. xxix . fig. xxix . fig. xxiv . fig. xxv . fig. xxv . fig. xxvi . fig. xxvii . fig. xxxiii fig. xxxiv . fig. xxxv . fig. xxxvi . fig. xxxvii fig. xxxviii fig. xxxviii fig. xxxix . cono-cuneus, or, the shipwright's circular wedge that is, a body resembling in part a conus, in part a cuneus, geometrically considered / by john wallis ..., in a letter to the honourable sir robert moray ... wallis, john, - . approx. kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from -bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : - (eebo-tcp phase ). a wing w estc r ocm this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons . universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase , no. a ) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set ) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, - ; : ) cono-cuneus, or, the shipwright's circular wedge that is, a body resembling in part a conus, in part a cuneus, geometrically considered / by john wallis ..., in a letter to the honourable sir robert moray ... wallis, john, - . [ ], p., [ ] leaves of plates : ill. printed by john playford for richard davis ..., london : . this item also apears at reel : as part of wing w : a treatise of algebra. london, . reproduction of original in the huntington library. created by converting tcp files to tei p using tcp tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between and available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the , texts created during phase of the project have been released into the public domain as of january . anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. % (or pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf- unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p , characters represented either as utf- unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng conic sections. geometry -- early works to . - tcp assigned for keying and markup - apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images - melanie sanders sampled and proofread - melanie sanders text and markup reviewed and edited - pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion cono-cuneus : or , the shipwright's circular wedge . that is , a body resembling in part a conus , in part a cuneus , geometrically considered . by john wallis , d. d. professor of geometry in the university of oxford , and a member of the royal society , london . in a letter to the honourable sir robert moray , knight . london : printed by john playford , for richard davis , bookseller , in the university of oxford , . to the honourable sir robert moray , k t. sir , since i came home from london , i have taken some time to consider of those solids and lines made by the sections thereof ; proposed to consideration ( to my lord brouncker and your self , at your lodgings , where i was also present ) by mr. pett , one of his majesties commissioners for the navy , and an excellent shipwright . the bodies proposed to consideration were all of this form . on a plain base , which was the quadrant of a circle , ( like that of a quadrantal cone or cylinder ) stood an erect solid , whose altitude ( being arbitrary ) was there double to the radius of that quadrant ; and from every point of its perimeter , streight lines drawn to the vertex , met there , not in a point ( as is the apex of a cone ) , nor in a parallel quadrant ( as in a quadrantal cylinder ) , but in a streight line or sharp edge , like that of a wedge or cuneus . on which consideration , i thought fit to give it the name of cono-cuneus , as having the base of a cone , and the vertex of a cuneus . by the various sections of this solid , in several positions , he did ( rightly ) conceive , that divers new lines must arise , in great variety , different from those arising from the section of a cone . some of which he supposed might be of good use in the building of ships ; in order to which it was , that he proposed them to consideration now because he judged it troublesom ( as indeed it would be ) first to form such solids , and then cut them by plains in such positions as he des●red ; he had ( for avoiding that trouble ) ingeniously contrived this expedient . he caused divers boards , of a good solid wood , to be exactly planed , some of an equal thickness , some meeting in a sharp edge ; those of the former , he caused to be glewed together in a parallel position ; those of the latter sort , he caused so to be glewed together , as that their sharp edges met in one common angle . and having thus formed several solids , of boards thus glewed together , he then caused them to be wrought into such a form as that before described : which being done , he then caused the glew to be dissolved in warm water , whereby the several boards , falling asunder , did exhibit , in their several faces , the respective sections of those solids . and such were those he shewed us ; which being put together , made up such solids ; and taken asunder , shewed the several sections of them . i do not intend at all to disparage the ingenuity of that contrivance , which was indeed very handsom , and neatly performed , but do withall suppose , that it would not be unpleasing to your self , or him , to see those lines described in plano , which would arise by such section of the solid . that therefore is the work of these papers , to represent the true nature of such lines , and the ways to draw them , without the actual section of a solid . which i have the rather undertaken , because this is a solid which i do not know that any other have before considered . and because this may be a pattern ; according to which , other solids of like nature may be in like manner considered if there shall be occasion . if beside these sections which he hath already considered , there be any other sections of this or other the like solids which he shall conceive useful to his purpose ; the same may in like manner be represented ( without the actual section of such solids ) by lines thus described in a plain . but which of them may be most advantageous to his design , i do not pretend to understand so well , nor can with so much certainty affirm ; as , that i am , sir , your very humble servant , oxon , apr. . . john wallis . cono-cuneus or , the shipwright's circular wedge . the sections of a cono-cuneus . . on a rectangle cdba , fig. . erect at right angles the quadrant of a circle cqd ; and joining qa , compleat the rectangled triangle cqa . supposing then from every point of the quadrantal arch dq , to their respective points in the streight line ba , in plains parallel to the triangle cqa , the streight lines sa to be drawn , compleating a curve superficies dsqaab ; the solid thus contained , i call a cono-cuneus . . it differs from a quadrantal cone , in this only ; that what is here a streight line ab , is there a single point ; all the lines drawn from the points s , meeting there at the point a. . it differs in this from a wedge , or cuneus ; that what is here a quadrant cqd , is there a rectangle . . it differs in this from a quadrantal cylinder ; that what is here a streight line ab , is there a quadrant , equal and parallel to cqd . . this solid , being cut by plains in different positions , will produce , in the curve surface dqab , great variety of lines . as for example : . first ; if it be cut by rsa , a plain parallel to the triangle cqa , the line sa is ( by construction ) a streight line ; and therefore , the hypothenuse of a right-angled triangle sra . . and consequently , this cono-cuneus is equal to half a quadrantal cylinder of the same base and altitude : for every of the triangles sra in the cono-cuneus , being half the respective rectangle in the cylinder , the whole of that will be equal to the half of this. . the quantities therein i thus design in species . . these triangles ; ( if made by plains set at equal distances ) projected on the plain cqa to which they are parallel , will appear as in the first projection , fig. . which is thus drawn : having drawn a triangle acq , like and equal to that in the solid , and cqd the quadrant of a circle , let cd be divided into any number of equal parts at the points r ; from every of which , the ordinates rs being drawn , take equal thereunto , in the line cq , the lines cs , or rs ; then joining as , the triangles sra or sca in this plain , represent the like triangles sra in the solid . . and if we suppose the solid to be continued downward , beyond its quadrantal base , these triangles must be so continued also : and the like , if we suppose it to be continued upward , ( after a decussation in ab ) as in opposite cones . . the quantities , in this projection , i design thus , in species . . in numbers thus ; ( putting r = . a = . ) cr. cs. as. . . . + . . + . − . . + . + . . − . + . . + . + . . − . − . . + . + . . + . − . . . . secondly ; if it be cut by edq , a plain parallel to the quadrantal base cdq , fig. . the curve line dσq will be an ellipse : for ( supposing this plain to be cut in ρσ by rsa , any of those triangles parallel to cqa ; ) then is , as ac to ae , or ar to aρ ; so cq to eq , and rs to ρσ . and consequently ( the ordinates ρσ being proportional to rs the ordinates of a circle ) edq will be the quadrant of an ellipse , as cdq is of a circle . . the quantities i thus design in species . . these ellipses ( if cut off by plains set at equal distances ) projected on the quadrant cdq ( to which they are parallel ) will appear as in the second projection , fig. . which is thus drawn : having drawn a quadrant cdq equal to that in the solid , let cq be divided into any number of equal parts at the points q , and every of the ordinates rs ( parallel thereunto ) at the points σ ; through which , if we draw the ellipses dσq , these in the plain will represent the like ellipses dσq in the solid . . if the solid be supposed to be continued downward below its quadrantal base cdq , the parallel sections will yet be ellipses : but with this difference ; cd , which is now half the longest diameter , will then be half the shortest diameter of the ellipse , ( such as are those in fig. . beyond the circular quadrant dq : ) and if the solid be continued upward , after a decussation in ab , the like ellipses will occur in the opposite solid as in this . . the quantities in this projection i thus design in species . . in numbers thus ; ( putting r = , a = . ) eq . ρσ . ρσ . ρσ . . . + . − . + . . + . + . − . . + . − . + . . + . + . + . . + . − . − . . + . + . + . . + . − . + . . + . + . − . thirdly ; if it be cut by cΣσq , a plain parallel to the rectangle cdba , fig. . the curve line will have this property : drawing the triangles as in the scheme , it is , as sr ( the ordinate from any point s in the arch Σq ) to σρ , or Σ● ( the ordinate from Σ , where the plain cΣq cuts the quadrantal arch ) : so is ar or ac ( the whole height ) , to aρ or ασ ( the distance of the point σ from the plain aaα parallel to the quadrant cdq ) . because ars , aρσ , are like triangles . . the quantities i thus design in species . . these curve lines ( if made by plains at equal distances ) projected on the rectangle cdba ( to which they are parallel ) , will appear as in the third projection , fig. . which is thus made : having drawn a rectangle cdba ( like and equal to that in the solid ) , and the quadrant cdq ; divide cq into any number of equal parts at the points c , and draw the sines or ordinates cΣ , with the co-sines Σp : then supposing from the several points r in the line ●d , the lines rσa parallel to ca , ( cutting the quadrant qd at s , and ab at a : ) and therein , as rs to pΣ ; so ac ( = ar ) to aσ : the curve lines qσp in this plain , represent their respectives qσs in the solids . where note , that as the lines sσσσ in the former projection , so are the lines aσσσ in this cut into equal parts . . as the solid may be continued downwards at pleasure , beyond its quadrantal base cdq ; so may these curve lines qσp , in like manner , be so continued infinitely : and they will then be assymptotes , each to other ; and to the streight line bd so continued . and if the solid be continued upward after a decussation in ab , the same plains will cut off in the opposite solid opposite sections like to these . . the quantities in this projection i thus design in species . . in numbers thus ; ( putting r = , a = . )   a q. a σ. a σ. a σ. a σ. i. . . + . + . − infin . ii. . . − . − . − infin . iii. . . + . + . − infin . iv. . . − . − . − infin . . fourthly ; if it be cut by a plain cqd , fig. . perpendicular to the rectangle cdba , and passing by the center c and any point d in the side db , the curve line will have this property : . cutting this plain in ρ σ ( by any of the triangles rsa , parallel to cqa ) ; then is , as ac or ar , to a ρ ; so rs , to ρ σ. the length of a ρ being first found in this manner : as cd to cr , or cd to c ρ ; so is dd to ρ r : which subducted from the whole height , ( or added thereunto , if we suppose ρ to be taken in the continuation of dc beyond c ) gives the length of a ρ. . the quantities of this section i thus design in species . . but if it be cut by a plain cqb , fig. . which passing by cq , cuts any point b ( in the side ab ) before it come at d in the side db produced ; the curve line b σ q will have this property : cutting this plain , as before , in ρ σ , by any of the triangles rsa parallel to cqa ; then is , as ba to ba ; or , as bc to b ρ ; or , as ac ( or ar ) to a ρ : so rs to ρ σ. . in species , thus : . or else , continuing cb till it cut db ( continued ) in d , the proportions will be as before , at § , . . but with this difference ; that the curve q σ bd will cut its axis at b , and meet with it again at d , ( the part bd being on the other side of the axis , and of the plain abdc , in the opposite solid . ) and accordingly ( r ρ being in this case greater than ar ) the quantities a ρ , and ρ σ , will be negative quantities ; a ρ falling beyond the vertex ab , which was supposed short of it ; and ρ σ below the plain abdc , which was supposed above it . . in both these cases ( whether cd cut or cut not the vertex ab ) the lines dc continued ( answering to a sutable continuation of the solid ) will again meet with their axes continued at δ ( as far beyond c , as d is on this side it ) . but the ordinates in this continuation will be greater than those of dc ; because from cd upward the solid grows thinner , but thicker from cd downward . and accordingly , a ρ , which between ab and cd is less than ar , ( and above ab , a negative quantity ; ) the same below cd becomes greater than ar ; ( dc cutting ▪ dc at c : ) for there it is a ρ = ar − r ρ ; here it is a ρ = ar + r ρ. . these curves , in both cases , ( when cd cuts or cuts not the line ab ) supposing the side db divided into equal parts by the lines cd , ( if projected on one and the same plain ) will appear as in the fourth projection , fig. . where the axes dc being continued to δ , are then ( to avoid confusion in the figure ) removed from their proper place in the plain abdc , and set off in the same streight line ac continued ; and the ordinates ρ σ applied to them in that position , in such proportion to rs , as a ρ is to ar or ac : and moreover , they are so distributed , some on the one side , some on the other side of ad , to prevent the confusion which might arise in the figure , if so many curves should all intersect one another in the same point Δ , beside another intersection afterwards . . the quantities in this projection , i thus design in species . . in numbers ( putting r = , a = , ) the semi-axes to the six curves described ( whereof the first is the circumference of a circle ) are these : i. cd ii. cd. iii. cd. iv. cd. v. cd. vi. cd. .   . . . . . and the ordinates , supposing the semi-axes divided into four parts , are these : i. rs. ii. ρ σ. iii. ρ σ. iv. ρ σ. v. ρ σ. vi. ρ σ. . . . . . . . + . + . + . + . + . + . + . − . − . + . + . − . + . − . − . − . + . − . . . . . . . + . − . − . − . + . − . + . + . − . + . + . + . + . + . + . + . − . − . . . . . . or if ( for a more accurate describing of the curves ) the semi-axes be divided into equal parts ( and the whole axes into ) , the ordinates thereunto appertaining are these . i. rs. ii. ρ σ. iii. ρ σ. iv. ρ σ. v. ρ σ. vi. ρ σ. . . . . . . . . . . . − . . . . . . − . . . . . . − . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . fifthly ; if it be cut by a plain dσ qc , ( fig. . ) passing through d , and perpendicular to the rectangle abd , cutting ac in any point c , and aq in q ; the curve line d σ q will have this property : cutting this plain by any of the triangles rsa in ρσ , it will be , as ac , or ar , to rs ; so aρ to a σ. the length of a ρ being first found thus : as dc to dr , or dc to dρ ; so is cc to rρ : which subducted from ar , leaves a ρ = ar − rρ ; and here dr = dc − cr : but if dc be supposed to be continued beyond c , and consequently r fall beyond c , then is dr = dc + cr. . the quantities of this section i thus design in species . . but if this plain ( passing by d ) cut any point b in the line ab , before it come at c in the continuation of ca , ( fig. . ) the curve ●●●e will have this property : cutting this plain ( as before ) in ρ σ , by any of the triangles rsa parallel to cqa , then is , as bb to ba ; or , as bd to b ρ ; or , as bd ( or ar ) to a ρ : so is rs to ρ σ. . in species , thus : . or else , continuing db till it cut ca ( continued ) in c , the proportions will be as before , at § , . . but with this difference ; that the curve dσ bq will cut its axis at b , ( the part bq being on the other side of the axis , and of the plain abdc , in the opposite solid . ) and accordingly ( rρ being in this case greater than ar ) the quantities aρ , and ρσ , will be negative quantities ; aρ falling beyond the vertex ab , ( which was supposed short of it ) and ρσ below the plain abdc , which was supposed above it . . in both these cases ( whether dc cut or cut not the vertex ab ) the curve lines dσc continued ( answering to a sutable continuation of the solid ) will again meet with their axes ( continued ) at δ ( as far beyond c , as d is on this side it ) . and if , in the mean time , the axis d δ cut the vertex ba , or its continuation ▪ beyond a , the curve will , in the same point , cut its axis , and ( passing thenceforth on the other side ) meet with it again at δ. . these curves , in both cases , ( whether dc cut or cut not the line ba , or its continuation ) supposing the line ca divided into equal parts by the lines dc , ( projected on the same plain ) will appear as in the fifth projection , fig. . where the lines dc being continued to δ , are ( to avoid confusion in the figure ) removed from their proper place in the plain abdc , and all set off in the same streight line ca continued ; and the lines ρσ are applied to them as ordinates ( in this position ) in such proportion to rs , as aρ is to ar . . the quantities in this projection i thus design in species . . in numbers ( putting r = , a = , ) the semi-axes of the six curves described , dc , are of the same length with cd , § . and the ordinates , supposing the semi-axes divided into four equal parts , are these : i. rs. ii. ρσ . iii. ρσ . iv. ρσ . v. ρσ . vi. ρσ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . − . . . . . ● − . − . . . . − . − . − . . . . − . − . − . . . . . . . or ( for a more accurate describing the curves ) dividing the semi-axe into parts ( and the whole axis into ) , the ordinates will be these . i. rs. ii. ρσ . iii. ρσ . iv. ρσ . v. ρσ . vi. ρσ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ● . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . − . . . . . . − . . . . . . − . . . ▪ . . − . . . . . − . − . . . . . − . − . . . . . − . − . . . . . − . − . . . . . − . − . . . . − . − . − . . . . − . − . − . . . . − . − . − . . . . − . − . − . . . . − . − . − . . . . − . ● − . − . . . . − . ●● − . ● − . . . . − . − . − . . . . − . − . − . . . . − . − . − . . . . − . − . − . . sixthly ; if it be cut by a plain bqc , passing through b ( fig. . ) perpendicular to the rectangle abdc , and cutting the side ac in c , ( and any of the triangles rsa in ρσ ) the curve line will have this property : as ac , or ar , to aρ ; so is rs , to ρσ . the length of aρ being first found thus : as ba to ba , or bc to bρ ; so is ac to aρ . . in species , thus : . but if this plain ( passing by b ) cut the line dc in any point p , before it come at c in the continuation of ac , the curve line will have this property : cutting the same plain ( as before ) by any of the triangles rsa parallel to cqa , it will be , as dp to dr ; or , as bp to bρ ; or , ar ( = ac ) to aρ ; so rs to ρσ . . in species , thus : . or else , continuing dp till it cut ac ( continued ) in c , the proportions will be as before at § , . . but in this section , the curve doth not cut its axis at p ( as in the two sections last mentioned at b ) , but continues on the same side of it , till it meet again ( if it be continued ) at β. and ( in case of such continuation ) instead of dr = r − c , it will be dr = r+c , where the point r is beyond the line ac : and , in like manner , if after bc have cut ac in c , it cut the continuation of ab in p , then , instead of dp = r − c , it will be dp = r+c. . in both cases ( whether bc cut ac above or below the point c ) the curve lines bσc continued ( answering to a sutable continuation of the solid ) will again meet with their axes ( continued ) at●β , as far beyond c as b is on this side it ; but continues all on the same side of its axis , without cutting it in the way , as in the two last mentioned sections . . in both cases ( whether bc cut or cut not dc ) the curve lines bσcβ transferred to one and the same plain , ( supposing the line ac divided into equal parts at the points c ) will appear as in the sixth projection , fig. . where the lines bc are continued to β , and then ( to avoid confusion in the figure ) removed from their proper place in the plain abdc , and all set off in the same streight line ac ( continued ) , and the lines ρσ applied to them as ordinates ( in this position ) in such proportion to rs , as aρ to ar . . the quantities in this projection , i thus design in species . . in numbers ( putting r = , a = , ) the semi-axes of the five curves described , bc , are of the same length with cd , and dc , § , . save that the first of those ( which is the circumference of a circle ) is here omitted ; ( instead of which , in this case , we should have a streight line , coincident with its axe ba . ) i. bc. ii. bc. iii. bc. iv. bc. v. bc. . . . . . and the ordinates , supposing the semi-axis divided into four parts , are these : i. ρσ . ii. ρσ . iii. ρσ . iv. ρσ . v. ρσ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . or ( for a more accurate describing the curve ) dividing the semi-axe into parts ( and the whole axe into ) , the ordinates will be these : i. ρσ . ii. ρσ . iii. ρσ . iv. ρσ . v. ρσ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ● . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . seventhly ; if it be cut by a plain a σ d , passing through a ( fig. . ) perpendicular to the rectangle abdc , and cutting the side bd in d , ( and any of the triangles rsa in ρσ ) the curve line d σ a will have this property : as ac , or ar , to a ρ ; so is rs , to ρσ . and a ρ is thus found : as ab to aa , or ad to a ρ ; so is bd to a ρ. . in species , thus : . but if this plain ( passing by a ) cut the line cd in any point p before it come at d in the continuation of bd , ( fig. . ) the curve line will have this property : cutting the same plain ( as before ) by any of the triangles rsa parallel to cqa , it will be , as cp to cr ; or , as ap to a ρ ; or , ar ( = ac ) to a ρ ; so rs to ρσ . . in species , thus : . or else , continuing ap till it cut bd ( continued ) in d , the proportions will be as before at § , . . in this section , the curve line d σ a cuts not its axis at p ( as in the fourth and fifth section at b ) , but continues on the same side of it ( above the plain abdc ) till it meet with it at a ; but ( supposing the solid to be farther continued in the opposite position ) cuts it at a , and thenceforth continues on the other side of it ( below the plain abdc continued ) till it meet again at δ. and ( in case of such continuation ) instead of cr = + c , we shall have cr = − c ; ( because now r falls on the contrary side of c , in the continuation of dc : ) and consequently the ordinates beyond a ( being on the contrary side ) to be interpreted negatively ( with the sign — ) as those on this side , affirmatively , with the sign + . . in both cases ( whether ad cut or cut not the line cd as at p ; that is , whether the point d fall above or below d ; ) the curve lines dσa continued ( answering to a sutable continuation of the solid ) cutting their axis at a , will again meet with it ( continued ) at δ , as far beyond a as d is on this side of it : and the ordinates beyond a will be just the same as on this side , but with contrary signs + − . . and the curve lines dσaδ transferred to one and the same plain , ( supposing the line bd divided into equal parts at the points d ) will appear as in the seventh projection , fig. . where the lines da are continued to δ , and then ( to avoid confusion in the figure ) removed from their proper place in the plain abdc , and all set off in the streight line ac ( continued ) , and the lines δσ applied to them as ordinates ( in this position ) in such proportion to rs , as a ρ is to ar . . the quantities in this projection i thus design in species . . in numbers ( putting r = , a = , ) the semi-axes of the five curves described , ad , are of the same length with bc , § . i. ad. ii. ad. iii. ad. iv. ad. v. ad. . . . . . and the ordinates , supposing the semi-axis divided into four equal parts , are these : i. ρσ . ii. ρσ . iii. ρσ . iv. ρσ . v. ρσ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ± . ± . ± . ± . ± . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − .   − . − . − . − .   or ( for a more accurate describing the curve ) dividing the semi-axis into parts ( and the whole axis into ) , the ordinates will be these : i. ρσ . ii. ρσ . iii. ρσ . iv. ρσ . v. ρσ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ± . ± . ± . ± . ± . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . − . . there are many other sections which may be made of the same solid ; but these being all that were proposed to be considered , i shall stay here . . but these four last mentioned ( and divers others , though somewhat different from them ) do all fall under one general , as so many particulars of it : for the better consideration of which , i shall compleat the body ( or at least the half of it ) which is here but quadrantal ; and imagin it farther to be continued downward ( below its circular base ) so far as shall be necessary ; and continued upward ( after an intersection in the line ab ) in like manner , as opposite cones are wont to be considered . . supposing then ( fig. . ) on the center c , and diameter Δd , a circle described Δsqd ; and cq perpendicular to the diameter Δcd , dividing the semicircle Δqd into two quadrants ; and ( at right angles to the plain of the circle ) a rectangle Δdbβ , divided into two equal parts by the streight line ca ; ( and therefore , joining qa , the triangle cqa will be at right angles to both the plains : ) and from every point s in the perimeter of the circle , to the respective points a in the line bβ ( in plains parallel to acq ) the streight lines sa to be drawn , compleating on either side of the rectangle a curve superficies Δsdbβ : these with the circle contain a solid , which i call a cono-cuneus , made up of four such quadrantal solids as are above described at § . which solid ( and it s opposite , made by a decussation in the line bβ ) we suppose to be continued as far as is necessary . . if this solid be cut by a plain at right-angles , to the rectangle Δdbβ , the section of that plain , with this rectangle , will be either parallel to bd , ( and then the section will be a right-angled triangle , as in our first case , § . ) or parallel to dΔ ; ( and then the section will be an ellipse , as in our second case , § . ) or at lest will obliquely cut the two opposite sides βΔ , bd , ( produced , if need be ) in δ , d ; which line δd i call , the diameter of the curve line , made by the section of the solid . . and , under this last case , fall the four last of these before-mentioned , ( the fourth , fifth , sixth , and seventh ) as appears by the scheme : where cd , cb , cb , answer the fourth case ; Δb , Δc , Δa , answer the fifth case ; bc , bc , br , answer the sixth case ; and aδ , aΔ , ar , answer the seventh case . but the curves answering these diameters i have omitted , to avoid confusion in the figure . . now a point being assigned ( fig. . ) in any of the diameters δd , the ordinate , or perpendicular height of the curve over that point , is thus found geometrically : by the point assigned ρ , suppose aρr drawn parallel to bd , cutting βb in a , and Δd in r ; on which , suppose a perpendicular plain erected , cutting the semicircle Δsd in rs , and the solid in a rsa right-lined triangle ; wherein ρσ being drawn parallel to rs , will be perpendicular to the plain of the rectangle , as is the line rs : and therefore σ is that point of the curve-super●icies which is over the point ρ , ( through which therefore the curve-line passeth , whose axis pas●eth through ρ : ) and therefore ρσ is the ordinate to that point of the axis or diameter δd . . therefore the point ρ being given , a and r be known also ; and consequently , rs the ordinate or right-sine belonging to the point r , in the semicircle Δsd : then , because a rs , aρσ , are like triangles , as ar is to aρ , so is rs to ρσ . . having thus found as many of the points σ as shall be thought necessary , a curve-line regularly drawn by them is that curve to which δd is the axis . . the arithmetical calculation may be thus performed : supposing Δd to be divided into any number of equal parts at the points r , the lines ra ( produced if need be ) will divide δd into the same number of equal parts at the points ρ : and if , from d , be drawn de parallel to Δδ , cutting Δβ in e , and ρε from the points ρ , the parallels ρε will cut δε into the same number of equal parts . . supposing then ( for the more convenient calculation ) Δd = d , Δr = d , δe = Ω , δε = ω , ( and therefore δd = ●radic ; : d +Ω , and δπ = √ : d +ω βΔ = a ( the altitude of βb above the base ) , and δβ = α ( the altitude of βb the vertex of the solid , above δ the lower vertex of the curve-line ) ; then is eβ = α − Ω , εβ = α − ω , the altitudes of βb above e , ε , or d , ρ ; ( and therefore , when Ω , ω , happen to be greater than α , the quantities α − Ω , α − ω , are negatives ; and consequently , e , ε , above the vertex βb , in the opposite solid ) and rd = d − d ; and therefore rs = √ : d − d . ( a mean proportional between Δr , rd ; that is , between d , d − d. ) . then , because a rs , aρσ , are like triangles , ( whether ρ be higher or lower than βb ; ) as ar , or βΔ , is to aρ , or βε ; so is rs to ρσ : that is , as a to α − ω ; so , to √ : dd − d which is therefore the length of ρσ . . if therefore , in a plain , a line equal to δd , be divided at ρ into so many parts as is supposed ; and on every of the points ρ , wherein it is so divided , be erected perpendiculars equal to the lines ρσ thus found respectively ( observing still , that the negative quantities are to be applied on the contrary part of the line thus drawn ) ; the curve-line drawn by the points σ in the plain , agrees with that in the solid made by the section thereof : and may be therefore described without an actual cutting of the solid , and may be fitted to any proportion of the height to the base of the solid ; and in whatsoever position the diameter δd be supposed to cut the rectangle Δdbβ in that solid . . this calculation ●itted to the circular base Δsd , may with the same case be applied to a parabola , hyperbola , or other curve-line whatever , whose axis is Δd , and vertex Δ ; if instead of √ : dd − d , ( which is here the ordinate in the circle ) we put the ordinate of that other curve-line : as , if a parabola ; , if an hyperbola ; ( supposing d the transverse diameter , and l the latus rectum ) ; and the like in other curves . . and for this reason , i chose to design the point r by its distance from Δ , rather than from c , forward and backward ; and ρ by its distance from δ , rather than from c ; which otherwise might as conveniently be done . . but if we should so design it , and put c = rc ( and consequently ; and α = ac , the altitude at c ; and ω the difference of altitudes at ρ from that at c ; then is a ρ = α − ω for the points ρ in cd above the point c , but a ρ = α + ω for those below it in c δ : and accordingly . . but if we put α = bd , ( the altitude of b above d , the higher vertex of the curve , which therefore will be a negative quantity when b falls below d ) and ω , the difference of altitude from that at d , the process will be the same as before , save that then , instead of α − ω , we must put α + ω = α ρ ( and consequently and the like if d were the vertex of a parabola , or hyperbola , or other curve , whose axis d δ slopeth downward . . if it be desired rather to find instrumentally , than by calculation , the several ordinates ρ σ , to any diameter Δ d , in any such solid , and in any position assigned ; it may be very easily performed in this manner . . first ; let any streight line , at pleasure , lm ( fig. . ) be divided at the points ρ , into any number of unequal parts , as a line of ordinates at equal distances in the quadrant of a circle ; ( in like manner , as the line cq is divided at the points s in the first projection , fig. . ) and on the other side of m , let λ m be so divided also into the same number of parts ; and on the several points ρ , m , erect perpendiculars , continued both ways as far as shall be needful . which general construction is applicable to any case at pleasure ; and being once drawn , may successively be applied to many . . then ( supposing , in the solid proposed , fig. . δ e , parallel to Δ d , cutting ac in e ; and eq , parallel to cq , cutting aq in q ; ) set off , in the perpendicular at m , fig. . a line me equal to that eq in the solid , and draw the streight lines e λ , el ; which lines will cut off , in the other parallels , the lines ρ s , equal to the ordinates of that ellipse in the solid , ( fig. . ) whose axis is δ e ; ( ●uch as are r σ in the second projection , fig. . ) . in like manner , ( supposing , in the solid , fig. . de parallel to d Δ , cutting ca , or the continuation thereof , in η ; and η q , parallel to cq , cutting qa , or the continuation thereof , in q ; ) set off in the perpendicular at m , ( fig. , . ) a line m η equal to η q ; ( on the same side of λ ml with me , or on the contrary , according as d and δ are on the same , or opposite sides b β ; ) and draw the streight lines η λ , η l ; which lines will cut off , in the other parallels , the lines ρ s , equal to the ordinates of that ellipse in the solid , whose axis is η d. . then ( dividing e η into as many equal parts at the points ω , as are the unequal parts in λ l ) from every of the points ω , draw streight lines to λ or l respectively ; which lines will cut off , in the respective parallels , ρ s , ( the first in the first , the second in the second , &c. numbering the points ω from e , and the parallels from λ ; ) the lines ρ σ , equal to the desired ordinates of the curve proposed . . lastly ; drawing a streight line δ d ( fig. , . ) equal to that in the solid ( the diameter of the curve proposed ) ; and dividing it in the points ρ into as many equal parts , as are the unequal parts in λ l ; and to each point of division , applying at right angles the lines ρ σ , equal to those upon the line λ l ( on the same or contrary sides of δ d , as those are of λ l ) ; and , by the points σ , drawing the curve-line which they direct : this curve-line is the same with that which is made by the section of the solid proposed , by a plain on the line δ d at right-angles to the rectangle Δ db β. . the same may be performed by one of the triangles λ me , fig. . reckoning the parallels therein twice over , ( the ordinates in each quadrant being the same ) and dividing e η into as many parts as before . . if the base Δ sd be an ellipse , this process will be the same as in a circle ; but if it be a parabola , hyperbola , or other the like curve , the line λ l , which is now divided as a line of ordinates at equal distances in a circle , must then be divided as such a line of ordinates of that parabola , hyperbola , or other curve , whose axis is Δ d : and then the rest of the operation pursued with very little alteration . . in the whole progress , i have still supposed the parallelogram abdc to be rectangular , and the quadrant cdq at right-angles with that plain , and the triangles acq , a rs , at right-angles to both of them ( and consequently , the body to be erect , not scalene ) ; and the plain cutting this body , to be also at right-angles with that parallelogram . but in case any of what we suppose to be rectangular , should be oblique , the sections will be somewhat different from these described , in like manner , as the sections of scalene cones , or the oblique sections of erect cones , differ from the right sections of right cones . but of these cases , i intend not here to discourse farther , contenting my self with the perpendicular sections of these erect solids . finis . fig. x. fig. xi . fig. xii . fig. xiii . fig. xiv . fig. xv. fig. xvi . project . . a fig. xvii . project . . fig. xviii . project . . fig. xix . project . . a fig. xx. project . . a fig. xxi . project . . fig. xxii . project . . a notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a -e fig. . fig. . fig. . fig. . fig. . fig. . fig. , . fig. . fig. . fig. , . fig. . fig. . fig. . fig. . fig. . fig. . fig. . fig. . the doctrine of the blessed trinity, briefly explained in a letter to a friend wallis, john, - . approx. kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from -bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : - (eebo-tcp phase ). a wing w estc r ocm this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons . universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase , no. a ) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set ) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, - ; : ) the doctrine of the blessed trinity, briefly explained in a letter to a friend wallis, john, - . p. printed for tho. parkhurst, [london : ] reproduction of original in huntington library. caption title. signed: john wallis. created by converting tcp files to tei p using tcp tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between and available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the , texts created during phase of the project have been released into the public domain as of january . anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. % (or pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf- unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p , characters represented either as utf- unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng trinity -- early works to . - tcp assigned for keying and markup - aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images - mona logarbo sampled and proofread - mona logarbo text and markup reviewed and edited - pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion the doctrine of the blessed trinity briefly explained , in a letter to a friend . sir , the doctrine of the arrians , socinians , or anti-trinitarians , ( call them as you please , provided you call them not orthodox christians ) in opposition to those who believe ( according to the word of god ) , that the sacred trinity , of father , son , and holy-ghost , are so distinguished each from other , as that the father is not the son , or holy-ghost ; the son not the father , or holy-ghost ; the holy-ghost not the father , or son ; yet so united , as that they are all one god ; ( which , in the athanasian creed , is called trinity in unity , and unity in trinity ; or , in common speaking , three persons and one god ; ) is what you were lately discoursing with me , and of which i shall give you some of my present thoughts . the scripture tells us plainly , there are three that bear record in heaven ; the father , the word , and the holy-ghost : and these three are one , joh. . . and the form of baptism ( matt. . . ) is , in the name of the father , and of the son , and of the holy-ghost . and the christian church , from the time of christ and his apostles downwards hitherto , as well before as since the council of nice , have ever held the divinity of those three persons ( as they are commonly called ; ) and that these three are but one god. and , that they have so held , hath been , by divers , sufficiently proved from the most ancient christian writers , which are now extant . which , therefore , i take for granted , as sufficiently proved by others , without spending time , at present , to prove it a-new . that these are three , distinguished each from other , is manifest : and , that this distinction amongst themselves , is wont to be called personality . by which word , we mean , that distinction ( what ever it be ) whereby they are distinguished each from other , and thence called three persons . if the word person do not please , we need not be fond of words , so the thing be agreed : yet is it a good word , and warranted by scripture , heb. . . where the son is called , the express image of his father's person : ( for so we render the word hypostasis , which is there used ; and mean by it , what i think to be there meant ) and we have no reason to wave the word , since we know no better to put in the place of it . if it be asked , what these personalities or characteristicks are , whereby each person is distinguished from other ; i think we have little more thereof in scripture , than that the father is said to beget ; the son , to be begotten ; and the holy-ghost , to proceed . if it be further asked , what is the full import of these words ( which are but metaphorical ) , and what is the adequate meaning of them ) i think we need not trouble our selves about it : for , since it is a matter purely of revelation ( not of natural knowledge , ) and we know no more of it than what is revealed in scripture , where the scripture is silent , we may be content to be ignorant . and we who know so little of the essence of any thing , especially of spiritual beings , though finite , need not think it strange that we are not able to comprehend all the particularities of what concerns that of god , and the blessed trinity . i know that the fathers , and school-men , and some after them , have imployed their wits to find out some faint resemblances , from natural things , whereby to express their imperfect conceptions of the sacred trinity : but they do not pretend to give an adequate account of it ; but only some conjectural hypotheses , rather of what may be , than of what certainly is. nor need we be concerned , to be curiously inquisitive into it , beyond what god hath been pleased to reveal concerning it . that the three persons are distinguished , is evident ; ( though we do not perfectly understand what those distinctions are : ) that to each of these , the scripture ascribes divinity , is abundantly shewed by those who have written on this subject : that there is but one god , is agreed on all hands : that the father is said to beget ; the son , to be begotten ; and the holy-ghost , to proceed ; is agreed also ; though we do not perfectly understand the full import of these words . and here we might quietly acquiesce ( without troubling our selves further , ) did not the clamorous socinians importunely suggest the impossibility and inconsistence of these things , insomuch as to tell us , that , how clear soever the expressions of scripture be , or can be , to this purpose , they will not believe it , as being inconsistent with natural reason . and therefore , though they do not yet think fit to give us a bare-fac'd rejection of scripture ; yet they do ( and must , they tell us , ) put such a forced sence on the words of it ( be they never so plain ) as to make them signify somewhat else . there is , therefore , in this doctrine of the trinity , as in that of the resurrection from the dead , a double inquiry : first , whether it be possible ; and then , whether it be true. and these to be argued ( in both cases ) from a very different topick : the one from natural reason ; the other from revelation . yet so , that this latter doth certainly conclude the former , if rightly understood . and though we should not be able to solve all difficulties ; yet must we believe the thing , if revealed ; unless we will deny the authority of such revelation . thus our saviour , against the sadducees , who denied the resurrection , matth. . . ye erre ( saith he ) not knowing the scriptures , nor the power of god. the power of god , if rightly understood , was enough ( from the light of reason ) to prove it not impossible : but , whether or no it will be so ( which natural reason could not determine , ) was to be argued from scripture-revelation . in like manner , st. paul before agrippa , act. . first argues the possibility of it ; why should it be thought a thing incredible with you , that god should raise the dead ? ver . . for if agrippa did believe the creation of the world , ( as many even of the heathen did , from the light of nature ) he could not think it impossible for that god ( who had at first made all things of nothing ) to recollect , out of its dust or ashes , a body which once had been . but whether or no he would do so , depended upon another question , to be after asked , ver . . king agrippa , believest thou the prophets ? for this was purely matter of revelation , and could not otherwise be known : for , as to the immortality of the sou● , and a future state hereafter , many of the heathens went very far , by the light of nature ; but as to the resurrection of the body , i do not find they had any sentiments about it ( or but very faint , if any : ) and if they had , it may well be supposed to be the remainder of some ancient tradition from the jews , or their predecessors . nor do i see any foundation in nature , which should make them think of it ( before it was revealed ) any more , than of the redemption of mankind by christ , ( which we should never have thought of , had not god himself contrived and declared it to us . ) but , when that of the resurrection was once suggested , there was no pretence of reason to think it a thing impossible , and therefore no reason to doubt the truth of it , when declared , if we believe the scriptures , wherein it is revealed ; especially those of the new testament . it is much the same as to the doctrine of the trinity . it is a thing we should not have thought of , if it had not been suggested by divine writers ; but , when suggested , there is nothing in natural reason ( that we know of , or can know of ) why it should be thought impossible ; but whether or no it be so , depends only upon revelation . and in this case the revelation seems so clear ( to those who believe the scriptures ) that we have not reason to doubt of it , unless the thing be found to be really impossible , and inconsistent with reason . nor do the anti-trinitarians insist on any other ground why they deny it , save only , that it seems to them absolutely impossible ; and therefore think themselves bound to put another sence on all places of scripture ( how clear soever they be , or can be ) which prove or favour it . so that the controversie is now reduced to this single point , whether it be possible or not possible : whether it be consistent or inconsistent with natural light or reason . ( and to that point therefore i shall confine my discourse . ) for it seems agreed on all hands ( as to those who believe the scriptures ) that , if it be not impossible , it is sufficiently revealed . now for us who understand so little of god's infinite essence , and which it is impossible for us fully to comprehend , who are our selves but finite , and mostly conversant with material objects ; in so much that we cannot pretend to understand the essence of our own souls ; and , when we attempt to explain it , must do it rather by saying what it is not , than what it is ; ( so hard a matter is it for us to fix in our mind or fancy , a notion , idea , or conception of a spiritual being , which falls not under our senses : ) 't is hard , i say , for us ( who understand so little of a spirit ) to determine ( of what god is pleased to reveal ) that it is impossible , or inconsistent with his essence , which essence we cannot understand . but what is it that is thus pretended to be impossible ? 't is but this , that there be three somewhats , which are but one god : ( and these somewhats we commonly call persons . ) now what inconsistence is there in all this ? that father , son , and holy-ghost are three , is manifest ; and are in scripture-language distinguished . that there is but one god is manifest also , and all those three are this god : that the name person is no incongruous word , is evident from heb. . . where it is used . if it be said , it doth not agree to them exactly in the same sence in which it is commonly used amongst men ; we say so too , nor doth any word , when applyed to god , signifie just the same as when applyed to men , but only somewhat analogous thereunto . what kind or degree of distinction ( according to our metaphysicks ) this is , we need not be very sollicitous to enquire ; or , whether in our metaphysicks ( accommodated to our notions of finite beings ) there be any name for it : 't is enough for us if these three may truly be so distinguished , as that one be not the other , and yet all but one god. now , that there is no inconsistence or impossibility , that , what in one regard are three , may in another regard be one , is very manifest from many instances that may be given even in finite beings , such as we converse with ; which , though they do not adequately agree with this of the sacred trinity , ( nor is it to be expected that they should ; finite , with what is infinite ; ) yet there is enough in them to shew , there is no such inconsistence as is pretended . i shall spare to instance in many resemblances which have been given long since by fathers and schoolmen , or by later writers . which though they are not pretended to be adequately the same with that of the sacred trinity , ( as neither will any thing else be that we can take from finite beings ; ) yet are they sufficient to shew that there is no inconsistence in it . ( which is all that is here incumbent on us to prove . ) i shall only name a few . i will begin with what concerns the most gross of finite beings , that is , material bodies . suppose we further , each of these dimensions infinitely continued ; the length infinitely eastward and westward , the breadth infinitely northward and southward , the heighth infinitely upward and downward : here are three infinite dimensions , and but one infinite cube ; and these three dimensions ( though distinct ) are equal each to other ( else it were not a cube ; ) and though we should allow , that a cube cannot be infinite ( because a body , and therefore a finite creature : ) yet a spirit may ; such as is the infinite god. and therefore no inconsistence ; that there be three personalities ( each infinite , and all equal ) , and yet but one infinite god , essentially the same with those three persons . i add further , that such infinite cube , can therefore be but one , and those three dimensions can be but three , ( not more nor fewer : ) for , if infinite as to its length ( eastward and westward ) , and as to its breadth ( northward and southward ) , and as to its heighth ( upward and downward ) ; it will take up all imaginary space possible , and leave no room either for more cubes or more dimensions : and if this infinite cube were ( and shall be ) eternally so , its dimensions also must be infinite and co-eternal . i say further , if in this ( supposed ) cube , ( we suppose in order , not in time ) its first dimension , that of length , as a. b. , and to this length be given an equal breadth ( which is the true generation of a square ) as c. d. , which compleats the square basis of this cube ; and to this basis ( of length and breadth ) be given ( as by a further procession from both ) an equal heighth e. f. , which compleats the cube ; and all this eternally , ( for such is the cube supposed to be , ) here is a fair resemblance ( if we may parvis componere magna ) of the father , ( as the fountain or original ; ) of the son , ( as generated of him from all eternity ; ) and of the holy-ghost , ( as eternally proceeding from both : ) and all this without any inconsistence . this longum , latum , profundum , ( long , broad , and tall , ) is but one cube ; of three dimensions , and yet but one body : and this father , son , and holy-ghost ; three persons , and yet but one god. and as , there , the dimensions are not ( in the abstract ) predicated or affirmed each of other , or the cube of either , ( the length is not the breadth or heighth , nor either of these a cube ; ) but ( in the concrete ) cube is affirmed of all ; this longum , latum , profundum , is a cube , and the same cube : so here , ( in the abstract ) the personality of the father is not that of the son , nor either of these that of the holy-ghost , nor the deity or godhead any of these ; but ( in the concrete ) though the personalities are not , yet the persons are , each of them god and the same god. if it be objected , that those concretes are affirmed or predicated each of other ; ( that longum is also latum and profundum , ( this long is broad and tall ; ) but not so here , the father is not the son or holy-ghost : i answer , that , if the words be rightly considered , the analogy holds here also : for when we say , this long is broad and tall ( where cube or body is understood ) the full meaning is plainly thus ; this body , which , as to one dimension ( that of length ) , is said to be a long body , is the same body , which , as to another dimension ( that of breadth ) , is said to be a broad body , and which , as to a third dimension ( that of heighth ) , is said to be a tall body . so here , that god , which ( as to one personality ) is god the father , is the same god , which ( as to another personality ) is god the son , and which ( as to a third personality ) is god the holy-ghost . so the analogy holds every way , nor is there any inconsistence in either case . i proceed to the consideration of somewhat more spiritual , and less material than that of a body locally extended . suppose we then a created angel , or humane soul : at least if those who deny the blessed trinity will allow that there are such beings ; but if they be sadducees , who do not acknowledge either angel or spirit , or that the holy scriptures are the word of god , which testifie both , ( which i doubt is the case of some of them ) let them speak out , that so we may know whom we have to deal with ; and not pretend to nibble only at the athanasian creed , or some expressions therein , while the quarrel is indeed at somewhat higher , ( though , ad amoliendam invidiam , they think fit to dissemble it , ) and that they do but faintly believe ( if at all ) that the holy scriptures ) are the word of god , or the doctrines therein contained to be such . and we have reason to suspect it , when they spare not to let us know , that , were this doctrine of the trinity therein delivered in words as express as could be , they would not believe it . but suppose we , ( what they would seem to grant , and what i am so charitable as to think divers of them do believe ) that there are spiritual beings , such as angels and the souls of men ; and that these spiritual beings are endued with knowledge ( or wisdom ) and force ( or an executive power ) to act according to that knowledge . that there is some such thing , at least in man , ( whether body or soul ) they cannot but acknowledge ; for themselves be , and know , and do . and though we cannot fully comprehend , much less express in words , how all this is so ; ( for we are here at a loss , as well as in higher things : ) yet , that it is , they cannot deny , though they do not know how. now , to be , and to know , and to do , are certainly distinct each from other , ( though perhaps we are not all agreed , of what kind , or in what degree this distinction is : ) to be is not the same as to know , for that may be were this is not ; and to do is ( for the same reason ) somewhat different from both those , for a man may be and may know what he doth not do ; yet 't is one and the same soul ( at least one and the same man ) which is , and knows , and does . there is therefore no impossibility or inconsistence in it , that what in one regard are three , may in another regard be one. thus in the sacred trinity , if we conceive of the father as the original or first person , who begets the son ; the son as the wisdom of the father , begotten of him ; and the holy-ghost as the spirit of the father and the son , as proceeding from both , and yet the same god with both ; ( or what other distinction there may be of these three persons , who are but one god , that we do not know ; ) there is no inconsistence in it , that these three may be one ; three in one regard , and one in another . i might shew the same as to the understanding , will , and meaning , which are all the same soul : and the known metaphysical terms of unum , verum , bonum , which are all but the same ens. and many other instances of like nature . but we hold ( it will be said ) a greater distinction ( than that of unum , verum , bonum ) between the three persons in the sacred trinity . be it so . ( but what that greater distinction is , we do not pretend to comprehend . ) however , it is from all these instances evident , that there is no impossibility , or inconsistence with reason , that what in one regard are three , may in another regard be one. which is what we undertook to shew . 't is true , that not any , nor all of these instances , nor any of those given by other learned mendo adequately express the distinction and unity of the persons in the sacred trinity , ( for neither hath god distinctly declared it to us , nor are we able fully to comprehend it , nor is it necessary for us to know . ) but because we do not know a how the bones grow in the womb of her that is with child , shall we therefore say they do not grow there ? or , because b we cannot by searching find out god , because we cannot find out the almighty to perfection , shall we therefore say , things cannot be , when god says they are , only because we know not how ? if god say , c these three are one ? shall we say , they are not ? if god say , d the word was god , and , the word was made flesh , shall we say , not so , only becaue we cannot tell how ? it is safer to say it is , when god says it is , though we know not ( in particular ) how it is . especially when there be so many instances in nature , to shew it not to be impossible or inconsistent with reason . the thing is sufficiently revealed to those who are willing to be taught , and e receive the truth in the love of it . ( nor is it denyed , by those who gainsay it , but that , if the thing be possible , it is sufficiently revealed ; there being no other exception made , as to the revelation , but the impossibility of the thing . ) f but if any man list to be contentious , and to g quarrel about words , it is no wonder if h hearing they do hear and not understand ; and that god i give them over to believe a lye , who do not love the truth . but k the humble he will teach his way . and , while we be so , we be safe . august . . yours , iohn wallis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a -e a eccles. ▪ . b job . . c joh. . . d joh. . , . e thess. . . f cor. . . rom. . . g tim. . . tit. . . h act. . . matth. . . i thess. . , . rom. . , . k psal. . . three sermons concerning the sacred trinity by john wallis. wallis, john, - . approx. kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from -bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : - (eebo-tcp phase ). a wing w estc r ocm this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons . universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase , no. a ) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set ) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, - ; : ) three sermons concerning the sacred trinity by john wallis. wallis, john, - . [ ], , [ ] p. printed for tho. parkhurst ..., london : . reproduction of original in huntington library. advertisement: p. . created by converting tcp files to tei p using tcp tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between and available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the , texts created during phase of the project have been released into the public domain as of january . anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. % (or pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf- unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p , characters represented either as utf- unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng trinity -- sermons. sermons, english -- th century. - tcp assigned for keying and markup - spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images - rachel losh sampled and proofread - rachel losh text and markup reviewed and edited - pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion three sermons concerning the sacred trinity . by john wallis , d. d. professor of geometry , in the university of oxford . london : printed for tho. parkhurst , at the bible and three crowns , in cheapside , . to the reader . the first of the three sermons here following , is printed according as it was preached in oxford , in the year . ( accommodated to that time and place ; ) but it was , for the substance of it , preached in london twenty years before that time . which i mention to shew , that the construction which i give of the words , is not a new forced notion , just now taken up to serve a turn ; or ( as somebody is pleased to call it ) equally new and cautious : but , what i did , so long ago , take to be a then received truth . and , i since find , it is at least as old as st. austin's epist. . the other two are lately added , in pursuance of some other discourses lately made publick , concerning the sacred trinity . wherein much of what was said before , scatteringly , ( as those who wrote against it gave occasion ; ) is now inlarged and put into a little better order . if what i have done may be serviceable to the truth , and to the church of god : i have what i did desire , and shall not think the labour ill bestowed . a sermon preached to the university of oxford . decemb. . . joh . xvij . . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . and this is life eternal , that they might know thee the onely true god , and jesus christ , whom thou hast sent . i need not apologize for the seasonableness of this text ; by telling you , that the subject matter of it , suites well with the great solemnity , which at this time we celebrate ; and the pen-man , with that of the day : because a discourse on such a subject , can never be unseasonable to a christian auditory . especially to such as , whose profession being to seek after knowledge , should not decline that of god and christ , the chief of all . nor will it be any exception hereunto : that it is no news , but well known already : not only because that there be many who pretend to know what they do not , or do in effect deny ; and that there be many things , which , though we know well , we have need enough to be minded of : but even because i do not find that many persons are wont to be displeased with being often minded of those things wherein they think that either their interest or excellency lies ; more than a good wit when commended , or a fair lady with being told she is handsome ; even though sometimes ( as we are wont to say ) they know it but too well already . and therefore , since to know god and christ is both our interest and our commendation ; it will not , i hope , seem grievous to any to hear it discoursed of ; to the end that those who know it not may be incited to learn it , and those who know it , may take content in it . and i shall as little apologize for a plain discourse on this subject : since it is both my profession and practice , to demonstrate or make things as plain as i can ; not to perplex or make them intricate ; which may amuse the auditors , or sometimes please or tickle them ; but is not wont either to teach , or perswade : like too much of ornament , which doth but disguise the native beauty ; or too much trimming , which hides the cloth. the words read , are our saviour's words ; addressed to his father in the behalf of his disciples : and are a part of that prayer with which he closeth his large exhortation , or farewel-sermon to his disciples , the night before he was to suffer ; of which we have a large rehearsal in the three foregoing chapters , the th , th , and th : which this th . closeth with a prayer . he begins his prayer , with a petition concerning eternal life , which he was to bestow ( according to the power his father had granted him ) to as many as he had given him ; that is , to as many as should effectually believe in him . to which petition he subjoins this exegetical epiphonema , and this is life eternal , that they may know thee the only true god , and jesus christ whom thou hast sent . we may consider the words either according to a synthetic or an analytic method , as the schools speak : the former of which they commonly follow in sciences theoretical ; the latter in practical . if considered synthetically ; they present us with , first , the cause , or principle ; the knowledge of god and christ : and , secondly , the effect , or consequent resulting from it ; eternal life . if analytically ; we have in them , first , a glorious end proposed ; eternal life : and , secondly , the means proportionate thereunto ; the knowledge of god and christ. in the former way , the result of them is to this purpose ; that the excellent knowledge of god and christ , is attended with this most glorious consequent , eternal life . in the latter way , it amounts to thus much : that the way or means to eternal life , is the knowledge of god and christ. nor is it much material , whether of the two ways we take them ; synthetically , or analytically : whether we take them as a theorem ; affirming this effect , of that cause : or as a problem ; directing to these means for such an end. yet i chuse rather to take them in the latter consideration , ( though not exclusive of the former ; ) because , this epiphonema taking its rise from the mention made of eternal life , in the former verse ; ( not from a former mention of the knowledge of god and christ ; ) it seems to be rather intended as a direction how to attain eternal life ; than , an account of the effect of such a knowledge . but , in doing the one , it doth the other also . i shall begin , first , with that which lies first in the order of the word ; the end proposed ; or the effect , or consequent of this knowledge ; the happiness which doth attend it : which , for its excellency , is called life , and , for its duration , eternal . this is life eternal . the word life i take to be here used in a figurative sense ; and to import good or happiness : like as , its contrary , death , especially death eternal , to import misery . there is indeed , at least , a threefold life commonly mentioned ; and , in proportion thereunto , a threefold death : natural , spiritual , and eternal . life natural , ( which is indeed the proper acceptation of the word life , or the first signification of it , ) is more easily apprehended , than expressed . it imports that active state or condition which ariseth from the union of the soul and body , as well in man , as in other animals ; ( not to mention that of plants : ) the destruction or want of which , upon the soul's departure , we call death . 't is that , according to which , in common speech , a man or beast is said to be alive or dead . now this life , is , of all natural goods , looked upon as the chiefest ; and consequently death the greatest of natural evils : because life is that foundation or first good , which makes us capable of what else is so : and with our life , we lose all the rest . hence that in job . . skin for skin , and all that a man hath , will he give for his life . and that of solomon ; a living dog is better than a dead lion , eccles. . . for , when life is gone , there succeeds an incapacity , not only of doing , but also of enjoying good. from this consideration it is , that the other significations of the word have their original . for life being looked upon as the greatest natural good , and death as the greatest natural evil ; the one ( by a synechdoche speciei ) is frequently used ( both in sacred and profane authours ) to signify good indefinitely , especially the greatest good ; and the other , in like manner , to signifie evil , especially the greatest evil. the one is put for happiness , and the other for misery . and then , again , ( by a synechdoche generis ) this general notion of good or evil , happiness or misery , implied in the words life and death , becomes applicable to this or that particular good and evil , as occasion serves . suppose the spiritual life of grace , or death in sin : and the eternal life of glory in heaven , or the eternal death of torment in hell. thus , deut. . . i have set before you ( saith moses to israel ) life and death , blessing and cursing : ( where life and death , are made equivalent to blessing and cursing ; ) therefore chuse life ( saith he ) that thou and thy seed may live ; that is , that you may be happy . so at ver . . of the same chapter ; i have set before you ( saith he ) life and good , death and evil . where life and good are put exegetical each of other , and so death and evil. and in the same sense it is the poet tells us , non est vivere , sed valere , vita . thus god to adam in paradise ( for 't is no new trope , nor of yesterday ) in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt die the death ; that is , thou shalt become miserable : for we know that adam did not the same day die a natural death ; but some hundreds of years after : but he did that day begin to be in a state of misery , whereof his natural death was but a part . so , rom. . . the wages of sin is death ; where the comprehension of all the evils or misery which sin deserves , or god inflicteth for it , is called death : like as on the contrary , all the happiness , which the saints enjoy , is , on the same account , called life ; the gift of god is eternal life , through jesus christ our lord. so here : by life we understand happiness ; contrary to which is the death of misery : and then ( by a metalepsis , or double trope , ) that happiness in special , which the saints enjoy in glory ( though not exclusive of what they have before ; ) and that misery which in hell attends the wicked . 't is true indeed , that the condition of the saints in glory , after the resurrection , may , even in a proper sense , be called life ; because of that union , which shall then be , of soul and body ; and the exercise of ( at least the most noble ) faculties of life . yet do not i take that to be the true import of the word here . for though it be true , that the saints in glory , have not only an union of soul and body , but likewise a knowledge or sense of that estate wherein they are , ( which may import not only a life , but even a rational life : ) yet as true it is , that the damned in hell have so too ; ( for their souls and bodies shall not be less united ; nor shall they be insensible of their woful condition : ) yet is not that estate of theirs called a life ( though naturally it be so , and it is their misery that it is so , ) but eternal death ; because a life of wo and misery ; not of bliss and happiness : a living misery , being , in this sense , the truest death . secondly , as it is called life for its excellency , so , for its duration , it is called eternal . it is very usual in scripture , in the use of allegories , or figurative expressions , to add some kind of epithet to distinguish the word so used from the same in its native signification : and , when the word is used so as to express figuratively somewhat more excellent than it self , the epithet hath somewhat of additional exellency in it . thus christ is said to be the spiritual rock , cor. . . the living bread , or manna that came down from heaven , joh. . . to distinguish the words , so metaphorically used , from the rock and manna literally spoken of , in the story of their travails in the wilderness . and the church of christ , as living stones , become a spiritual house , and a holy priesthood , to offer up spiritual sacrifices to god , pet. . . where the epithets serve both for distinction from the material stones and temple , the levitical priesthood , and corporeal sacrifices ; and for the commendation or preheminence of those before these . so the new heaven , and the new earth , and the new jerusalem , rev. . , . jerusalem that is above , gal. . . and matth. . . i will drink no more ( saith christ ) of the fruit of the vine , till i drink it new with you in my father's kingdom : not that christ did intend anew to drink of such wine in his father's kingdom ; but of a new wine , another sort of wine than that commonly so call●d ; to wit , those spiritual joys in his father's kingdom , which should more refresh their hearts and souls , than this wine did their bodies . so ; i am the true vine , and my father is the husbandman , joh. . . i am the good shepherd , joh. . . not that christ was more truly a vine , in propriety of speech , than that which we so call ; or indeed a shepherd , who took the care of sheep : but that there was in christ somewhat of another kind much more eminent , than that of the vine , which did yet in some measure resemble it ; and , a much greater care , but of another nature , of those he calls his flock , than a shepherd hath of his sheep . so here ; this is life eternal : not a natural life , ( such as is commonly meant by the word life , ) a life of the body , which after a short time is to be exchanged for death ; but a life , a happiness , of another nature ; a far more excellent good than what we call life , which doth but very imperfectly express it ; an eternal life . and this eternity , as it serves , in general , to distinguish this word life from the ordinary acceptation ; and doth import , for the kind of it , somewhat much more excellent : so it doth particularly point out that everlasting duration of this so great a happiness . 't is that which , though indeed it have a beginning , shall never have an end. and upon this account it is , that it is so often called eternal life , and life everlasting ; that it were endless to enumerate the places where it is so called . an eternal inheritance ; a house eternal in the heavens ; an inheritance incorruptible , and undefiled , which fadeth not away ; a kingdom which cannot be moved ; an eternal weight of glory ; when our mortal shall have put on immortality . and this consideration of eternity , added to that of life ; this everlasting duration , to that unspeakable , unimaginable happiness ; renders this eternal life , a perfect felicity and every way compleat . for that perfection of degree , imported in the word life , can admit of no addition , but that of perfect con●in●ance , which the word eternal assures us of . like as , on the other hand , that perfection of misery , which attends the wicked , is capable of no greater aggravation , than that of perpetuity : sealed up in that sad expression of a living misery , eternal death . you have them both paralleled in matth. . . these shall go into everlasting punishment , but the righteous into life eternal . i have now done with the first part , the happiness here proposed ; eternal life . before i come to the s●●ond , the knowledge of god and christ ; it will 〈◊〉 requisite to consider , a little , the conne●●●● of these together , in the word , is ; this is 〈◊〉 eternal . which is capable of a double ac●●ptation . for it may be understood either as a formal , or as a causal predication . this is life eternal ; that is , herein consisteth eternal life . or else thus ; this ●s life eternal , that is , this is is the way or means , to attain eternal life . the former of these is very agreeable to the doctrine of the schoolmen ; who generally place the happiness of heaven in the beatifick vision ; in the seeing or knowing of god. grounded on such places as that of matth. . . blessed are the pure in heart , for they shall see god. cor. . , , . we know but in part , and we prophesie but in part ; but when that which is perfect shall come , then that which is in part shall be done away : we now see through a glass darkely , but then face to face : now i know in part , but then shall i know even as also i am known . cor. . . we all with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the lord , are changed into the same image , from glory to glory . joh. . . beloved , now are we the sons of god , and it doth not yet appear what we shall be : but we know , that when he shall appear , ( or , when it shall appear ) we shall be like him : for we shall see him as he is . with others of the like import . and certainly that perfection of knowledge , shall be at least a great part of that happiness , which we expect in heaven ; as from these and other the like places is well collected . so that it is not improperly said , that eternal life doth , at least in part , consist in such a knowledge . nor is it any sufficient objection hereunto , to say , that , it is not by knowledge only , as an act of the understanding , that we enjoy god , wherein our happiness consists ; but by an act of the will also , chusing and closing with , and delighting in him . for though this be true ; yet neither is the knowledge here spoken of , a bare speculative , or notional knowledge , wherein the understanding is alone concerned : but an active , operative knowledge ; such as brings the will , affections , and all the faculties into a proportionate conformity thereunto . and in such a knowledge of god in the understanding , attended with such a conformity in the will and other faculties , it is not to be denyed that our happiness doth consist ; even that of eternal life . yet ( without excluding this sense ) i take the words here to be rather a causal predication : assigning the way or means whereby eternal life is attained . this is life eternal , that is , this is the way to attain eternal life ; to know thee the only true god , &c. the knowledge of god and christ , being the direct way to attain eternal life . parallel to which , is that of our saviour , joh. . . his commandment is life everlasting . and very frequent elsewhere are such metonymies of the effect for the cause . i am the resurrection , and the life , saith christ , joh. . . that is , the authour of it . so luk. . . man's life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth ; that is , it doth not depend upon it ; it is not secured by it : or a christ elsewhere , matth. . . ( out of deut. . . ) man liveth not by bread alone , &c. and moses , speaking of their diligent observing the commands of god , deut. . . this is your life , ( saith he ) and through this thing you shall prolong your days : ( where the latter clause is enegetical of the former : ) just in the same form with the words here , this is life eternal ; that is , hereby they shall attain eternal life . this therefore being the most plain and simple interpretation of the words : we are now to enquire particularly , what that is that christ here says to be eternal life , or rather the way thereunto . that they may know thee the only true god ; and , whom thou hast sent , jesus christ. which contains in brief the doctrine of the gospel , or christian religion : distinguished into two parts , the knowledge of god , and the knowledge of jesus christ. both which are necessary to bring us to eternal life . i shall speak , first , to the former of these two ; the knowledge of god ; that is , of god the creatour and lord of all ; as contradistinguished to that of christ the redeemer . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that they might know thee the only true god. by thee , or the person here spoken to , we are to understand god , the father of our lord jesus christ ; ( for to him it is manifest , that christ doth here direct his prayer : ) yet not so much in his personal as in his essential consideration . for it is not the personality , but the essence of the father , that determines him to be the only true god. we have therefore , in the object of this knowledge , at least , these three propositions : i. that there is a god. ii. that there is but one ( true ) god. iii. that god , the father of our lord jesus christ , is this god. i. the first of these strikes at atheism , or those that deny a god. and that we know thus much is necessary from that of heb. . . he that cometh unto god , must believe that god is , and that he is a rewarder of those that diligently seek him . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . he must believe , that there is a god. nay , he must believe also somewhat of what he is : not fansie to himself somewhat under the name of god , which indeed is not a god ; or notions inconsistent with that of a deity ; as those , psal. . . thou thoughtest that i was altogether such a one as thy self : or the like . for to believe such a false notion of god , is not to believe a god , but to believe an idol . we are next to know , as that there is a god ; so , that there is but one god. i mean ; but one true god. for there are indeed , as the apostle tells us , cor. . , , . gods many , and lords many ; that is , there are that are called gods , ( for so he explains himself ) but to us there is but one god ; we know , ( saith he ) that there is no other god but one. and this indeed depends upon the former . for he that doth , according to a true notion of god , know that there is a god ; must needs know also that there is but one. for the true notion of god , including infinite , absolute , perfect , &c. must needs also include unity ; for it is inconsistent that there should be many such . so that , in a manner , polytheism includes atheism . he that believes many gods , doth , in effect , not believe any : that is , not any such being as of which it is impossible there should be more than one. we are , thirdly , to know , that this god , is that onely true god. i say , this god ; whom we have variously designed in scripture , by several characters . the god that made heaven and earth : the living god : the god of israel : the god whose name is jehovah : and ( as here , and elsewhere frequently in the new testament ) the father of our lord jesus christ. by which and other the like characters , he is distinguished from all false gods , from all pretended deities . this god we are to know to be the onely true god. but , when i say , that the father of our lord jesus christ is this onely true god ; i add , that this appertains not so much to his personality as to his essence . for though the three persons in the sacred trinity , be distinguished each from other by their personalities , ( the father is not the son , nor the son the father , &c. ) yet they all communicate in the common essence ; whereby the son as well as the father , and the holy ghost as either , is this onely true god. the person of the father is indeed true god , but not according to his personality , but according to his essence . and the person of the son is god also , and the true god ; yet not another , but the same true god. and the holy ghost likewise . according to that of joh. . . i and my father are one : that is , one mod , though not one person . and joh. . . there are three that bear record in heaven , the father , the word , and the holy ghost ; and these three are one. three , and yet one. three persons , yet but one god. they are all this one , this onely true god ; beside whom there is no god. i know there are some who would be glad to take advantage of this place , to the derogation of the divinity of christ , and of the holy ghost . as if it were here affirmed , that the father onely were true god : and therefore , not the son , nor the holy ghost . but the cavil is obvious , and the answer easie . it is not said that the father onely is true god ; but that the father is the onely true god ; he is that god beside whom there is no other true god : which may well enough be said , though the son also ( as indeed he is ) be that same true god ; and the holy ghost likewise . indeed should we say , that the son were also true god , and another god ; the father could not then be said to be the onely true god , since that there would be another true god beside this . ( and the like of the holy ghost . ) but to say that the son is the same true god , is well consistent with it . for though another person than the father be true god , yet , because not another god , this one god remains still the onely true god. and the original words are to this purpose very clear ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . where the article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 coming before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( not after it ) doth determine it to be a restriction of the praedicate , not of the subject . 't is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . not thee onely to be the true god ; but ( as we truly render it ) thee to be the onely true god. that is ; to know thee to be that god , beside which god there is no other true god ; though another beside thee be likewise this onely true god ; viz. the same god with thee , though not the same person . it excludes only a plurality of gods , not a plurality of persons in the same god-head . 't is true indeed , that this divinity , is not , in this place , so directly affirmed , either of the son , or the holy ghost : but , neither is it denyed : and therefore it is to receive its decision from other places where it is affirmed clearly . and thus much concerning the first branch of this knowledge , the knowledge of god. to know thee , the only true god. there is another piece of knowledge necessary to the attainment of eternal life ; the knowledge of christ. for so it follows , and jesus christ whom thou hast sent . 't is true , that had we continued in that estate wherein man was at first created , there had been no necessity of this second branch of knowledge . for , had there been no sin , there had been no need of a saviour : and consequently , not of this knowledge of jesus christ. a knowledge of god , the onely true god , with an obedience conformable thereunto , had then been enough to make us happy . but man , by his fall , having contracted an estate of misery ; there is now no restitution to our lost happiness , but by a redemption ; and there is no redemption , but by jesus christ. for as there is but one god ; so , but one mediator between god and man , the man christ jesus , tim. . . neither is there any other name given to men , whereby we must be saved , but that of jesus christ of nazareth ; whom they crucified , and god raised from the dead : ( act. . , . ) there is no salvation in any other . it is necessary therefore , to the attainment of eternal life , that we know him , in this capacity . what we are to know concerning him , though we cannot expect , in so few words , to have clearly set down , without a comment from other places to give light to them : yet at least three things seem in these words to be pointed at ; his divinity , his incarnation , and his mediatory office. . his divinity ; in that he is the son of god. for he calls him father , whom he says we must know to be the onely true god. indeed , were he onely the son of god in such a sense as adam is so called , luke . . or the angels thought to be , job . . that is , by creation ; for as saints are so called ( rom. . and elsewhere , ) that is , by adoption ; it would not iner a divinity . but to be ( as christ is ) the son of god by eternal generation , argues a communication in the same nature . as the apostle infers , heb. . . for to which of the angels said he at any time , thou art my son , this day have i begotten thee ? this onely begotten of the father , must needs be also of the same nature with the father ; and therefore , god , as he is . and this argument , ( however now perhaps there are who endeavour to elude it ) the jews , his enemies , thought to be conclusive . for when they observed him to call god his father , or pretend himself to be the son of god ; especially , the christ the son of god ; they did not understand him to speak in such a sense as when themselves were commonly wont so to speak ( as joh. . . we are not born of fornication ; we have one father , even god ; ) but in such a sense as they judged blasphemous , ( and had been so indeed , had it not been true ; ) who therefore sought the more to kill him , ( joh. . . ) because he said , that god was his father ; making himself equal with god. and the high priest ( matth. . . ) rent his cloths , saying , he speaketh blasphemy , when our saviour affirmed before him , that he was the christ , the son of god. 't was manifest therefore , that he so spake , and they so understood him , of such a son-ship as argued a divinity , a being equal with god. . his humanity , or incarnation , is pointed at , in these words , whom thou hast sent . for by the fathers sending him , or his coming into the world , is clearly meant his being incarnate , or made man. as gal. . . god sent his son made of a woman . and joh. . . the word was made flesh , and dwelt amongst us . . his mediatory office , is implyed as well in the title christ , added to his name jesus ; as in that of his being sent by god. jesus the christ , or jesus the messiah , whom thou hast sent . for as his name jesus doth design the person ; so the title christ , that is messiah , ( that in greek , answering to this in hebrew , and both signifying the anointed ) doth import the office , to which he was designed , and for which he was sent . for god did not send him , to no purpose ; but sent him for this end , for this work , to be the mediator between god and man ; to reconcile us to the father ; to make an atonement or propitiation for us . to take away the sins of the world ; to obtain eternal redemption ; to procure an everlasting inheritance ; a purchased possession ; to make intercession for us ; to save to the uttermost those that come unto god by him . or , as joh. . , . ( where all the three particulars are likewise intimated ) god therefore sent his onely begotten son into the world , that whosoever believes in him should not perish , but have everlasting life . and now , having gone through the whole text , we might , if time would suffer , look back upon it to take a new survey thereof , and collect from thence some of those particular deductions which might concern our practice . for certainly , the knowledge which christ here declares necessary to eternal life , and the means conducing thereunto , is not a bare notional knowledge , or a pure speculative belief , ( such as the devils may have as well as we ; ) but an operative knowledge , a practical faith , a faith fruitful in good works ; without which those speculative notions will never bring us to heaven . and therefore , without ingaging in the nice disputes , of justification by faith alone , or works concurring thereunto ; this is on all hands agreed without dispute , that faith without good works will never justify us . whatever their influence be , in justification ; their presence at least is necessary . without doing , we cannot , in god's account , be reputed either to believe or know. those that obey him not , are reckoned , in god's account , amongst those that know not god : at least amongst those who profess they know god , but do in their works deny him . who shall be so far , by such a knowledge , from obtaining eternal life , that christ shall come in flaming fire to take vengeance on them , and to punish them with everlasting destruction , from the presence of the lord , and from the glory of his power . in particular : if we know god , to be the onely true god ; then must we love him , fear him , worship him , and obey him . nor doth the knowledge of christ , as mediator , abate any thing of this duty . for though he came to take away the curse of the law , by being made a curse for us ; yet not our obligation thereunto . he came not to destroy the law , or make it less obligatory to duty , but to fulfill it . i may add ; that , those , who will not acknowledge themselves under the obligation of it , have reason to fear , they be yet under the curse of it . again , if we know christ whom he hath sent ; it will be our duty then to believe in him ; ( for 't is , to those onely , that christ doth give eternal life . ) and , so to believe in him , as to obey him ; for , to those who obey not the gospel of his son , it is , that christ shall render vengeance in flaming fire . furthermore : if in this christ we hope to have eternal life ; how should this excite our rejoicing and thankfulness for so great salvation ! not by rioting and drunkenness ; by revelling , and debauchery ; ( which is the abuse , not the celebration , of this solemnity , in memory of christ's incarnation ; ) but by a pious remembrance and commemoration of that redemption obtained for us : such as may be to the honour , not the reproach , of him that came to redeem us from our vain conversation : that , denying ungodliness and worldly lusts , we should live godly , righteously , and soberly in this present world : looking for that blessed hope , and the glorious appearing of the great god , and our saviour jesus christ ; who gave himself for us , that he might redeem us from all iniquity , and purify unto himself , a peculiar people , zealous of good works . to whom with the father and the holy ghost , be glory for evermore . the end of the first sermon . a second sermon concerning the trinity : to the university of oxford . april . . joh . xvij . . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . and this is life eternal , that they might know thee the onely true god , and jesus christ , whom thou hast sent . it is now a great many years since , in this place ( if not to this auditory ) i did discourse of these words . i shall repeat very little of that discourse : but think fit to add somewhat to what was then said . our saviour , in the three chapters next foregoing ( the th , th , and th . chapters of s. john's gospel ) had made a large discourse to his disciples ( after his institution of the lord's supper ) the night before he was to die ; which ( in this th . chapter ) he closeth with a prayer , to his father , in their behalf . wherein having made mention of eternal life ( ver . . ) which he was to give , to as many as the father had given him , ( that is , to as many as should ●ffectually believe in him ; ) he subjoins this e●●phonema , and this is life eternal , that they might know thee , the only true god ; and , whom thou hast sent , jesus christ. in which words , we have two things proposed to us : the christian's happiness ; and , the m●ans w●ereby it is to be attained . i. the c●ristian's happiness , is called life , as to its exc●●●ency : and eternal , as to its duration . w●ich is begun here , in the kingdom of gra●● : and is to be perfected , and for ever con●inued , in that of glory . ii. the means to attain it , is the knowledge of god and christ. where , by knowledge , i do not understand a meer notional or speculative knowledge ; ( for such i presume the devils may have in as large a proportion as any of us , and yet never attain eternal life : ) but an active , practical knowledge : such a knowledge as is attended with faith and with practice suitable thereunto . as in that of isa. . . by his knowledge , ( that is , by the knowledge of him ) shall my righteous servant justifie many : that is , by faith in him , attended with a suitable practice to it . the object of this knowledge is declared to be twofold . . the knowledge of god ; and . the knowledge of christ. to know thee the onely true god ; that 's one part : and ( whom thou hast sent ) jesus christ ; that 's the other . and each of these contains several particulars . the former of them contains at least these three . . that there is a god. . that there is but one ( true ) god. . that the father of our lord jesus christ , is this onely true god. he is that god , besides which god , there is no other true god. and , though jesus christ be god also ; yet not another god , but the same true god. for he and the father are one. joh. . . in the latter of them ( the knowledge of christ ) are three things also . . his divinity . . his humanity . and . his mediatory office. which are here briefly insinuated ; and are elsewhere more fully expressed . . his divinity , in that he is the son of the father , who is the onely true god : not by creation , as adam and the angels are called the sons of god : nor by adoption , as are the righteous , who truly believe in christ : but by generation , as the onely begotten of the father , ( joh. . . ) and therefore of the same nature with the father . . his humanity ; implyed in these words , whom thou hast sent . that is , so sent as to be made of a woman : so sent as to be made flesh. gal. . . joh. . . . his mediatory office : implyed in the title christ , added to the name jesus , ( and , whom thou hast sent , jesus christ. ) he was so sent , as to be the christ , the messias . so sent , as that the world through him might be saved : so , as that whosoever believes in him should not perish , but have everlasting life . joh. . , . of all which points i did then discourse more largely ; and therefore do now but name them . but i did then further observe , from the order of the words , ( to obviate a cavil of the socinians , ) that the word onely ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) is here restrictive , not of ( the subject ) thee ; but of ( the predicate ) the true god. of which i intend ( with god's assistance , and your patience ) to speak further at this time . objection i. the first and great objection of the socinians , from this place , against the divinity of christ , and the doctrine of the trinity , is this if the father be the onely true god ; then the son , or holy-ghost , is not god , or not the true god ; but the father onely . to which i shall give three things in answer . . this argument is a plain fallacy ; which they put upon us , by a willful perverting the order of the words . for it is not said thee onely to be the true god , ( as if not the son also , or the holy-ghost , were the true god , but the father onely : ) but , to know thee ( not thee onely , or onely thee , ) to be the onely true god. nor is it so in our englis● translation onely ; but in the original greek : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . it is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . where the article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 coming after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , doth determine the restrictive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not to be applied to the subject 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but to the predicate , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . just as , in our english , the article the , coming between thee and onely , doth confine the word onely , not to thee ( that went before , ) but to true god , which follows . to know thee ( not onely thee , ) the onely true god. that is , to know thee to be that god , beside which god , there is no other true god. which we readily acknowledge , and profess . and then the socinians argument will appear just in this form : the god of abraham is the onely true god ; and therefore not the god of isaac , nor the god of jacob. yes , say i ; the god of isaac is the same god with the god of abraham ; and therefore the true god as he is . and the god of jacob , likewise . and this one answer doth fully satisfy the objection , and there needs no more . yet i shall add two other things ( though they might here be spared ) because they may be of use elsewhere . . i say further : if it had been said ( as it is not ) thee onely ; yet even this would not exclude any who is the same with him. and therefore , not the son , nor the holy-ghost ; since they are one and the same god with him. ( i and the father are one , joh. . . these three are one , joh. . . ) to which purpose , consider we what we have jer. . , . and again jer. . , . behold the days come , saith the lord , that it shall no more be said , the lord liveth that brought up the children of israel out of the land of egypt ; but , the lord liveth that brought up the children of israel from the land of the north , or out of the north country . now we are told by god himself , exod. . , . i am the lord thy god , which brought thee out of the land of egypt , — thou shalt have no other god but me. shall we therefore argue thus ; the god who brought israel out of egypt , is the onely true god ; and we must have no other god but him . therefore , not him who brought israel out of the north-country ? yes , say i , him also . for the god who brought them out of the north-country , is the same god , with him who brought them out of egypt , ( not another god , though designed by another character , ) and therefore , in having him , we have not another god. so here ; to know thee onely ( if it had been so said , as it is not ; ) it had implied no more but thus , not any who is not the same god with thee . to know thee onely ( and not any other , who is not the same god with thee ) to be the true god. which therefore would not exclude the son nor holy ghost , who are the same god with the father . but of this answer , there is no need in this place , because it is not said thee onely , or onely thee . . i say further ; if it had been said ( as it is not ) thee onely , ( as the socinians would have it to be understood ; ) i would then say , this were an essential predication , rather than a personal . that is , that the predicate true god , is affirmed of him in regard of his essence , rather than of his personality . as belonging to the essence , which is common to the three persons , not as peculiar to the person of the father . like as if it were said , david the king of israel , or david the father of solomon , is a reasonable creature , or endued with reason ; this being endued with reason , doth not belong to him as king of israel , nor as father of solomon ; but , as he is a man ( though denominated by these relations , ) and is equivalent to this , the man ( who is father of solomon , and king of israel ) is endued with reason . so if it be said , that david king of israel , and he onely , was father of solomon : it is not intended , that he was so as king of israel ( much less , in that capacity onely , ) but rather , as the man who begot him ; though designed by that character . so here ; god the creator is the onely true god : and god the redeemer likewise ; ( thus saith the lord thy redeémer the holy one of israel , the lord of hosts , i am the first and i am the last , and beside me there is no god , isa. . . isa. . . applyed to christ , rev. . , . rev. . , . ) shall we therefore argue , that god the redeémer is the onely true god , and beside him there is no god , therefore not god the creator ? no , we must not so argue . for it is not as redeemer , or as creator , that he is the onely true god , but as god. ( it may be praedicatio 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ) for he was the onely true god from all eternity ; but it was in time that he made the world , and was the redeemer of mankind . and this both the arian , and the socinian , must needs acknowledge as to the place before us . for when christ saith , to know thee ( father ) the onely true god ; it cannot ( according to their principles ) be said of him as father of our lord jesus christ , but as god. for if christ be onely a titular god , or a creature-god , ( as they would have it , ) there was a time , or moment , when he was not , ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ) and therefore , when god was not his father . but he was the onely true god from all eternity ; and therefore must be here so called , not as father of our lord jesus christ , but as god. not according to his personality , but according to his essence ; which , we say , is common to the three persons : who are the same god , though under different denominations . but these two latter answers , ( though they be true and solid , ) are not necessary to this place ; because it is not said thee onely . yet i here name them , because they may be of use to answer some like objection raised from some other place . the full import of the words , is this , that the father of our lord jesus christ , is that god , beside which god , there is no other true god. or , there is no other true god , beside that god , which is the father of our lord jesus christ. and this we do fully agree with , when we say , that the son and the holy-ghost , are not another god , but the same true god with the father . objection ii. it may perhaps be next objected , that though this place do not deny the son and holy ghost to be the true god , ( meaning thereby , the same god with the father : ) yet neither doth it prove them so to be . i answer . 't is true : this place alone , ( without the concurrence of others ) doth not prove the trinity . ( and it is much if it should , where there are but two mentioned . ) nor is it brought by us to that purpose . we only answer the objections brought against it by others , from this place : and leave the proof of it to be fetched from other places in concurrence with this . i have observed elsewhere ( lett. . ) that if we should read it thus , to know thee to be the onely true god ; and him also whom thou hast sent , jesus christ , ( as implying him also to be the same true god : ) or thus , to know thee , and ( whom thou hast sent ) jesus christ , the only true god : the words will well bear it , without any force put upon them . nor is this only a new notion of my own . for i ( since ) find , that s. austin had said the same long ago , in his epist. . ( speaking to pascentius , an arian , concerning this place ) de patre tantummodo vos vultis intelligi , quod ait , ut cognoscant te unum verum deum , & , quem misisti jesum christum ; ubi nos subaudimus , etiam jesum christum verum deum : ut haec sit sententia , te , & , quem misisti , jesum christum , cognoscant unum verum deum . ne illa consequatur absurditas , ut , si propterea non est verus deus jesus christus , quia dictum est patri , te unum verum deum : propterea non sit dominus pater , quia dictum est de christo , unus dominus . where he takes the meaning to be this , to know thee , and , whom thou hast sent , jesus christ , the onely true god ; which he backs with this argument ; because if we should here on this account exclude the son from being the true god ; we might , for the same reason , exclude the father from being the lord , because it is said ( cor. . . ) one lord , jesus christ. yet even this , though it might prove it , as to the son , it would not hence conclude it , as to the holy-ghost . but the concurrence of other places , will prove it more clearly as to both . i shall shew it of each . as to the son , we have it clearly affirmed , by the same s. john , ( who best understood the import of his own words ) that he is also the true god ; ( so that it was not intended here to exclude him . ) joh. . . we are in him that is true , even in his son jesus christ : this is the true god ▪ ( and therefore not onely the father . ) and he had before told us ( from christ's own words ) joh. . . i and my father are one. nor is it here meant of one in testimony , as the socinians would have it understood elsewhere , ( there being in the context here no mention of testimony at all : ) but it must be meant of one god. and this is manifest from the inference which the jews made from it . for they did thereupon take up stones to stone him , as for ( what they call ) blasphemy : because thou ( say they ) being a man , makest thy self god , ver . , , . for which inference there had been no pretence , if by one , they had not understood one god. and the high priest in like manner , matth. . , , . i adjure thee ( saith he ) by the living god , that thou tell us whether thou be the christ , the son of god ; to which when christ had answered , thou hast said , ( dicis quod res est , ) he rent his clothes , saying , he hath spoken blasphemy , what further need have we of witnesses ? for to say that he was the christ , the son of god ; or ( as it is in mark . . ) the christ , the son of the blessed ; was understood by them to be the same , as to call himself go● . which had been blasphemy , had it not been true. and what is said of christ , joh. . . i and the father are one ; is said of all three , by the same st. john , ( ● joh. . ) the father , the word , and the holy ghost ; th●se three are one. objection iii. it is objected , that these words , last cited , are said to have been wanting in some translations , or some ancient copies . answ. be it so . and so are some whole epistles wanting in some translations . and considerable parts of some other chapters . but we are not therefore to cast them away as not genuine . the ii d. and iii d. epistles of st. john , and that of jude , are said to have been wanting in the syriack and arabick translations : and the story of the woman taken in adultery , joh. . wanting in the gothick gospels : and part of the last chapter of st. mark 's gospel , is said to be wanting in some books : and the doxology in the close of the lord's prayer : and the like in divers others . but we must not thence conclude them not to be genuine , and put them out of our bibles , because they have chanced to be omitted in some books . and it is so far from being strange , that such omissions should sometimes happen ; that it is very strange ( if there were not a great providence of god to preserve the scriptures pure and entire ) that there should be no more such mistakes than what are found . for ( before the convenience of printing was found out ) when copies were to be singly transcribed one from another , and even those but in a few hands : 't was very possible , ( and hardly avoidable , ) even for a diligent transcriber , sometime to skip a line . especially , ( which is the case here ) when some of the same words do again recur after a line or two ; men are very subject , both in writing and printing , ( as those well know who are versed in either , ) to leap from one word , to the same recurring soon after . nor is such omission ( when it happens ) readily discerned , if ( as here ) the sense be not manifestly disturbed by it . now when such variety of copies happens ( that words be found in some , which are wanting in others , ) this must either happen by a casual mis-take , ( without any design of fraud : ) or by a willful falsification ; as to serve a particular turn ; ( which i take to be the case of the papists , indices expurgatorii . ) and , as to the words in question ; if the difference of copies happened at first by a casual mistake , ( as i am apt to think , ) 't is very easy for a transcriber ( unawares ) to leave out a line which was in his copy ( especially where such omission doth not manifestly disturb the sense ; ) but not to put in a line which was not there . and , in such case , the fuller copy is likelyest to be true , and the omission to be a fault . which happening ( as it seems it did ) some hundreds of years ago , in some one copy ; it might easily pass ( unobserved ) into many others transcribed thence ( and so to others derived from those transcripts . ) but an insertion ( of what was not in their copy ) must needs be willful , and not casual . on the other side ; if this variety of copies were at first from a willful falsification ; it is much more likely to be a willful omission of the arians , in some of their copies , ( which might be done silently , and unobserved ; ) than by a willful insertion of the orthodox . for the insertion of such a clause , if wholly new , and which had never before been heard of ; would have been presently detected by the arians , as soon as ever it should be urged against them . nor was any advantage to be made of it by the orthodox , since the divinity of christ ( which was the point then in question ) might be as strongly urged from that in st. john's gospel , i and the father are one , as from this in his epistle , these three are one. and therefore it is not likely that the orthodox should willfully make any such falsification , from whence they could promise themselves no advantage . nor do i find , it was ever charged upon them by the ancient arians in those days : though athanasius and others urged it against them . and in very ancient copies , in which it had been left out , it is found supplied in the margin , as having been faultily omitted . and it is the more likely to be genuine , because in this clause ( the father , the word , and the holy-ghost ) the second person is called sunpliciter , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the word ; which is st. john's language , both here , and in his gospel , joh. . and is ( i think ) peculiar to him ; and not so used by any other of the holy writers of the new testament . i do not deny but that this second person may be called the word of god , in heb. . . by faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of god. and pet. . , . by the word of god were the heavens of old , and the earth , &c. and by the same word they are kept in store . as he is by the same st. john , rev. . . his name is called , the word of god. but to call him the word absolutely ( without other addition ) i think is peculiar to st. john. and therefore much more likely in this place , to have proceeded from the same pen , and not to have been inserted by an interpolater some hundreds of years after . and that clause these three are one , in the epistle , agreeing so well with i and the father are one in the gospel , is a further confirmation of their being both from the same pen. add to this , that the antithesis which we find in the th and th verses , is so very natural ; that it is a great presumption to be genuine . there are three that bear record in heaven , the father , the word , and the holy-ghost , and these three are one : and there are three that bear witness in earth , the spirit , and the water , and the blood , and these three agree in one. which as it stands , is very natural ; but the latter clause would seem lame without the former : and the words in earth wholly redundant in the latter , if not by antithesis to answer to the words in heaven , in the former verse . and that it was anciently so read , appears from st. cyprian , by whom it is twice cited ( in his book de unitate ecclesiae , and in his epistle ad jubaianum ) before the arian controversy was on foot . in the former place , ( arguing for the church's unity , not to be broken by schisms ) he speaks thus . dicit dominus , ego & pater unum sumus . et iterum de patre & filio & spiritu sancto , scriptum est , et hi tres unum sunt . et quisquam credit hanc unitatem de divina firmitate venientem , sacramentis coelestibus cohaerentem , scindi in ecclesia posse ? that is , our lord saith , i and the father are one : and again , of the father , son and holy ghost , it is written , these three are one. and who can believe , that this unity of the church , proceeding from this firm union in god , and united by the heavenly sacraments , can be separated in the church ? where he argues for the unity of the church ( not to be divided by schism ) by two arguments from this place . one from the firm unity of god ; noted in ver . . the father , son , and holy ghost are one ; from whom this church proceeds , ( de divina firmitate venientem . ) the other , from their being united by the same sacraments ( sacramentis coelestibus cohaerentem ) which relates to ver . . the spirit , the water , and the bloud agree in one. which double argument , from the two verses , shew that , then , they were both read . and , as to the former of them ( which is that in question ) he cites it again , in his epistola ad jubaianum ; where , disputing against bapt●sm by hereticks , he thus argues ; si baptizari quis apud haereticos potuit ; utique & remissam peccatorum consequi potuit . si peccatorum remissam consecutus est ; & sanctifica●us est , & templum dei factus est . quaero , cujus dei ? si creatoris ; non potuit , qui in eum non credidit . si christi ; nec hujus potuit fieri templum , qui negat deum christum . si spiritus sancti ; [ cum tres unum sint , ] quomodo spiritus sanctus placatus esse ei potest , qui aut patris aut fi●ii inimicus est ? that is ; if by hereticks one could be baptized ; then he might obtain remission of sins : if he obtain remission of sins , then is he sanctified , and become the temple of god. i ask then , of what god ? of the creator ? that he cannot be , who did not in him believe . of christ ? neither can he be his temple , who denies christ to be god. of the holy ghost ? no. fo● , seeing these three are one , how can the holy ghost be at peace with him who is at enmity with either the father or the son ? 't is manifest therefore that , these three are one , was thus read in cyprian's time ; as being by him twice cited , before the arian controversie was on foot . and ( before him ) it is cited by tertullian , in his book adversus praxeam , cap. . connexus patris in filio , & filii in paracleto , tres efficit cohaerentes , alterum ex altero : qui tres unum sunt , ( non unus : ) quomodo dictum est , ego & pater unum sumus ; ad substantiae unitatem , non ad numeri singularitatem . where he doth not only cite the place , but doth likewise parallel and compare , these three are one , ( in this place ) with i and the father are one , ( in the other place ) as being of a like import . that is , the connexion of the father with the son , and of the son with the paraclete or holy ghost , makes these coherent one with the other : which three are one , ( unum not unus , one thing , not one person ; ) like as it is said , i and the father are one , ( one thing ) as to the unity of substance , though not as to singularity of number . they are one being , one substance , though otherwise they may be three . 't is therefore no new interpolation ; but was anciently so read by cyprian and tertullian ( the two most ancient of the latin fathers ) long before the arian controversie was on foot . and hath been urged by others afterward , against the arians . nor is there any prejudice ( that i know of ) against its being so read as now we read it , save that some of the fathers ( it is said ) have omitted to urge it against the arians , when there hath been occasion of so doing . but this ( beside that it is onely a negative argument , and i know not how well grounded ) might very well happen , if it chanced to be wanting in that particular copy which such father used . ( for we are not to suppose they had then such plenty of bibles as are now in our hands ; but some one manuscript copy was to serve many . ) and because that in st. john's gospel , i and the father are one , did fit their purpose as well , or rather better , than this in his epistle , these three are one. for the controversie , then on foot , was not so much that of the trinity , as that of the divinity of christ. to return , therefore , to the place which is before us ; from what hath been said , it is manifest enough , that st. john , in calling the father , the onely true god , did not intend to exclude the son , from being the same true god ; whom himself doth elsewhere call the true god also , joh. . . no more ( i say ) than what is said , by name , of god the redeemer ( isa. . , . ) is to be thought exclusive of god the creator , or god the father ; thus saith the lord , the redeemer , the lord of hosts , i am the first , and i am the last , and beside me there is no god. which is applied to christ in particular , rev. . ● , . but is not exclusive of the father ; because god the creator ( or god the father ) is the same god with god the redeemer , and therefore not another god beside him . and therefore both of them ( or rather , the same god under both considerations ) indifferently called ( especially in the old testament ) god indefinitely , the lord of hosts , the holy one of israel . nor is that which is said of christ , tim. . , , . our lord jesus christ , who onely hath immortality , intended to exclude the father ; as if the father were not also immortal , or were not ( what is there said of christ ) the blessed and onely potentate , the king of kings , and the lord of lords . but only , that our lord jesus christ , is that god , which ( god ) is the blessed and onely potentate , the king of kings , and lord of lords , and who only hath immortality . and ( as was before noted by s. austin . ) the father is not excluded from being lord , notwithstanding that of cor. . . to us there is but one god , the father ; and one lord jesus christ : or that of eph. . , . one lord , one faith , one baptism , one god and father of all . for the father , and the son , are the same god , the same lord. the same of whom it is said , isa. . . i am the lord and there is none else , there is no god beside me . and again , ver . . i am the lord and there is none else . where note , that the word father , in that phrase , god and father of all , is different from the sense of it , in the father of our lord jesus christ : that relating to the common nature ; this to the person . and as in these places , what is sa●d of the son , ( that he onely hath immortality , that he is the onely potentate , that he is the one lord , that beside him , the redeemer , there is no god , ) are not to be understood exclusive of the father ; so what is here said of the father , ( that he is the onely true god ) is not to be understood exclusive of the son ; who is not another , but the same true god. i thought here to have inserted ( as in a proper place ) a discourse of some other points relating to the trinity ; which i find it necessary here to omit ( or to defer it to some other occasion ) that i be not prevented by the time in what i have to say further . that there is a god the creator , a god the redeemer , and a god the sanctifier ; and that these are the same god ; i think cannot reasonably be denied . i shall shew it of each . as to god the creator , we are told , gen. . . in the beginning god created the heaven and the earth . ( and , to the same purpose , in many other places . ) and , i think , there is none doubts , but that this creator , is the true god , the supreme god. and in jer. . . god doth by this character distinguish himself from all other ( pretended ) gods , the gods that have not made the heavens and the earth , they shall perish from the earth , and from under these heavens . as to god the redeemer ; i know that my redeemer liveth , saith job , ch. . . by which redeemer doubtless he meant the living god , a god who did then live ; a god who was , then , in being , and not ( as the socinians would have us think ) who was not to be , till two thousand years after . and isa. . . thus saith the lord the redeemer , the lord of hosts , i am the first and i am the last , and beside me there is no god. which redeeme● , must needs be the same god , with god the creator , the lord of hosts . as to god the sanctifier ; purge me with hyssop ( saith david ) and i shall be clean ; wash me , and i shall be whiter than snow : create in me a clean heart , o god ; and renew a right spirit within me , ( psal. . , . ) which certainly are works of sanctification ; and the god , to whom david prayed , is doubtless the living god , a god then in being . and when god promiseth ●o israel , i will give them a hear● to k●ow me ; and they shall return unto me with their whole heart , jer. . . i will give them one heart , and one way , that they may fear me for ever ; i will put my fear in their hearts , that they shall not depart from me , jer. . , . i will give them one heart , and put a new spirit within them ; i will take away the heart of stone and give them a heart of flesh , ezek. . . and . . i will put my law in their inward parts , and write it in their hearts , jer. . . the lord thy god will circumcise thine heart , and the heart of thy seed , to love the lord thy god with all thine heart , and with all thy soul , that thou mayst live , deut. . . all these are sanctifying works ; and that god who doth them , is god the sanctifier and it is the same god , who doth thus sanctifie , that is the creator and the redeemer . now this god the creator , god the redeemer , and god the sanctifier , i take to be the same with what we otherwise call , god the father , god the son , and god the holy ghost . and our church doth so expound it in her catechism ; first , i learn to believe in god the father , who hath made me and all the world : secondly , in god the son , who hath redeemed me and all mankind : thirdly , in god the holy ghost , who sanctifieth me and all the elect people of god. and it is no more absurd or inconsistent , to say , that god the father , god the son , and god the holy-ghost , are the same god ; than to say , that god the creator , god the redeemer , and god the sanctifier , are the same god. as they stand related to us , they are called god the creator , god the redeemer , and god the sanctifier . as to the different oeconomy , amongst themselves , one is called the father , who is said to beget ; another the son , who is said to be begotten ; a third , the holy-ghost , who is said to proceed or come forth ; but are all the same god. objection iv. but then here i meet with another objection , on which the socinians lay great weight . if god the creator , god the redeemer , and god the sanctifier , or god the father , god the son , and god the holy-ghost , be the same god , they cannot then be three persons : and if they be three persons , they must be three gods. for like as three persons , amongst men , doth signifie three men ; so three persons , who are god , must be three gods. contrary to the first commandment , which allows us to have but one god. to which i answer ; first , this is only to cavil at a word , when they have nothing of moment against the thing . so that if in●●ead of saying ●hese three persons are one god , we say , these three are one god , or give them another name instead of persons , or say these three somewhats , without giving them a name , this objection is at an end . . i say further ; 't is very true , that , in our english tongue , by another person , we sometimes understand another man , ( because that other person is , very often , another man also . ) but it is not always so ; nor is that the proper signification of the word ; but an abusive sense put upon it . and the reason of using the word person in this abusive or improper sense ; is , for want of an english word to answer the latin word homo , or the greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which might indifferently relate to both sexes . for the word man doth properly relate to the male , and woman to the female . and if the word man be sometimes so used as to imply the woman also ; it is ( by a synecdoche ) putting the name of one sex , to signifie both. and 't is for want of such a word ( which might indifferently relate to both sexes ) that we sometime make use of person in a borrowed sense , rather than to use a circumlocution of man and woman , by naming both sexes . and if we should use such circumlocution of man and woman ; yet even this would not reach the whole species . for we do not use to call them man and woman , till they be of a considerable age ; before which time they are called children ; and therefore to comprehend the whole species , we say , man , woman , and child . we do indeed , sometimes , to that purpose , make use of the word mankind , ( adding the word kind to that of man , to ampliate the signification of it . ) but this relates only to genus humanum in a collective sense ; not to homines taken distributively . for we do not say a mankind , two mankinds , &c , as we say homo , homines . we are fain , therefore , for want of a proper english word , to make use of person in a borrowed sense to answer the latin homo . but the ancient fathers , who first applied the word persona to the sacred trinity , did not speak english. and therefore we cannot , from the present use of the word person in our language , conclude in what sense they used the word persona . . again ; the schoolmen in later ages , have yet put another sense on the word persona , peculiar to themselves ; extending it indifferently to men and angels ; ( for want of a proper word of that extent ; ) so as to signifie ( with them ) what they call suppositum rationale , or what we call a reasonable creature . ( and , in imitation of them , some others have since so used it . ) but this is a new sense , of later ages , since the time of those fathers , ( nor do the schoolmen , in this sense , without a metaphor , apply it to the sacred trinity . ) we cannot therefore conclude from hence , what was the fathers sense of it . . to find out therefore the true sense of t●e word person as applied to the trinity ; we are not so much to consider , what now-a-days the word doth sometime signifie with us in english ; nor what sense the schoolmen have put upon it since the time of those fathers : as , what was the true sense of the word persona , at or before their times , in approved latin authours . which is quite another thing from either of these senses . for what in english we sometimes mean by three persons ( taken indifferently for men , women , and children , ) the latins would not have called tres personas , but tres homines : though , if considered in such relations , as father , mother , and child , they might so be called tres personae . nor do i find that in approved latin authours , the word persona was wont to be attributed by them ( as by the schoolmen it hath since been ) to angels ; nor to their genii , or heathen gods. but , . it did signifie the state , quality , or condition of a man , as he stands related to other men. ( and so i find the latin word persona englished in our dictionaries . ) suppose , as a king , a subject , a father , a son , a neighbour , a publick or private person , a person of honour , and the like . and so , as the condition varied , the person varied also , though the same man remained . as if an ordinary person , be first made a knight , and then a lord ; the person or condition is varied , but he is still the same man that he was before . and he that is this year , a lord mayor , may be , next year , but an alderman , or not so much . hence are those latin phrases , frequent in approved authours ; personam imponere ( to put a man into an office , or confer a dignity upon him ; ) induere personam ( to take upon him the office ; ) sustinere personam ( to bear an office , or execute an office ; ) deponere personam ( to resign the office , or lay it down ; ) so , agere personam ( to act a person , ) and many the like . so that there is nothing of contradiction , nothing of inconsistence , nothing absurd or strange in it , for the same man to sustain divers persons , ( either successively , or at the same time ; ) or divers persons to meet in the same man ; according to the true and proper notion of the word person . a man may , at the same time , sustain the person of a king , and of a father , if invested with regal and paternal authority ; ( and these authorities may be subordinate one to another ; ) and he may accordingly act sometime as a king , and sometime as a father . thus tully , ( who well understood the propriety of latin words ) sustineo unus tres personas ; meam , adversarii , judicis , ( i being one and the same man , sustain three persons ; that of my own , that of my adversary , and that of the judge . ) and david was , at the same time , son of jesse , father of solomon , and king of israel . and this takes away the very foundation of their objection ; which proceeds upon this mistake , as if three persons ( in a proper sense ) must needs imply three men. . now if three persons ( in the proper sense of the word person ) may be one man ; what hinders but that three divine persons ( in a sense metaphorical ) may be one god ? what hinders but that the same god , considered as the maker and sovereign of all the world , may be god the creator , or god the father ; and the same god considered , as to his special care of mankind , as the ruthour of our redemption , be god the redeemer , or god the son ; and the same god , as working effectually on the hearts of his elect , be god the sanctifier , or god the holy-ghost ? and what hinders but that the same god , distinguished according to these three considerations , may fitly be said to be three persons ? or ( if the word person do not please ) three somewhats that are but one god ? and this seems to me a full and clear solution of that objection , which they would have to be thought insuperable . objection v. it may perhaps be objected further , why must we needs make use of the word person ; and call them three persons , if three somewhats will serve as well ? i answer , first , we have no such need of the word person , but that we can spare it . hypostasis will serve our turn as well . and if they think the latin word persona , be not a good translation of the greek hypostasis ; let them retain the greek word . ( we mean the same by both . ) and then perhaps they will find themselves at a loss , to fasten some of their objections upon the word hypostasis , which they would fasten upon persona . . but , secondly , if the thing be thus far agreed , that these three somewhats ( thus considered ) may be one god : i see not why they should contend with us about the name person . for this is only to quarrel about a word , or name , when the notion is agreed . . if it were admitted ( which i see no reason for ) that the word person doth not fitly express that notion which it is intended to design ; the most that can be inferred from it , is but , that we have not given it so fit a name : and , to cavil at that , when the notion intended by it is understood ; were just as if one should argue , there never was such a man , as whom they called pope pius ; because the man , who was so called , was not a pious man. . but i see not why the word person should not be thought a very fit word for this purpose . for two of these three are represented to us in scripture under the names of father and son ; and this son as begotten of the father ; ( and therefore these names are not to be quarrelled with : ) but all this in a metaphorical sense ; ( for no man can suppose , that this father doth so beget this son , as these words do properly signifie amongst men ) . now the relations of father and son , in a proper sense , are such as are properly denoted by the word persona , in its proper acceptation . and consequently the father and son , in a metaphorical sense , may ( by a continuation of the same metaphor ) be fitly called persons , in that metaphorical sense . and in what sense they be father and son , in a like sense they be persons , according to the propriety of the latin word persona . for such relatives the latins called personas . and if the father and son may fitly be so called ; no doubt but the holy ghost may be so called also , as one proceeding or coming forth ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) from them . as in joh. . . the comforter , which is the holy ghost , whom the father will send in my name , he will teach you all things . and joh. . . the comforter , whom i will send you from the father , even the spirit of truth , which proceedeth from the father , he shall testifie of me. where it is manifest , that , in what sense the father and son are to be reputed persons ; the comforter or holy ghost , is , in the same sense , so to be reputed . so that ( i think ) i have clearly vindicated , not only the notion , that these three somewhats may be one god ; but the name also , that these somewhats , may fitly be called persons . objection vi. i shall name but one objection more , which when i have satisfied , i shall conclude for this time . that th . objection ( and 't is but a weak one ) is this . the trinitarians do not all agree , but differ among themselves , in expressing their notions in this matter . very well . and do not the antitrinitarians differ much more ? doth not the arian and the socinian differ as much from one another , as either of them do from us ; ( and declare that they so do ? ) and do not the arians among themselves , and the socinians amongst themselves , differ more than do the trinitarians ? certainly they do . it must be confessed , that different men , as well in the same as in different ages , have very differently expressed themselves , according to their different sentiments of personality ; and of the particular distinctions of the three persons among themselves . but so it is in all the most obvious things in the world . as , in time , place , space , motion , and the like . we are all apt to think , that we all know well enough , what we mean by those words , till we be asked . but if we be put to it , to express our selves concerning any of them , what it is , whether a thing , or nothing , or not a thing , or somewhat of a thing , and what that somewhat is ; it would be long enough before we should all agree to express our selves just in the same manner ; and , so clearly , as that no man who hath a mind to cavil , could find occasion so to do . i might say the like of heat and cold ; of light , sight , and colour ; of smells , and t●sts , and the different sorts of them . can we never be s●id to agree in this , that the fire doth burn and consume the woo● ; till we be all agreed what is the figure of those fiery atoms ( and what their motion , and from what impulse ) which enter the pores of ●he wood , and separate its parts , and convert some of them to smoak , some to flame , and ●●me to ashes ; and which to which ; and in what manner all this is done ? what a folly then is it to require that , in the things of god , we should all so agree as to express our thoughts just in the same manner ; as is not possible to do in the most obvious things we meet with ? and , in such a case as wherein to express our notions , we have no words but figurative , it is not to be thought strange , that one man should make use of one metaphor , and another of another , according as their several fansies serve . but thus far , i think , the orthodox are all agreed ; that between these three , which the scripture calls the father , the son , and the holy ghost , or the father , the word , and the spirit , there is a d●stinction , greater than that of ( what we call ) the divine attributes ; but not so as to be three gods. and this distinction , they have thought fit to denote by the word hypostasis , or person . they are also all agreed ; that one of these persons ( namely the son or the word ) was incarnate , or made flesh , and did take to himself our humane nature . but as to the particular modes , or manner how ; either how these two natures are united , or how these three persons are distinguished each from other : we may be content to be ignorant , farther than god hath been pleased to reveal to us . we know that our immortal soul is joined with an humane body , so as to make one man ( without ceasing , that to be a spirit , and this to be a body : ) but 't is hard for us to say how. and accordingly we say , that the man christ jesus , ( without ceasing to be man , ) and god manifested in the flesh , ( without ceasing to be god , ) are one christ : but what kind of union this is , which we call hypostatical , we do not throughly understand . we know also that the father is said to beget , the son to be begotten , the holy ghost to proceed : but neither do we fully understand the import of these words ; nor is it needful that we should . but , so far as was said before , we do all agree ; and we may safely rest there . now to god the father , god the son , and god the holy ghost ; three persons , but one god ; be honour , and glory , and praise , now and for ever . the end of the second sermon . a third sermon concerning the trinity . joh . xvij . . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . and this is life eternal , that they might know thee the onely true god , and jesus christ , whom thou hast sent . i have , in a former discourse from this verse , entered upon the doctrine of the trinity ; not so much , as being contained in it , as occasioned by it . i have shewed that the word onely is here restrictive , not of the subject thee , but of the predicate true god. affirming the father to be the onely true god , though not the father onely . nor is it exclusive of the son , who is also the same true god ; and is so expresly called , by this same writer , joh. . . where ( speaking of jesus christ ) he says , this is the true god , and eternal life ; as if it were spoken with a direct aspect to the words before us . now that christ is often called god , neither the arians nor the socinians do deny . and it is so frequent , and so evident , as not to be denyed . not only in the place last cited , but in many others . thy throne , o god endureth for ever , heb. . . the word was with god , and the word was god. joh. . . my lord and my god. joh. . . the being over all , god blessed for ever , amen . ( or , the supreme being , the ever blessed god. rom. . . ) and elsewhere . objection vii . but to this they object , that though he be sometime called god ; yet by god is not there meant the supreme god : but either a mere titular god , as the socinians will have it ; ( as one of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , cor. . . one who is called god , but indeed is not , but a mere man however highly dignified . ) or ( as the arians will have it ) that he is god indeed , but not the supreme god , not the same god with the father , but an inferiour god , ( deus factus ) a made-god , a creature-god ; who was indeed before the world , but not from eternity , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , there was ( a time , a moment , a quando ) when he was not , when he had not a being . in answer to both which ; i shall endeavour to shew , ( by the most signal characters , whereby the supreme god , the onely true god , is set forth to us in scripture ; and by which he is therein distinguished from all false gods , or other pretended gods ; ) that christ is the true god , the supreme god , the same god with the father , and not another god. character i. the first character , which we meet with , of this god , is that of gen. . . in the beginning god created the heaven and the earth . which i think no man doubts but to be meant of the true god , the supreme god. and by virtue of this , he claims the sovereignty thereof ; the earth is the lord's , and the fulness thereof , psal. . . jehovah , the lord of all the earth , josh. . , . the god of the heaven , and the god of the earth , gen. . . the heaven is my throne , and the earth is my footstool , isa. . . behold the heaven , and the heaven of heavens , is the lord's , the earth also , and all that is therein , deut. . . the same character is applied to god very often , isa. . , . thus saith god the lord ( jehovah ) he that created the heavens and stretched them out ; he that spread forth the earth and that which cometh out of it ; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it , and spirit to them that walk therein . i am the lord ( jehovah ) that is my name , and my glory will i not give unto another . and isa. . . mine hand hath laid the foundation of the earth , and my right hand hath spanned ( or spread out ) the heavens . so psal. . . when i consider the heavens , the work of thy fingers ; the moon and the stars which thou hast ordained . psal. . . which made heaven and earth , the sea , and all that therein is . and many other places , not only in the old testament ; but in the new testament likewise ; as acts . . that ye should turn from these vanities unto the living god , who made heaven and earth , and the sea and all things that are therein . and acts . . god that made the world , and all things therein . so revel . . . thou hast created all things . chap. . . him that made heaven and earth , and the sea , and the fountains of water . and it is the distinctive character , whereby he doth distinguish himself from all other pretended gods , jer. . where he who at ver . . is called the lord , the true god , the living god , an everlasting king , at who 's wrath the earth shall tremble , and the nations shall not abide his indignation ; doth at ver . . give this defiance to all other gods , thus shall ye say to them ; the gods which have not made the heavens and the earth , they shall perish from the earth , and from under these heavens . now this character we find ascribed to christ. not only , where it is spoken as of god indefinitely , but to be understood of christ ; ( as are some of the places already mentioned : ) but even where it is particularly applied to him . i shall begin with that of joh. . , . where we have a large discourse of him , in the beginning was the word , and the word was with god , and the word was god. where , by the word is meant christ , as is evident from the further descriptions of him in the following verses ; 't is he of whom john the baptist came to bear witness , ver . , . he who came into the world , but the world knew him not . ver . . who came to his own , but his own received him not ; but to as many as received him , he gave power to become the sons of god. ver . . . who was made flesh , and dwelt amongst us , and we beheld his glory ; the glory as of the onely begotten of the father . ver . . he of whom john bare witness and cryed , saying , this is he of whom i spake , he that cometh after me is preferred ●efore 〈◊〉 ●or he was before me ; ( not as to his humane na●ure ; fo● so , john the baptist was older than he , by six months , luk. . . ) and of his fulness ( saith st. john ) we have all received grace for grace ; for the law was given by moses , but grace and truth came by jesus christ , ver . , , . 't was jesus christ therefore that is here called the word . now of this same word , it is said , the same was in the beginning with god ; all things were made by him , and without him was not any thing made which was made , ver . , . he was in the world , and the world was made by him , ver . . consonant to that of heb. . . the worlds we refrmed by the word of god : and pet. . . by the word of god the heavens were of old , and the earth standing in the water and out of the water . and by the same word , the heavens and earth are kept in store , or preserved , ver . . and to the same purpose , col. . , . by him were all things created , that are in heaven , and that are in earth . and he is before all things , and by him all things consist . and heb. . . by whom also he made the worlds . in psal. . we have a long prayer ( to the supreme god doubtless ) which bears this title , a prayer of the afflicted , when he is overwhelmed , and poureth out his complaint before the lord , ( the lord jehovah . ) it begins thus , hear my prayer , o lord , ( jehovah ) and let my cry come unto thee . and at the same rate he proceeds , addressing himself to the same god all along . and at ver . , , , . he speaks thus , o my god , thy years are throughout all generations ; thou of old hast laid the foundations of the earth , and the heavens are the work of thy hands ; ( who is the same god therefore of whom moses had before said , in the beginning god created the heaven and the earth , gen. . . ) they shall perish ( as the psalmist proceeds ) but thou shalt endure : yea all of them shall wax old as a garment , as a vesture shalt thou change them and they shall be changed : but thou art the same , and thy years shall have no end . and doubtless the psalmist , when he made this long prayer , thought not of addressing himself to any other than the supreme god. ( not to a god who had not , then , a being , nor was to have till a thousand years after , as the socinians would have us think of christ. ) he prays to god as his redeemer ; that is , to christ. and that christ is that god to whom he did thus address , we are expresly told , heb. . , , , . but unto the son he saith , — thou , lord , in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth , and the heavens are the works of thine hands ; they shall perish , but thou remainest : and they all shall wax old as doth a garment , and as a vesture shalt thou fold them up , and they shall be changed ; but thou art the same , and thy years shall not fail . all which is plainly cited from that psalm . christ therefore is that god to whom that prayer was made ; the same supreme god , who created the heaven and the earth : even jesus christ , the same yesterday and to day and for ever , heb. . . and it is very frequent in scripture , that what in one place is spoken of god indefinitly ( without specification of this or that person ) is elsewhere applied to one or other of the persons in particular , as that of the creation is here to christ , the redeemer ; as being the same god who is the creator also . and that of redemption , to god the creator ( who is the redeemer also ) isai. . . thus saith the lord ( jehovah ) that created thee , — fear not , for i have redeemed thee . so that god the creator , and god the redeemer , are the same god. character ii. the next character i shall insist upon , is that whereby god denotes himself to moses , exod. . , , . i am that i am ; and i am hath sent me unto you . when god was sending moses to the children of israel , in order to their deliverance out of egypt , moses puts this question , when i come to the children of israel , and shall say them , the god of your fathers hath sent me unto you ; and they shall say , what is his name ? what shall i say to them ? 't is certainly , therefore the true god , that is here spoken of : let us see what is the character that this god gives of himself . and god said unto moses , i am that i am : and he said , thus shalt thou say to the children of israel , i am hath sent me unto you . this therefore is a proper character of the true god. i am that i am , ( ehjeh asher ehjeh , ) or i am , who am ; or i am , he who am , so the vulgar latin ; ( ego sum qvi svm ; ) and ( qui est ) he that is , hath sent me : as if , what god says of himself ( in the first person ) i that am , were proper for moses to say of him ( in the third person ) he that is . and so the septuagint , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , i am , he that am , or he that is ; and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( he that is ) hath sent me . where simply to be , is made a distinctive character of god , as he whose essence is to be ; and it is impossible for him not to be. who is of himself ( or rather himself is ) without deriving ought from any other ; and from whom all other beings , have their being . who giveth to all , life and breath and all things ; in whom we live and move and have our being , act. . , . who hath first given to him ? that is , none hath : he receives nothing ( aliunde ) from ought else ; but of him , and through him , and to him are all things , rom. . , . who is therefore called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . the same notion the heathens also had of the supreme god. hence aristotle calls him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the being of beings ; and plato 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the self being ; who himself is , and gives being to all else . and ( being thus self-existent ) he must be also a necessary being ( ens necessarium ) and eternal , ( for if ever he had not been , it were impossible he should ever be ; for how could nothing make it self to be : ) and likewise infinite ( as the source of all being . ) all which the heathen acknowledged ( as consonant to natural light ) as well as we. now this same character i am , or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( which is the word whereby the greek septuagint doth here render the hebrew word ehjeh , which we translate i am ) that is i who am , or he who is , we find signally applied to christ , rom. . . he that is . for what there we render , who is , in the greek is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , he that is , or the being : with this addition , over all ; ( the being , over all , or the supreme being : ) with this further character , god blessed for ever ; ( or the ever blessed god. ) amen . where it is not amiss to note , that the blessed ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) was an usual title whereby they were wont to design the true god. and accordingly , that question which caiaphas the high priest , puts to our saviour , mat. . . i adjure thee by the living god , that thou tell us , whether thou be the christ , the son of god ; is in mark . . art thou the christ , the son of the blessed , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . where no man doubts but that by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is meant , the supreme god. and when christ is here called , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( the supreme being , the ever-blessed god ; ) with the solemn note of asseveration , amen : it is certainly too august a title for any less than the supreme god , the only god. the same character we have of him again , rev. . . where we have not only the title 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , importing his being , but the additional intimation of his eternity , through all the variety of continued duration , past , present , and to come . where we are to observe , that at ver . . we have this character of god ●ndefinitely , without restriction to this or that person in the deity , ( as appears by its being contradistinct to christ personally considered , ver . . ) grace be unto you and peace , ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) from him which is , and which was , and which is to come , — and from jesus christ , &c. where it is manifest from the unusual construction , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 &c. that the title 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( who is and was , and shall be ) is taken , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as the grammarians speak , ( as one undeclined-substantive joined with the article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) as being ( all together ) one joint title of god , indefinitely taken , ( because of that contradistinction which follows ; and from jesus christ ; ) and with particular respect ( as the margin of our bible directs ) to that of exod. . . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , i am 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or he who am ; and can relate to none but the supreme god. now what is thus said of this god indefinitely , at ver . . is again repeated of christ in particular at ver . . ( with a further addition of omnipotence , ) i am alpha and omega , the beginning and the ending ( the first and the last ) saith the lord , which is , and which was , and which is to come ; the almighty . so that he is here design'd , not only by his absolute being ; but by his eternity also , through all variety of continued duration , ( past , present , and future ; ) who is , and was , and shall be ; who was the first ( before whom nothing was ) and the last ( after whom nothing shall be ; ) and , by his omnipotence , the almighty . the same title of alpha and omega , the first and the last , is given him in divers other places ; as at ver . , and . of the same chapter , i am alpha and omega , the first and the last ; i am he that liveth and was dead , and behold i am alive for evermore , amen . and rev. . . the first and the last , which was dead and is alive . and again , rev. . . and rev. . . all relating to isai. . . isai. . . isai. . . where the like had before been said , as a character ( no doubt ) of the true god. and isai. . . before me there was no god formed , neither shall there be after me . and what can this be other than the infinite , the eternal , the almighty god. the same yesterday , and to day , and for ever , as he is called , heb. . . the blessed , and only potentate , the king of kings , and lord of lords , who only hath immortality , &c. as he is described , tim. . , , . and again , the king of kings , and lord of lords , rev. . , and rev. . . the great god , and our saviour , tit. . . where , our saviour , is so contra-distinguished , not as another from the great god , but as another title of that same person : he that is our god and saviour , or god our saviour , as it is tit. . . ( like as god and the father , ephes. . . and again , col. . . giving thanks to god , and the father . ) for 't is manifest that here ( tit. . . ) it is spoken of christs coming to judgment ; which is here called , the glorious appearance of the great god , and our saviour jesus christ ; that is , the glorious appearance of jesus christ , who is the great god and our saviour ; the title that jeremy gives to god , jer. . . the great and mighty god , the lord of hosts is his name . christ therefore , our saviour , is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the great god. and the doxology there added , rev. . . to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever , amen ; is equivalent to that of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , rom. . . god blessed for ever . and the like , tim. . . to whom be honour and power everlasting , amen . and much more , that of rev. . , , . worthy is the lamb , that was slain , to receive power , and riches , and wisdom , and strength , and honour , and glory , and blessing : ( as high a doxology as that in the close of the lords-prayer ; ) to which we have the acclamation of every creature ( which is in heaven , and on the earth , and under the earth , and such as are in the sea , and all that are therein , ) saying , blessing , honour , glory , and power , be unto him that sitteth upon the throne , and unto the lamb for ever and ever . and the four beasts said , amen ; and the four and twenty elders fell down and worshipped him that liveth for ever and ever . too great things to be said of a mere creature , or a titular god ; but very agreeable to christ , being ( as he is ) the same god with the father , the only true god. i might here add a like remark , on that of isai. . . hearken o israel , i am he ; i am the first , i am also the last . and in like manner , isai. . . isai. . , , . deut. . . i , even i , am he ( hu ) and there is no other god with me , or beside me . ( and to the same purpose elsewhere . ) ani hu ; i am he ; so we render it . i am he ; what he ? 't is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 't is the he absolutely taken , and emphatically applied to god. which i take to be of like import with , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , i am ; i that am , or that which is . * the greek septuagint ( in the places cited ) renders ani hu by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : and the vulgar latin ( indifferently ) by ego sum , ego ipse , ego sum ipse , ego ipse sum : that is , i am he , or i am. and christ , of himself , joh. . . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , before abraham was , i am. and i the rather take it so to signify ( in the places cited ) because i there find it attended ( exegetically ) with an intimation of his eternity ; he is , he is the first and he is the last ; before him none was , and after him none shall be : he is , and ever was , and ever shall be. character iii. the next character that i shall insist upon , is that of the two proper names of god , jah and jehovah ; which i take to be proper to god , and incommunicable to any other . i put them both together , because they be both of the same import ; and indeed , of the same with ehjeh , ( i am ) before-mentioned . the chief difference is , that ehjeh ( i am ) retains the form of the verb ; but jah and jehovah are nouns verbal , from hajah or havah which signifie to be : all denoting gods absolute being : and all peculiar to the supreme god , and no where applied in scripture ( that i know of ) to any other . i know the socinians would perswade us that jehovah is sometime given to an angel , which we do not deny ; but we say that angel is not a created angel , but the angel of the covenant , who is god himsel● . the name jah comes often in the old testament , but not so often as jehovah . particularly in psal. . . sing unto god , sing praises to his name , extol him that rideth upon the heavens by his name jah . so we find it in our bibles , and it agrees with the original . but in our psalters , ( by a continued mistake , ) instead of jah or ya , is printed yea. * . but this name is no where ( i think ) retained in the greek septuagint , ( the septuagint renders it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : ) nor in the new testament ( which frequently follows the septuagints form of speech , ) unless in the solemn form of praise hallelu-jah ( which the greek puts into one word alleluia ) that is , praise jah , or ( as it is usually rendred ) praise ye the lord. which is jointly applied to him that sits upon the throne and to the lamb , rev. . , , , . whom i take to be there meant by the lord our god , ver . . and the lord god omnipotent , ver . . and the great god , ver . . for the supper of the great god , ver . . is the same with the supper of the lamb , ver . , . the name jehovah is , in the old testament , much more frequent ; especially in the original hebrew . but in our translation is frequently rendered by the lord ; as in all those places ( if the printers have been careful ) where lord is printed in capital letters . the name jehovah , is at exod. . , ● . made equivalent to ehjeh , i am. for what is said at ver . . thus shalt thou say unto the children of israel , i am hath sent me unto you ; is thus repeated at ver . . thus shalt thou say unto the children of israel , jehovah ( the god of your fathers , the god of abraham , the god of isaac , and the god of jacob ) hath sent me unto you : with this addition , this is my name for ever , and this is my memorial unto all generations . and psal. . . that men may know , that thou , whose name alone is jehovah , art the most high over all the earth . in which place , the restrictive word alone , cannot be understood to affect the word name , as if it were thus to be construed , ( cujus nomen est jehovah solum , ) whose name is only jehovah ; ( for god we know had other names , whereby he is often called : ) but to the word whose , ( cujus solius nomen est jehovah , ) to whom alone ( or to whom only ) the name jehovah doth belong . so isai. . . i am jehovah and none else ; there is no god beside me . and deut. . , . jehovah he is god , and there is none else beside him : jehovah he is god in heaven above , and upon earth beneath , there is none else . and isai. . . i am jehovah that is my name ; and my glory will i not give unto another . and deut. . . hear , o israel , the lord thy god is one lord ; or , jehovah thy god is one jehovah ; there is no other jehovah but he . and deut. . . that thou mayest fear this glorious and fearful name , the lord thy god , or jehovah thy god. and to the same purpose , deut. . . sam. . . and in many other places . i will not despute , whether this name jehovah , were never made known , till god did thus declare it to moses , at exod. . . it might seem so to be by that of exod. . . i appeared unto abraham , and to isaac , and to jacob , by the name of god almighty , but by my name jehovah was i not known to them . 't is true , that god is often so called in the book of genesis : but that book was written by moses , after the time that moses speaks of , in exodus . and moses might so call him , by a name known at the time when he wrote , though it had not been known at the time whereof he wrote . as when abraham is said to go forth from vr of the chaldees , or of chasdim , gen. . . though chesed the son of nahor ( from whom , in likelihood , the chaldees were called chasdim ) was not born till afterwards , as appears gen. . . so exod. . . where the children of israel are said to have sojourned four hundred and thirty years ; it must be reckoned backward as far as abraham's coming forth from vr of the chaldees , at which time they could not be called , the children of israel , ( for israel was not then born , ) but it was that people , who were afterwards called the children of israel . and many such prolepses , or anticipations of names , there are in all historians . but , whether it be upon this account , or some other , that he is said , by his name jehovah not to have been known to them , is not material to our present business . 't is enough , that jehovah is now known to be the signal name of the true god ; and ( i think ) no where given to any other . now that our saviour christ is called jehovah , is not to be denied . and it is for this reason , that the socinians would have us think that this name is not peculiar to god. in jer. . , . he is called jehovah tzidkenu , the lord our righteousness . behold the days come saith the lord , that i will raise unto david a righteous branch ; and a king shall reign and prosper , and shall execute judgment and justice on the earth ; in his days judah shall be saved , and israel shall dwell in safety : ( which is agreed , by jews and christians , to be understood of the messias . ) and this is the name whereby he shall be called ( jehovah tzidkenu ) the lord our righteousn●●s , ( jehovah our righteousness . ) and to the same purpose , jer. . , . in psal. . which is called , a prayer of the afflicted , when he poureth out his complaint before the lord ( jehovah . ) it begins thus , hear my prayer o lord ( jehovah ) and let my cry come unto thee . and he to whom this prayer is made , is eight or nine times called the lord ( jehovah . ) now he to whom this prayer is made ( we are told , hebr. . , , , . ) is our lord christ ; vnto the son he saith , — thou lord in the beginning hast laid the foundations of the earth , and the heavens are the works of thy hands ; they shall perish , but thou remainest ; they all shall wax old as a garment , and as a vesture shalt thou fold them up , and they shall be changed ; but thou art the same , and thy years shall not fail . all which is cited out of that prayer , made to the lord jehovah . so i the lord ( jehovah ) the first and the last , isai. . . thus saith the lord ( jehovah ) before me there was no god , neither shall there be after me , isai. . . thus saith the lord ( jehovah , ) the king of israel , and his redeemer , ( jehovah ) the lord of hosts , i am the first and i am the last ; and beside me there is no god , isai. . . which are the characters applied to christ , rev. . , . & . . & . . & . . as was shewed before . 't is true , that in the greek septuagint of the old testament , the name jehovah is no where retained ; but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( i think ) every where put for it . whether because of a jewish superstition , no where to pronounce that name ; or because it could not conveniently be expressed in greek letters ; i will not determine . and for that reason ( because the septuagints did not use it ) it is not used in the new testament ( which doth mostly comply with the language of the septuagints ; as being the greek translation then in use . ) and therefore we are not to look for the name jehovah there applied to christ. but divers places are in the new testament applied to christ , wherein the name jehovah was used in the old testament . and the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( the lord ) by which both the septuagints and the new testament do constantly render the hebrew name jehovah , is so frequently applied to christ in the new testament , as that ( throughout the new testament ) it is almost his constant character , the lord , the lord jesus christ , &c. one lord jesus christ , cor. . . our lord jesus christ , the lord of glory , jam. . . my lord and my god , joh. . . no man can say that jesus is the lord , but by the holy ghost , cor. . . and elsewhere so often , that none can be ignorant of it . character iv. the last character ( which i shall insist upon ) of the true god , the only god ; is that of the lord god of israel ; hear o israel , the lord our god is one lord. and thou shalt love the lord thy god with all thy heart , &c. deut. . . and the lord thy god , is almost the constant language of moses to the children of israel : and it is the character which god directs him to use ; thus shalt thou say unto the children of israel , the lord god of your fathers , the god of abraham , the god of isaac , and the god of jacob , hath sent me ; this is my name for ever , and this is my memorial unto all generations , exod. . . and the lord god of the hebrews , ver . . and elsewhere very often throughout the bible . and doubtless , he that was the lord god of israel , is the true god , the only god. 't is he who tells us , i am the lord thy god — thou shalt have no other god but me , exod. . . and , besides me , there is no other god , isai. . . and so often elsewhere , that it is needless to name the places . and this character , as well as the rest , is expresly given to christ also , luk. . , . where we are expresly told of john the baptist , that many of the children of israel shall he turn to the lord their god ( to the lord god of israel : ) for he shall go before him in the spirit and power of elias . now we all know , whose fore-runner john baptist was ; and before whom he was to go , in the power and spirit of elias . and he before whom he was thus to go , is the lord god of israel ; and therefore not only a titular god , or a creature god , but the true god , the supreme god , the same god with that god who is the lord god of israel ; whom no man doubts to be the true god , the supreme god , the only god. i might add many other characters given to christ , proving him to be the true god ; as that rev. . . i am he which searcheth the reins and hearts , and i will give unto every one according to his works , ( and to the same purpose , rev. . . and elsewhere : ) which god ( the true god ) claims as his peculiar prerogative , jer. . , . the heart is deceitful above all things , and desperately wicked , who can know it ? i the lord search the heart , i try the reins ; to give to every man according to his ways , and according to the fruit of his doings . and to the same purpose , jer. . . jer. . . chron. . . psal. . . psal. . . and in many other places . and that likewise of isai . . his name shall be called wonderful councellor , the mighty god , the everlasting father , the prince of peace , &c. with many other characters of like nature , which can never agree to any but the true god. but it is not my business , in this short discourse , to say all that might be said ; but what may be sufficient . he therefore that is ( as hath been shewed ) god , the true god ; the mighty god ; the everlasting father ; the eternal god ; the first and the last , ( before whom nothing was , and after whom nothing shall be ) that was , and is , and shall be ; the same yesterday , and to day , and for ever ; the almighty ; by whom the world was made ; by whom all things were made , and without whom nothing was made that was made ; who laid the foundations of the earth , and the heavens are the work of his hands ; who , when the heavens and the earth shall fail , his years endure for ever ; who searcheth the heart and the reins , to give to every one according to his works ; who is jehovah ; the lord god of israel ; the supreme being ; which is over all , god blessed for ever ; who is the blessed and only potentate , the king of kings and lord of lords , who only hath immortality , to whom be honour and power everlasting , amen . that god ( i say ) of whom all these great things are said , is ( certainly ) not a mere titular god , ( who is called god but is not , ) a creature god , or only a dignified man. for , if these be not characters of the true god , by what characters shall the true god be described ? i know , the socinians have imployed their wits to find out some tricks to evade or elude some of these plain places , which i shall not trouble my self , or you to repeat ; or to give an answer to them . for they are so weak , and so forced , that the plain words of scripture , read together with the forced senses they would put upon them , are answer enough ; nor do they need or deserve any further answer . objection viii . the last objection which i shall now take notice of , is this ; that the doctrine of the trinity was not known to the jewish church before christ. to which i answer , . if it were not made known to them , it was not necessary for them to know . for matters of pure revelation , are not necessary to be known , before they are revealed , ( nor farther than they are revealed : ) but may be so to us , to whom they are revealed . the whole doctrine of our redemption by christ , was ( doubtless ) unknown to adam before his fall ; and , had he not fallen , it would have been no fault in him not to have known it at all . and when ( after his fall ) it was first made known to him , ( in that first promise , that the seed of the woman should break the serpents head , gen. . . ) it was yet so dark , that he could know very little ( as to the particulars of it ) of what is now known to us . and as god by parcels ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) at sundry times , and in divers manners , declared more of it to abraham , to david , and the prophets , so were they obliged to know and believe more of it : and when in the last days he had declared the whole of it by his son ; heb. . , . it is now necessary for us to believe much more ; of which they might be safely ignorant . and , of the trinity likewise , if it were not then revealed . . but secondly , there were many things , which though not fully revealed , so as to be clearly understood by all ; were yet so insinuated , as to be in good measure understood by some ; and would more be so , when the veil should be taken off from moses's face , cor. . , , . thus the death and resurrection of christ , were not understood , even by his own disciples , till after his resurrection . yet we must not say that these things were not before intimated in the scriptures ( though covertly ; ) for when their understandings were opened , to understand the scriptures , and what had been written of him in the law of moses , and in the prophets , and in the psalms ; they then perceived that it was so written , and that it behooved christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day . yet this was therein so covertly contained , that they seem no more to have understood it , than that of the trinity . and st. paul in the epistle to the hebrews , declares a great deal to have been covered under the jewish rites and ceremonies ; which , certainly , most of the jewish church did not understand ; though , in good measure , it might be understood by some . i might say the like of the resurrection ; which was but darkly discovered till immortality was brought to light through the gospel , tim. . . we must not yet say , it was wholly unknown to the jewish church , ( of whom many , no doubt , did believe it : ) yet neither can we say , it was generally received ; for we know the pharisees and the sadduces were divided upon that point , act. . , , . and so little is said of it in the old testament , that those who had a mind to be captious , might have found much more specious pretence of cavilling against it then , than our adversaries now have against the doctrine of the trinity . . i say thirdly , as of the resurrection , there were then divers intimations , which are now better understood ( in a clearer light ) than at that time they were : so i think there were also of the doctrine of the trinity . i shall instance in some of them . . that there was , in the unity of the god-head , a plurality of somewhat ( which now we call persons ) seems fairly to be insinuated , even in that of elohim-bara , gen. . . ( in the beginning god created , ) where elohim ( god ) a nominative case plural , is joined with bara , a verb singular ; ( which is as if we should say in english , we am , or they doth ; which would to us sound odly , if somewhat of mystery be not intended in it . ) nor is it here only , but very frequently , that god is called elohim in the plural number , ( and much oftner than in the singular number eloah , ) as if , though jehovah be but one , yet elohim may be three : not three gods , but three somewhats in that one god. ( for though it be elohim , yet it is bara : it is so three , as yet to be one. ) nor is it elohajim ( in the dual number ) as spoken of two , or a couple ; but elohim ( in the plural number ) as of more than two. this may perhaps be called a criticism , ( and it is so . ) but i am loth to say , it is purely casual , and not designed . for many times little circumstances , and unheeded expressions ( as at first they may seem to be , ) may ( by the divine wisdom ) be fore-designed to some considerable purpose . as , that of , not a bone of it shall be broken , exod. . . numb . . . psal. . . and that of , they pierced my hands and my feet , psal. . . and , they shall look upon him whom they have pierced , zach. . . and that , they part my garment among them , and on my vesture they cast lots , psal. . . and , they gave me gall for my meat , and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink , psal. . . which are most of them , but poetical expressions ; and seemingly casual , and undesigned , as to their literal sense ; but were providentially ordered , as being literally to be fulfilled ; as we find in joh. . , , , , , . and in the places parallel of the other gospels . i might instance in a great many such , which at first might seem casual , but were providentially designed . i shall content my self at present with one more ; which is that of st. paul , ( which perhaps may be thought to look as like a criticism as what i mention ) gal. . . now to abraham and his seed were the promises made . he saith not , and to seeds , as of many ; but as of one , and to thy seed which is christ. now the promises made to abraham , to which he refers , are those gen. . , , . ( which , i think , is the only place , where , in promises made to abraham , such mention is made of his seed . ) by my self have i sworn , saith the lord ; for because , thou hast done this thing , and hast not withheld thy son , thine onely son ; that in blessing i will bless thee , and multiplying i will multiply thy seed , as the stars of the heaven , and as the sand which is upon the sea-shoar , and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies ; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed ; because thou hast obeyed my voice . by abraham's seed , here , is manifestly meant his children whom god promiseth to multiply . and it might seem to be very indifferent whether to say , thy seed , or thy children . but st. paul was so nice a critick , as to take advantage of his saying seed ( in the singular number ) and not seeds or children ( in the plural ) as thereby signally denoting ( as principally intended ) that one seed , which is christ. yet are not the rest of the seed to be quite excluded ( even in that last clause of it , in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed , ) as appears by act. . . and ye ( men of israel , ver . . ) are the children of the prophets , and of the covenant which god made with our fathers , saying unto abraham , and in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed . whence 't is evident , that seemingly unheeded criticisms are sometimes providentially designed . and such i take this of bara elohim , to be . and it is taken notice of to this purpose , both by jewish and christian writers . the like plurality seems plainly intimated in the same chapter , gen. . . let vs make man in ovr image and after ovr likeness . yet even this plurality is no other than what in another consideration , is an vnity ; for so it follows , ver . . so god created man in his own image . these plural somewhats , therefore , are but one god. and 't is but a childish excuse to say , it is the stile of princes to speak in the plural , we and vs instead of i and me. 't is indeed a piece of courtship at this day , ( and perhaps hath been for some ages : ) but how long hath it been so ? 't is not so old as moses ; much less so old as the creation . king pharoah , and senacharib , and ahasuerus , were wont to say i , me , mine , ( not we , vs , ours . ) and nebuchadnezzar , even in the height of his pride , dan. . . is not this great babylon that i have built , by the might of my power , and for the honour of my majesty . here 's nothing of we and our . this was not stilus regius in those days . and if we should here expound it by such an equivalence ; and god said , let me make man in my image ; it would scarce sound like good sense . ( for 't is not usual to speak imperatively in the first person singular . ) it seems therefore to imply a plurality , though not a plurality of gods. the like we have gen. . . behold , the man is become like one of vs. is this also stilo regio , instead of , the man is become like one of me ? so , gen. . , . and the lord ( jehovah ) said , let vs go down , and confound their language . . and as these places intimate a plurality , so i know not but that of gen. . may intimate this plurality , to be a trinity . that the appearance there of three men to abraham , was a divine apparition ( though abraham did not at first apprehend it so to be ) is evident . for it is expresly said by moses , ver . the lord ( jehovah ) appeared unto him in the plains of mamre ; and he lift up his eyes , and lo three men stood by him . so that this appearance of three men , was an appearance of the lord jehovah . and though we do not find that abraham doth any where use the word jehovah in that discourse , ( but adonai all along : ) yet moses the relater ( where himself speaks ) says every where jehovah ; though when he recites abraham's words , it is adonai : but even adonai is a word plural ( as well as elohim ) that is , my lords , ( the singular is adoni , my lord ; but seldom said of god. ) whether it were , that the name jehovah were not then known to abraham ( according to that of exod. . . ) or that abraham was not at first aware who it was with whom he was then discoursing ; or for what other reason he did avoid using the name jehovah ; i shall not trouble my self curiously to enquire : but sure we are that moses tells us , this apparition of three men ( as at first they seemed to be ) was an apparition of the lord jehovah . we need not doubt therefore , but that god appeared there , in this apparition of three men ; which is therefore a fair intimation of a trinity of persons . it might perhaps be cavill'd at , if this were all : and so might that of jonah's being three days and three nights in the whale's belly , when brought as an argument to prove our saviour ought so long to lie in the grave . but st. paul tells us , cor. . , . that christ died for our sins according to the scriptures ; and that he rose again the third day , according to the scriptures . ( and christ in like manner , luk. . . ) yet i know not any thing more clear to that purpose in the scriptures ( of the old testament ) than either this of jonah's being so long in the whale's belly ( to which christ himself alludes , mat. . . ) or that of hos. . . after two days he will revive us , and the third day he will raise us up . which seems not to be more express ( for the resurrection of christ on the third day ) than this of jonah . but such covert intimations there are in the old testament ; of things afterward more clearly discovered in the new. nor was this unknown to the ancient jewish doctors , as appears by what ainsworth ( in his notes on gen. . ) cites from thence , ( out of r. simeon , ben jochai in zoar ; ) come see the mystery of the word elohim : there are three degrees , and every degree by it self distinct ; and yet notwithstanding they are all one , and joined together in one , and are not divided one from another , ( only , there he calls degrees what we now call persons . ) so that it was not unknown to the jews of old , whatever the present jews think of it . . what these three are , ( the father , the word , and the spirit , ) seems to be likewise intimated in the story of the creation , gen. . where they seem to be distinctly named . in the beginning ( elohim ) god created the heaven and the earth , ver . . where no man doubts but god the father is implied , though perhaps not he only . and ver . . the spirit of god moved upon the face of the waters . where ainsworth tells us from the ancient rabbines whom he cites , they call him , the spirit of mercies from before the lord : the spirit of wisdom , called , the spirit of the living god : and , the spirit of the messias . of the same spirit , we have elsewhere mention ; my spirit shall not always strive with man , gen. . . take not thine holy spirit from me , psal. . . the spirit of the lord is upon me , isai. . . they vexed his holy spirit , isai. . . and elsewhere . and if it be said , that by the spirit of god , is meant god himself : we say so too , for we do acknowledge , that the holy ghost , is god himself . and , of the word , there is a like intimation , ver . . god said ( or spake the word ) let there be light , and there was light. and in like manner , ver . , , . , . god said , let there be a firmament , &c. so psal. . , . by the word of the lord were the heavens made , &c. he spake and it was done , he commanded and it stood fast . and psal. . . he spake the word and they were made , he commanded and they were created . consonant to that of heb. . . by faith we understand that the worlds were made by the word of god. and pet. . , . by the word of god the heavens were of old , and the earth , &c. and by the same word they are kept in store , or preserved . in which places , by the word , so often mentioned , and with such emphasis put upon it ; seems to be meant , that word mentioned , joh. . , , . in the beginning was the word , ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ) all things were made by him : the world was made by him ; just as in heb. . . the worlds were made by the word of god. nor was this notion of the word ( personally taken ) unknown to the jewish doctors . for what we have psal. . . the lord said unto my lord , ( dixit jehova domino meo ) the chaldee paraphrase , renders by dixit jehova , ( bemeimreh ) in verbo suo meaning , by his word , the messias ; and of whom our saviour himself expounds it , mat. . . and it is frequent , in that paraphrase , by the word to design the messias ; * as s. joh. doth , joh. . . in the beginning was the word . and i put the more weight upon this , because ( as here , gen. . , . so ) we have in several other places , the word and spirit mentioned as concerned in the creation , psal. . . by the word of the lord ( jehovah ) were the heavens made , and all the hosts of them by the ( spirit , or ) breath of his mouth , ( berwach . ) where we have jehovah , his word , and spirit . job . , . he divideth the sea by his power , and by his ( wisdom , or ) vnderstanding he smiteth through the proud ; by his spirit he garnisheth the heavens , his hand hath formed the crooked serpent . where we have the power of god , the wisdom of god , and the spirit of god. and job . . ●he spirit of god hath made me , and the breath of t●e lord hath given me life . so , psal. . , . o lord ( jehovah ) how wonderful are thy works , in vvisdom thou hast made them all . thou sendest forth thy spirit , they are created , and thou renewest the face of the earth . and it is not amiss here to take notice , that as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies as well ratio as oratio ; so christ ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) is called the word of god , and the wisdom of god. and as in joh. . , , . it is said of the word , that in the beginning was the word , all things were made by him , and the world was made by him : and heb. . . the worlds were framed by the word of god. so the same is said of wisdom , prov. . . the lord by vvisdom hath formed the earth , by vnderstanding hath he established the heavens . and prov. . . &c. the lord possessed me ( wisdom ) in the beginning of his way , before his works of old ; i was set up from everlasting , from the beginning , ere ever the earth was ; — when he prepared the heavens i was there , — when he established the clouds above , — when he strengthened the fountains of the deep , — when he appointed the foundations of the earth , then was i by him , &c. and accordingly the holy ghost is called the power of god , luk. . . the holy ghost shall come upon thee , and the power of the highest shall over-shadow thee . and pet. . . who are kept by the power of god , through faith unto salvation ▪ which doubtless is not without the operation of the holy ghost , working and preserving faith in us . suitably hereunto , god's power and wisdom are oft conjoyned . he is wise in heart , and mighty in strength , job . , &c. he is excellent in power , and in judgment , job . . but , ( without laying too great a stress on every particular , ) there seems a foundation clear enough to consider the word of god , and the spirit of god , as clearly distinguishable , even in the great work of creation ; and that the holy writers , even in the old testament , have considered them as distinct ; and that even the jewish writers have owned them as such . i know very well that those who have a mind to be captious , may cavil at these places , as the sadduces of old did at those passages in the old testament tending to prove a resurrection . and not those only , but even some of our own ; who would have us think , that the fathers before christ had only promises of temporal blessings ( not of heavenly and eternal : ) though st. paul tells us , ( when , of the hope and resurrection of the dead he was called in question ; ) that he did so worship the god of his fathers , believing all things which were written in the law and the prophets , and had hope towards god ( which they also allowed ) that there should be a resurrection of the dead both of the just and vnjust ; and that it was a promise made of god to their fathers , to which their twelve tribes instantly serving god day and night , hoped to come ; which were no other things than what moses and the prophets had said should come to pass ; and which to king agrippa ( who if not a jew , was at least well acquainted with their doctrines ) should not seem strange , act. . . act. . , . act. . , , , , , . and heb. . . that all these died in faith , not having received the promises ; ( that is , they died in the belief of better things than what they had yet received : ) but saw them afar off , and were perswaded of them , and embraced them , and confessed , they were but strangers and pilgrims upon earth . and our saviour proves it out of the old testament , ( mat. . . ) by such an argument , as if one of us should have urged , it would perhaps have been ridiculed : i am the god of abraham , the god of isaac , and the god of jacob ; now god is not the god of the dead , but of the living . and the apostle pursues the same argument , heb. . , , , , . they sojourned in the land of promise , as in a strange land , dwelling in tabernacles ( movable from place to place ) for they looked for a city which hath foundations ( a fixed city , not flitting as were those tabernacles , ) whose builder and maker of god : declaring plainly that they did seek a country : not such as that from whence they came ; but a better country , that is , a heavenly : wherefore god is not ashamed to be called their god ; for he hath prepared for them a city ; where he directly argues , that god's promise , to be their god , was a promise of heaven . and no doubt but the prophets , and men of god , had taught them all along , to put a spiritual sense , upon those ( seemingly ) temporal promises , ( though the sadduces would not believe it , but cavilled at it ; ) in so much that not only the pharisees and doctors of the law ; but even the women embraced it ( even before christ's resurrection ; ) i know saith martha ( of her dead brother lazarus ) that he shall rise again in the resurrection , at the last day , joh. . . and , of such spiritual senses , we have copious instances , in the epistle to the hebrews , and elsewhere frequently . and as they did without any reluctances , readily embrace the doctrine of the resurrection , when more clearly declared by the apostles , ( as a thing not wholly new to them ; ) so neither do we find in them any reluctance to that of the trinity ( for which , in likelihood , they had in like manner been before prepared : ) but readily closed with the form of baptism , in the name ( not names ) of the father , and of the son , and of the holy ghost , mat. . . and that solemn benediction , cor. . . the grace of our lord jesus christ , and the love of god , and the communion of the holy ghost be with you all , amen . where we have all the three persons reckoned together ; as they are also in that celebrated place , joh. . . the father , the word , and the holy ghost ; these three are one. and as they had been before by christ himself , joh. . . the comforter , which is the holy ghost , whom the father will send in my name , he shall teach you all things . and joh. . . the comforter whom i will send unto you from the father , even the spirit of truth , which proceedeth from the father , he shall testify of me. and ( to name no more places ) mat. . , . jesus , when he was baptized , went straitway out of the water : and lo , the heav●ns were opened unto him , and he ( john the baptist ) saw the spirit of god descending like a dove , and lighting upon him : and lo , a voice from heaven saying , this is my beloved son , in whom i am well pleased . . there is yet another consideration which doth confirm this opinion , that the doctrine of the trinity was not unknown to the jewish church before christ : from the footsteps thereof yet extant in heathen writers . 't is well known ( to those conversant in such studies ) that much of the heathen learning ( their philosophy , theology , and mythology ) was borrowed from the jews ; though much disguised , and sometimes ridiculed by them . which things though they be fabulous , as disguised in a romantick dress : yet they are good evidence that there was a truth in history , which gave occasion to those fables . none doubts but ovid's fable of the chaos ( of which all things were made ) took its rise from moses's history of the creation : and deucalion's flood , from that of noah : and the titan's fighting against the gods , from the builders of babel's tower : and that of two-faced janus , from noah's looking backward & forward to the world before and since the flood . and many the like , of which we may see in natalis comes , in bochartus , and others : and of which we have a large collection in theophilus gale's court of the gentiles . and in dr. duport's gnomologia homerica ; wherein is a collection of homer's sayings , which look like allusions to like passages in sacred scripture ; and seem to be borrowed ( most of them ) from those books of it , which were written before homer's time ; who yet is one of the most ancient and most famed of heathen writers . plato hath borrowed so much of his philosophy , history , and theology , from the jewish learning , as that he hath obtained the title of ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) moses disguised in a greek dress . and , may seem , because the name of jews was odious , to cite them rather by the names of certain barbarians , syrians , phoenicians , egyptians &c. from that title of god in exodus , i am , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( or from the equivalent names of jah and jehovah ) he borrows his ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ) the being , ( or that which is , ) the very being , the true being ; which are the titles he gives to the supreme god. for his immortality of the soul , he reckons the best argument to be ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ) a divine revelation , which he had by tradition from certain ancients , who lived ( as he speaks ) nearer to the gods , ( as if he had borrowed even this phrase from deut. . . what nation is so great , who hath god so nigh unto them ? ) and much more , as hath been noted by others . and i am so far from thinking ( as the socinians would have us ) that st. john did but platonize , and borrowed his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from plato's trinity ; that i rather think , that plato borrowed his trinity ( as he did many other things ) from the jewish doctrine , though by him disguised : and take it for a good evidence , that the doctrine of the trinity , was then not unknown to them . aristotle , in the last chapter of his book , de mundo ; which is de dei nominibus : he tells us that god , though he be but one , hath many names : and amongst those many , he reckons that of the tres parcae ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) or as we call them , the three destinies ( atropas , clotho , and lachesis ; whom he doth accommodate to the three diversities of time ; past , present , and future , ) to be one of these names . which , though numbred as three , are but this one god. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ( and cites plato to the same purpose ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . so that it seems both plato and aristotle were of opinion , that three somewhats may be one god. and this , in likelihood , they derived from the jewish learning . i might say the like of their three judges in another world , minos , radamanthus and aeacus . which thing though it be fabulous , yet it implies thus much , that they had then a notion , not only of the soul's immortality , but also of a trinity of persons in another world , who should take account of mens actions in this world. and both these notions they had , no doubt , from the jewish learning ; from whence their most sublime notions were derived . to these i might add that of their three-shap'd chimaera ; which their poets feign to have been . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as is to be seen in homer one of their most ancient poets . and that of cerberus , their three-headed porter of the other world. which poetical fictions , though invented perhaps to ridicule the trinity ; do yet at last argue that they had then some notices of a trinity , ( of three somewhats which were yet but one. ) for , if they had no notice of it , they could not have ridiculed it . our adversaries , perhaps , may please themselves with the fansy , that chimaera and cerberus are brought in to prove the trinity . but they mistake the point : we are not now proving the trinity , ( which is already settled on a firmer foundation ; ) but inquiring , whether this doctrine were then known . and as we think it a good argument to prove the christian religion , to have been known in lucian's time , ( and known to him , ) because lucian doth scoff at it ; which he could not have done , if he had known nothing of it : so is it a good argument to prove the doctrine of the trinity to have been then known , when it was ridiculed . and it proves also , that there might be then prophane wits to ridicule it , as there are now to blaspheme the trinity , as a three-headed monster ; and , that this 〈◊〉 wit of theirs , is not their own , but stollen from wittier heathens . but , whether it were , or were not , known to the jewish church before christ , ( of which there be great presumptions that it was so known , as well as that of the resurrection : ) it is enough to us , that we are taught it now . and , if any will yet be so obstinate as not to believe , either the resurrection , or the trinity ; upon pretence that neither of them was known to the jewish church , ( or at least , not so clearly , but that they may be able to cavil at places from the old testament alledged to prove either ; ) we must leave them to the wisdom and judgment of god , till he shall think fit to instruct them better . now to god the father , god the son , and god the holy ghost ; three persons , but one eternal and ever blessed god ; be praise , honour and glory , now and for evermore , amen . finis . advertisement . by reason of the authors absence from the press at so great a distance , some mistakes have happened , both in the letters and sermons ; and some things omitted , which should have been inserted in their proper places , but that they came so late to the printers hands , that it could not well be done without d●scomposing his affairs . of both which it is thought fit thus to direct . errata . let . i. p. . l. . for divisions read dimensions . p. . l . dele three . p . l. . for meaning read memory . let. ii. p. ● . l. . for that read shall . let. iii. p. . l. . as a separate existence . p l. . as to be . p. . l. ult . for those read these . p. . l. known p. . l. . for sure read save . let. iv. p. . l. . for toil read talk . p. . l. . as well as . let. v. p. . l. . dele of . p. . l. . for any read my . p. . l. . read joh. . . p. . l. . for israel read jacob. p. . l. . doth not well p. . l. . said so much . let. vi. p. . l. . for nor read now. p. . l. . for then read t●ere . p. . l. . for london read leyden . p. . l. . at least . p. . l. . for this read thus. p. . l. . for as read in l. . thee only , the. p. . l. . for railing read ranting . p. . l. . was not then . l. . beside that in . let. vii . p. . l . possibility . p. . l. . for fourt● read fault . p. . l. pen. all-comprehensive . p. . l. . father . p. . l. . afte● notion● , add further than they are revealed . l. pen. words . p. . l. . hands . p. . l. . to answer . l. . for one read me . serm. p. . l. . exegerical . p. l. . god. p. . l. . for for read or . l. . for er read fer . p. . l. . read author . p. . l. . read were framed . additions . let. i. p. . l. . after united , add or intimately one. p. . l. . after cube , add , ( there being no limits in nature , greater than which a cube cannot be ) . let. iii. p. . l. . add this marginal note , the saxon word hel or helle , ( whence comes the english word hell , ) doth not properly or necessarily import the place of the damned ; but may be indifferently taken for hell , hole , or hollow place : which are all words of the same original . helan ( to hide , or cover , ) hole ( cavitas , ) hol ( cavus ) hollow . and when it is used in a restrained sense ; it is metonymical , or synecdochical ; as when hole or pit , is put for the grave , and the like . p. . l. . add , so that i take the plain sense of the words to be this : he was ( for some time ) in that hell , or hades ( what ever by that word be meant ) ; wherein ( it is expresly said ) he was not left ; but was raised from it . p. . l. . add , beside this letter of thanks from his partner in the disputation ; there was another from sandius himself , ( not printed , but in manuscript , ) acknowledging a like conviction . of which wittichius recites an extract , in his causa spiritus sancti victrix demonstrata , à christophoro wittichio . lugduni batavorum , apud cornelium boutestein , . let. iv. p. . l. . after athanasius , add , ( 't is the same thing with me , whether it were written by him or some other , as long as i find it agreeable to scripture . at the end of the same line , add ( wherein yet i would not be thought to encourage dangerous errors : for the errors are equally dangerous , and equally fundamental ; whether i do , or do not anathematize them . ) p. . at the end ; add jan. . / . yours , john wallis . let. vi. p. . l. . add this marginal note . socinus 's words are these : velim autem scias , me duplici de causa ( praeter eam quam ipse commemoras ) ab ista quaestione , de animae immortalitate , abstinuisse . nam & mihi res erat cum homine qui me calumniandi , inque omnium invidiam vocandi , omnem occasionem quaerebat . necdum mihi , quid de quaestione ista statuendum sit , plane exploratum erat ; quemadmodum nec hodie quidem est . tantum id mihi videtur statui posse ; post hanc vitam , animam seu animum hominis non ita per se subsistere ut praemia utla poenasvé sentiat , vel etiam ista sentiendi sit capax . quae mea firma opinio facile potest ex disputatione ista colligi : cum ex multis quae identidem à me ibi dicuntur ; tum ex ea ipsa , de qua praecipuè agitur , sententia mea . nam quamvis , cum ipso puccio disputans , ( qui , ut immortalitatem primi hominis ante peccatum probaret , animi ipsius immortalitatem mihi objiciebat , ) ostendi , non propterea dici posse hominem immortalem quia anima ipsius non moriatur : tamen satis apparet me sentire , non ita vivere , post hominis ipsius mortem , animam ejus , ut per se praemiorum poenarúmve capax existat : cum in ipso primo homine , totius immortalitatis rationem uni gratiae divinae trib●o ; nec in ipsa creatione quidquam immortalis vitae agnosco . socini epist. . ad volkelium ; die . novembris , anno , . let. vi. p. . l. . add this marginal note : sandiru 's words are these ( cited by wittichius in his causa spiritus sancti victrix , pag. . ) jam finitis illis quae ad librum tuum regerenda duxi ( praeter ea quae satis à socio meo responsum puto , ) oro te ne graveris ulteriùs hoc argumentum prosequi ; quò tandem veritas , si fieri possit , patefiat ; & velut scintilla ex silice ad chalybem alliso prosiliat . nam ingenuè fateor , mihi conjecturam mean longè verisimiliorem visam , antequam librum tuum , quo me docere aggressus es , legissem . non parùm & contulit ad eam debilitandam , consideratio mea , joh. . , . & mat. . ● . nam postquam in baptismo spiritus sanctus super christum descendit , & super eum mansit , eumque in desertum duxit , nec ab eo recessit ; ( cum non verisimile sit christum tentationem satanae sine spiritus sancti auxilio superâsse ; ) finita demum tentatione dicuntur angeli accessisse & ministrâsse ei . quod si itaque conjectura mea consistere non possit , ut vix possit , perpendendum erit , an non spiritus sanctus possint esse septem spiritus principales ; vel , multitudo spirituum longè subtiliorum caeteris angelorum ordinibus , fortean naturâ ipsâ : et an per hanc hypothesin salvari possint omnes difficultates contra conjecturam meam hactenus product● . novi quendam qui sentit , spiritum sanctum quidem esse unam personam , camque creatam , sed totum vniversum essentia sua pervadentem . valdè autem dubito an haec sententia subsistere queat . illa de una persona spiritus sancti comprehensis sub eo angelis tanquam ejus ministris & satellitibus ; mihi non admodum arridet . si autem horum nihil verum comperiatur ; tum demum mihi verisimillimum videbitur , spiritum sanctum cum deo patre ejusque verbo , unum deum , unam substantiam , unum individuum esse . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a -e heb. . . cor. . . pet. . . heb. . . cor. . . cor. . . tim. . . col. . , . rom. . , . & alibi . joh. . . joh. . . heb. . , . eph. . . heb. . . jam. . thes. . . tit. . . gal. . . matth. . . joh. . . thes. . . pet. . . tit. . , , . notes for div a -e * for i take the hebrew pronouns hu and hi , ( which we commonly render by he , she , or it , according as the gender varies ) to be derivatives from the verb havah or hajah which signifies to be. not that i take hu to be a proper name of god ( as are jah and jehovah , from the same verbs , ) but an appellative w●rd , common to the creatures also ; but here emphatically appl●ed to god , ( as are the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . which are common to the creatures al●o ; for ●hey also are , in their kind , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ) and the latin p●onouns is , id , ( that is , he or it ) when relatively taken , are to be expounded of their antecedent to which t●●y relate : but when put a●solutely without an antecedent ; they are of alike import with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quid taken substantively : ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) according ●o which we use to say ( even in our metaphys●cks ) ens & aliquid con●ertunt●r , ( he or it , so taken ar● of the same import , with a being , or what is. ) and the learned gat●ker ( than whom i do not know that we have a better critick ; more judicious or more acute ; ) though ( in his book de ●tylo novi instrumenti , contra pfochenium , ) he do n●t take hu to be a proper name of god ( but communicable to creatures , however here emphatic●ll● applied to him : ) yet doth allow , that in these places , and in many others ( o● which he gives divers instances ) it is used for the ve●b substantive ( sum , or est. ) which is the same wi●●●hat i say , that it imports a being , or to be , ( and therefore , when signally applied to g●d , ●is absolute , infinite , independent ▪ self-being . ) and so , it seems , the septuagi●ts did 〈◊〉 und●rstand it , who render ani hu , by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , i am ; ( and the vu●gar latin b● 〈◊〉 sum ; ) and in the new t●stam●●t ( which commonly ●ollows the phrase o● the ●ept●●gints ) christ says it of himself , before abraham was ( not i was , but ) i am , ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) importing ●hereby his permanent and ins●ccessive being : co-exis●ent to all the 〈…〉 ( successive ) duration ; past , present , and future : the same yes●erday , and to-da● ▪ and fo● e●er . the differe●ce between is or id relatively tak●n ( r●lating to what we call 〈◊〉 antecedent , ) and the same taken absolutely ( without such reference to other 〈◊〉 it selfe ; ) is much the same as between ( what the logi●ians call ) est secundi ●djecti ( which is but a copula to join the predicate with the ●ubject . ) and est ●●rr● adjecti ; where it self is ( or doth include ) the predicate . as when s●crat●● est , 〈◊〉 r●solved by socrates est ens , or est existens ; the word est , so taken , including 〈◊〉 the copula and the predicate : like as id or quid substantively taken , is not relative , 〈◊〉 absolute , and the same with ens. * in one great bible of this tr●nslation , ( amo●gst mr. selden's books in the bodleyan library ) appointed to be read in ●●urches ( as we are told in th● title page ) printed ( if i do not mis-remember t●e date ) abo●● the reign of king edw●rd the sixth , or the end of king henry the eig●th , i find the name ja. but in all other ( whether psalters or bibles , old or new ) of that translation ( that i have consulted ) it is yea. of which ( i suppose ) the occasion at first was this : the hebrew letter , by different persons , is differently called jod and yod ; and accordingly that name to be written in english ja or ya . which being ( it seems ) in some books written or printed ya ; some after-printer thinking it to be mis-printed for yea , did so ( as he thought ) correct it ; and the error hath thence been propagated eversince . yet this having ( it seems ) been discovered by some-body , some while since ; i find in divers late editions of the psalter , or psalms in our book of common-prayer , ( which follows that translation ) it is thus printed praise him in his name , yea , and rej●yce before him , ( with a comma before and after yea , ) leaving it indifferent , whether to refer yea ( or ya ) to the former clause , as the name of god ; or , to the latter clause as the affirmative particle yea . but in the original hebrew , and in all other translations ( that i have observed ) in any language , i find the name jah , or somewhat equivalent thereunto ; as doubtless it ought to be . * so in isa. . . fear not , i am with thee ; and ver . . fear not , i will help thee ; and ver . . fear not , i will help thee , saith the lord and thy redeemer ; and ver . . the wind ( or spirit , ruach ) shall carry them away , and the whirl-wind shall scatter them : is in the chaldee paraphrase ( rendred into latin ) ne timeas , quia in adjutorium tuum erit verbum meum . ne timeas , quia verbum meum erit in adjutorium tuum . ne t●meatis , — verbum meum est in auxilium vestrum , dicit dominus & redemptor vester . ventus ( seu spiritus ) abripiet eos , & verbum ejus disperget eos , quasi turbo stipulas . ( where we have god , his word , and spirit . ) so in isai. . . for my own sake , for my own sake will i do it : and ver . . hea●ken unto me : and ver . . my hand hath laid the foundation of the earth , and my right hand hath spanned the heavens : and ver . . i , even i have spoken , i have called him : and ver . . come ye near unto me , hear ye this : are in the chaldee paraphrase , propter nomen meum , propter verbum meum faci●m . obedite verbo meo . in verbo meo fundavi terram , & in potentia mea appendi coelos . ( where again we have god , his word , and power , or spirit . ) in verbo meo pepigi pactum cum abraham patre vestro , & vocavi eum . accedite ad verbum meum , audite haec . and , at the like rate , in many other places . an answer to dr. sherlock's examination of the oxford decree in a letter from a member of that university to his friend in london. wallis, john, - . approx. kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from -bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : - (eebo-tcp phase ). a wing w estc r ocm this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons . universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase , no. a ) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set ) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, - ; : ) an answer to dr. sherlock's examination of the oxford decree in a letter from a member of that university to his friend in london. wallis, john, - . the second edition, corrected and inlarged. p. s.n.], [s.l. : . reproduction of original in the university of illinois (urbana-champaign campus). library. created by converting tcp files to tei p using tcp tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between and available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the , texts created during phase of the project have been released into the public domain as of january . anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. % (or pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf- unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p , characters represented either as utf- unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng sherlock, william, ?- . -- modest examination of the authority and reasons of the late decree of the vice-chancellor of oxford. trinity -- early works to . - tcp assigned for keying and markup - aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images - mona logarbo sampled and proofread - mona logarbo text and markup reviewed and edited - pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion an answer to dr. sherlock's examination of the oxford decree : in a letter from a member of that university , to his friend in london . the second edition , corrected and inlarged . printed anno dom. . an answer to dr. sherlock's examination , &c. ian. . / . sir , as to what you ask , concerning dr. sherlock's modest examination of the oxford decree ( as he calls it : ) i have seen it ; and find he is very angry , and under great mistakes . he is set forth in the frontispice , with his titles at large , william sherlock , d. d. dean of st. paul 's , master of the temple , and chaplain in ordinary to his majesty : and thinks much , that what he says ( though without naming him ) should be censured , considering his profession , character , and station in the church , p. . the title he gives it , ( and at which he quarels ) decretum oxoniense , or the oxford decree , is ( for ought i know ) a title of his own . sure , 't is none of theirs who made it : who are therefore therein not concerned , whether it be , or be not , decretum oxoniense . nor was he named in it ; but onely a sermon censured , which was preached at oxford by another person . if dr. sherlock be of the same mind with that other person ; that is not our fault . 't was printed ( he says ) in latin in these words , &c. true ; but not with that spelling . for instance , prefectorum was not printed ( once and again ) with a single e , instead of praefectorum with an ae . and it was hoped , so great a critick as he would be thought ( pag. . ) might have been able to spell true , when he had a printed copy before him . he then fansies ( or would be thought to think ) that some malicious animadverter ( p. . . ) had translated this latin into english , for the benefit and edification of his english readers . but that is one of his great mistakes . 't was printed at oxford , both in latin and english , the same day ; and by the same authority ; ( and 't is believ'd , dr. sherlock knows it was ; ) and the english ( as there printed ) is as much an original as the latin ; ( how it is re-printed at london , i know not . ) and , i doubt , the animadverter ( if he had done it ) would rather have said , it was for the benefit and edification of dr. sherlock , for fear he should not have understood latin. for it is at this rate , they use to talk to one another . if the hawkers at london , have caused it to be re-printed , with a new title , and notes upon it , ( to make it fell the better , ) and put it into the weekly advertisements , for that purpose ; who can help it ? but the critick finds fault with the latin , as transgressing the plain rules of grammar , in using eorum fidei & curae commissis , for suae . of that , let the criticks judge . if committed to their care , had been meant of them iointly , i think the word suae might have been used ; but when to be understood of them respectively , i think eorum doth better . suae curae commissi , is , in plain english , committed to their own care : but it is here to be understood , of the care of others ; and , who those others were , eorum was to signify . and i would fain know , by what plain rule of dr. sherlock 's grammar ( if he have a grammar ) eorum may not be so used . but i would not advise dr. sherlock to venture too much at criticism . i doubt his talent doth not lie that way . in what cases we must use suae , and in what eorum , and in what we may indifferently use either ; better criticks , than dr. sherlock and i , will not take upon them to determine . the pretended false english in that remark ( whose ever it be ) it may be noted , that the propositions above-mentioned are dr. sherlock 's in his discourse of the trinity ; and the defender's of it ( of that discourse ; ) and wrote against by the animadverter ; i am yet to seek . i think it is true english. when dr. sherlock tells us , where the bad english lies , let the noter answer it . the vice-chancellor and heads of houses are not therein concerned . mean while , i think his two criticisms , to be two mistakes . he tells us , the decree of the oxford convocation , is indeed decretum oxoniense , or a decree of the university of oxford , ( be it so ; ) but , not that of the heads of colleges and halls . very true ; nor do they say it is . but , if that would do him a kindness , a vote of convocation might have been had as easily . for , as i do not hear , that any one dissented , in the meeting of heads ; so i believe there would have been as few in convocation , if it had been proposed there . some perhaps would rather have had it passed , not there only , but in convocation also ; but , if so , it was to pass there first , before it came to convocation . but he says , p. . the statutes refer such censures , not to the meeting of heads , but to the vice-chancellor , and six heads , doctors of divinity , and to one or both of the professors of divinity . the word heads in this last clause , is another of his mistakes . for it is not requisite , that the six doctors of divinity should all be heads of houses ; the vice-chancellor may as well advise with other doctors . but be it so ; there were at least six heads of houses , doctors of divinity , and one or both of the two professors of divinity . but is it there said , he may not advise with more than six ? if instead of calling six heads , he call them all , is there any hurt in this ? especially when they are all unanimous ? but , he says , p. . they were not all present . ( very good ! before we had too many , now we have too few . ) but all were warned ; and if some chanced to be out of town , it is but what would have been in a convocation . some of the wisest heads ( he says ) were absent , and some present dissented . that some were absent , is very like : but , that any present did dissent , i have not heard ; or , that any then absent did dislike the sentence when they heard it . but , if the meeting of the heads of houses be so venerable an authority ; he will ( he says ) undertake , any day in the year , to procure a meeting of twice as many , as wise and learned men , to censure their decree . ( very modestly spoken ! ) no doubt but he and his are wise and learned men ; at least , he thinks so . but what are those wise and learned men to do ? to censure their decree . very good ! perhaps they would ( some of them , not many , ) advise to put suae instead of eorum . but would those wise and learned men say ( as he doth ) that the three persons in the trinity , are three distinct infinite minds and spirits , and three individual substances ? i doubt , he would not find it so easy ( every day in the year ) to procure a meeting of twice so many wise and learned men , to say this. i do not find , that his new doctrine doth make so many proselites . but , supposing their authority , he asks , how far their authority extends ? i say , if it extend so far as to censure our own members ; 't is enough for our turn at present . dr. sherlock , if he please , may keep out of their reach . and the words of the statute be large enough , haereticos , schismaticos , & quoscunque alios minus recte de fide catholica , & doctrina vel disciplina ecclesiae anglicanae sentientes . — utque tam conciones quam libri , quibus male-sanae opiniones propagantur , cohibeantur . and this referred ( with dr. sherlock 's good leave ) vice-cancellarii judicio , assidentibus ipsi praefectis in ordinario ipsorum conventu ; ( in the chapter de authoritate & officio vice-cancellarii . ) and , as to sermons in particular , ( in the chapter de offensionis & dissensionis materia in concionibus evitanda , ) siquis pro concione aliqua , intra universitatem ejusve praecinctum habita , quicquam doctrinae vel disciplinae ecclesiae anglicanae publice receptae dissonum aut contrarium — protulerit ; sive protulisse ab ipso vice-cancellario suspectus , vel ab alio aliquo , rationabilem suspicionis causam afferente , delatus fuerit ; the vice-chancellor or his deputy is to proceed as is there directed , adhibito consilio sex aliorum s. theol. doctorum , quorum unus sit s. theologiae professor regius , si concioni interfuerit . but , because dr. sherlock ( tho' he pretend to cite them ) doth ( p. . ) confess he doth not know our statutes ; i shall admit this excuse of ignorance for his mistakes ; provided , he will forbear thus to talk of he knows not what . now , as to what the vice-chancellor is thus to censure ; it may be presum'd , that he ( with the advice afore-said ) is ( in some measure ) to make some judgement of it , in order to such censure . how far ( out of the present case ) they may declare and decree heresy , i shall not take upon me to determine . a judge , in his ordinary proceedings , tho' i think he is not to declare new treasons ( besides those enumerated in the statute of treasons ; ) yet , when a case is to be tried before him , i suppose , he may declare , whether he think the fact in question , to be treason within that statute . but , of this , let those judge , whose business it is to understand the law. i confess also , that i do not take our statutes , to be the law of the land , ( for the whole nation ; ) but they be our rule ( by which we are to proceed as to our own members : ) ratified to us by the arch-bishop of canterbury , under his archiepiscopal seal ; and by the king's majesty , under the great seal of england . the statute of . eliz. is , i suppose , to be understood of such legal conviction or definitive sentence ( in order to burning ) as upon which ( as the law then stood ) the writ de haeretico comburendo , was of course to issue . which is not the present case . that the paper of complaint was signed but by two ; i believe is true . but one had been enough . and the vice-chancellor was satisfied , there needed no more . and therefore did forbid the gathering of more hands : because he meant to proceed calmly , not tumultuously . ( and , in so doing , i think he did wisely . ) and it had been dispatched sooner ; but that the business of entertaining the king , did retard it till that solemnity was over . but a main business of these angry papers , is , a quarel between dr. sherlock , and , his malicious animadverter , dr. south . the vice-chancellor and heads of houses had said nothing of dr. sherlock ; but had onely censured an offensive sermon , which they could not approve of ; but might be supposed to do , if ( when preached to their faces ) they shewed no dislike of it . but dr. sherlock ( whose doctrine was the same ) brings himself into the quarel by a side-wind . he first supposeth , that the complaint was commenced by dr. south . which is a mistake ; for the sermon was complain'd of , the same day it was preached , or that following , before dr. south knew any thing of it ; being at that time far enough from oxford . then , that the person who preached it , was never summoned or questioned for it , or his name mentioned at the meeting . which is another mistake ; for , upon the first complaint , the person was summoned , and did appear , and did give his answer in writing , with his name subscribed ; owned the words ; and said , what he had to say , in excuse thereof : and this his answer was communicated to the heads of houses . next , that their censure was in latin only ; whereas it was originally in english also . then , that it was translated by his malicious animadverter : when as there was no such matter . that he caused it to be re-printed at london ; that , there , he gave it a notable title ; that he made the notable remarks in the postscript ; that , when he had railed himself out of breath , he called for a decretum oxoniense to help him ; which was the wisest thing he could do . that dr. south sollicited the cause with such zeal and importunity , as could not be resisted ; that he triumphs in it ; that he published it in one of the weekly prints ; and much more to the same purpose . now , if you ask , how he knows all this ? his proof is , it may be supposed , or it is easy to guess , p. . now , much of this we know to be false . and if we should add , it may be supposed , that the rest is so too ; would not this be as good a proof ? or , if it should be said , that dr. sherlock being baffled by dr. south , and having railed to no purpose , got a young man to preach his doctrine in the face of the university , ( which happened , for his purpose , as if it had been contrived ; ) that in case , as was hoped , the university had taken it patiently ; he might have gloried , that the university of oxford found no fault with his doctrine . which might furnish him with new topicks of railing and triumphing : would not , it may be supposed , do as well here ? only we cannot say , it happened luckily for his purpose ; but rather unluckily . but be this as it will : let the two doctors agree that point amongst themselves ; or let the animadverter and the defender fight it out . the decree ( as he calls it ) names neither ; but only censures a third person . that this person was not summoned , is not true . summoned he was ; and had given in his answer , in writing , under his hand ; and upon that answer the vice-chancellor and heads of houses did proceed . they did condemn the doctrine ; and forbid the preaching it ; by him or any other . why they were so kind as to proceed no farther against him ; many reasons may be alleged . he had ( while the business was depending ) quitted the university , and was gone ; and , 't was hoped ( being a young man ) he would be more wary ; and avoid the like , for the future . and if dr. sherlock would , in time , have done the like , i think he had done better : and i believe the best of his friends think so too . when he had let fall some unwary expressions , and not justifiable ; he might have retracted them , with as little discredit as he has done some other . and it would be the wisest thing he could do . what are the thousand iacobite stories he talks of ( p. . ) i know not : whether now he be or be not a jacobite ; whether he have or have not been ; or , whether sometime he have and sometime have not ; is nothing to this purpose ? if he will still insist upon it , that if a person be a mind , a spirit , a substance ; then three persons must be three distinct minds , spirits , and substances , p. . ( as distinct as adam and abel , though not separate , p. . ) he knows it will not be allow'd him : because mind , spirit , substance , are ( in their proper signification ) absolute ; but person ( in its proper signification ) is a relative term. if dr. sherlock were dean of paul s , dean of windsor , and dean of westminster ; should we thence argue , that , since a dean is a man , an animal , a substance ; therefore , because of three distinct , substantial deaneries , they be ( or he is ) three distinct men , three distinct animals , and three distinct substances ? i think not . because man , animal , substance , are terms absolute , but dean is relative . and the same absolute being , may admit ( without being multiplied ) many relative predicates . i should rather say , that dr. sherlock would ( in such case ) sustain three persons , without being three men , three animals , or three substances . yet this is not sabellianism ; for , though dean of paul's , be a relative name ; yet it is not merely an empty name ; but doth import a substantial dignity , as the ground of that relation ; and a substantial man as the subject of that , as well as of his other relations . and this hath been told him so often , that we cannot think the dean so dull , as not to apprehend the distinction ; but so wilful , as that he scorns to own it : but would still have us think , that mind , spirit , person , are terms equivalent ; ( and therefore jumbles them together as such ; ) which will not be admitted . or , if they be equivalent ; why cannot he content himself with ( what is generally received ) three persons , but must impose upon us his new terms of three distinct minds , three distinct spirits , and three distinct substances ? but scorn and flouncing will not carry it off . the consequence will hold more strongly , thus , if an infinite eternal mind or spirit be god ; then three distinct infinite eternal minds or spirits , are three gods. ( for , here , the terms are all absolute , not relative . ) and if to maintain ( obstinately ) that there be three gods ; ( that is , three eternal infinite minds or spirits ; ) be not heresy , what is ? it seems to me , but a new trick , to play the game into the socinian's hand ; by granting to them ( their darling notion ) that to affirm , the father , son , and holy-ghost , to be three persons of which each is god ; is the same as to affirm that they are three gods. which we must not allow . if st. hilary have sometime called them tres substantias ; he may know , that substantia was at that time an ambiguous term , and taken sometimes as the latin word for hypostasis , and sometimes for ousia . for which reason the latines were , for some time , shy of admitting the term hypostasis , least it should be thought to imply the same with substantia , in the same sense with ousia . and he might have understood from his own citation , p. . that , by substance , is there meant subsistence . tres substantias esse dixerunt ; subsistentium personas , per substantias , edocentes . that is , ( by his own translation ) they said there were three substances ; meaning thereby , three subsisting persons . but when as now ( for some ages ) it is agreed ( for prevention of ambiguity ) in the one sense , to say substance , and in the other subsistence ; it is not now the same to call them three substances ( in contradistinction to three subsistences ) as then it was , while the word was used ambiguously in both senses . this , i suppose , may satisfy you , ( so far as concerns the vice-chancellor and heads of houses ; ) if it will not satisfy dr. sherlock , let him and the animadverter dispute it out . yours , &c. three papers presented to the royal society against dr. wallis together with considerations on dr. wallis his answer to them / by tho. hobbes. hobbes, thomas, - . approx. kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from -bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : - (eebo-tcp phase ). a wing h estc r ocm this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons . universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase , no. a ) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set ) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, - ; : ) three papers presented to the royal society against dr. wallis together with considerations on dr. wallis his answer to them / by tho. hobbes. hobbes, thomas, - . wallis, john, - . [ ], , [ ], p. printed for the author, london : . "to the right honorable and others, the learned members of the royal society for the advancement of the sciences" on leaf preceding t.p. reproduction of original in the bodleian library. to the right honourable and others, the learned members of the royal society for the advancement of the sciences--considerations upon the answer of dr. wallis to the three papers of mr. hobbes. created by converting tcp files to tei p using tcp tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between and available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the , texts created during phase of the project have been released into the public domain as of january . anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. % (or pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf- unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p , characters represented either as utf- unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng mathematics -- early works to . square root -- early works to . - tcp assigned for keying and markup - spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images - mona logarbo sampled and proofread - mona logarbo text and markup reviewed and edited - pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion to the right honourable and others , the learned members of the royal society , for the advancement of the sciences . presenteth to your consideration , your most humble servant thomas hobbes , a confutation of a theoreme which hath a long time passed for truth ; to the great hinderance of geometry , and also of natural philosophy , which thereon dependeth . the theoreme . the four sides of a square being divided into any number of equal parts , for example into ; and straight lines drawn through the opposite points , which will divide the square into lesser squares ; the received opinion , and which dr. wallis commonly useth , is , that the root of those , namely , is the side of the whole square . the confutation . the root is a number of those squares , whereof the whole containeth , whereof one square is an vnitie ; therefore the root , is squares : therefore the root of squares is squares , and not the side of any square ; because the side of a square is not a superficies , but a line . for as the root of vnities is vnities , or of souldiers souldiers : so the root of squares is of those squares . therefore the theoreme is false ; and more false , when the root is augmented by multiplying it by other greater numbers . hence it followeth , that no proposition can either be demonstrated or confuted from this false theoreme . upon which , and upon the numeration of infinites , is grounded all the geometry which dr. wallis hath hitherto published . and your said servant humbly prayeth to have your judgement hereupon : and that if you finde it to be false , you would be pleased to correct the same ; and not to suffer so necessary a science as geometry to be stifled , to save the credit of a professor . three papers presented to the royal society against dr. wallis . together with considerations on dr. wallis his answer to them . by tho. hobbes of malmsbury . london : printed for the author ; and are to be had at the green dragon without temple-bar . . to the right honourable and others , the learned members of the royal society , for the advancement of the sciences . your most humble servant thomas hobbes presenteth , that the quantity of a line calculated by extraction of roots , is not to be truely found . and further presenteth to you the invention of a straight line equal to the arc of a circle . a square root is a number which multiplied into it self produceth a number . and the number so produced is called a square number . for example : because multiplied into makes ; the root is , and the square number . consequent . in the natural row of numbers , as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , &c. every one is the square of some number in the same row . but square numbers ( beginning at ) intermit first two numbers , then four , then six , &c. so that none of the intermitted numbers is a square number , nor has any square root . prop. i. a square root ( speaking of quantity ) is not a line , such as euclide defines , without latitude , but a rectangle . suppose a b c d be the square , and ab , bc , cd , da be the sides ; and every side divided into equal parts , and lines drawn through the opposite points of division ; there will then be made lesser squares , which taken all together are equal to the square abcd. therefore the whole square is , whereof one square is an unit ; therefore units , which is the root , is ten of the lesser squares , and consequently has latitude ; and therefore it cannot be the side of a square , which according to euclide is a line without latitude . consequent . it follows hence , that whosoever taketh for a principle , that a side of a square is a meer line without latitude , and that the root of a square is such a line , ( as dr. wallis continually does ) demonstrates nothing . but if a line be divided into what number of equal parts soever , so the line have bredth allowed it , ( as all lines must , if they be drawn ) and the length be to the bredth as number to an unite , the side and the root will be all of one length . prop. ii. any number given is produced by the greatest root multiplied into it self , and into the remaining fraction . let the number given be two hundred squares , the greatest root is / squares . i say , that is equal to the product of into it self , together with multiplied into / . for multiplied into it self , makes . and into / makes / , which is equal to . and added to maketh ; as was to be proved . or take any other number , the greatest root is ; which multiplied into it self is , and the remainder / multiplied into is ; and both together . prop. iii. but the same square calculated geometrically by the like parts , consisteth ( by eucl. . . ) of the same numeral great square , and of the two rectangles under the greatest side , and the remainder of the side , or ( which is all one ) of one rectangle under the greatest side , and double the remainder of the side ; and further of the square of the less segment ; which all together make , and moreover / of those squares , as by the operation it self appeareth thus . the side of the greater segment is ¼ . ¼ . which multiplied into it self , makes . the product of the greatest segment , into the two fractions / , that is , into / ( or into twice / ) is / ( that is ) and that added to makes . lastly , the product of / into / or / into / , is / . and so the same square calculated by roots , is less by / of one of those two hundred squares , then by the true and geometrical calculation ; as was to be demonstrated . consequent . it is hence manifest , that whosoever calculates the length of an arc or other line by the extraction of roots , must necessarily make it shorter then the truth , unless the square have a true root . the radius of a circle is a mean proportional between the arc of a quadrant and two fifths of the same . describe a square abcd , and in it a quadrant dca . in the side dc take dt two fifths of dc ; and between dc and dt a mean proportional dr ; and describe the quadrantal arcs rs , tv. i say , the arc rs is equal to the streight line dc . for seeing the proportion of dc to dt is duplicate of the proportion of dc to dr , it will be also duplicate of the proportion of the arc ca to the arc rs ; and likewise duplicate of the proportion of the arc rs to the arc tv. suppose some other arc less or greater then the arc rs to be equal to dc , as for example rs : then the proportion of the arc rs to the streight line dt will be duplicate of the proportion of rs to tv , or dr to dt . which is absurd ; because dr is by construction greater or less then dr . therefore the arc rs is equal to the side dc . which was to be demonstrated . corol. hence it follows that dr is equal to two fifths of the arc ca. for rs , tv , dt being continually proportional ; and the arc tv being described by dt , the arc rs will be described by a streight line equal to tv. but rs is described by the streight line dr . therefore dr is equal to tv , that is , to two fifths of ca. and your said servant most humbly prayeth you to consider ( if the demonstration be true and evident ) whether the way of objecting against it by square roots , used by dr. wallis ; and whether all his geometry , as being , built upon it , and upon his supposition of an infinite number , be not false . considerations upon the answer of dr. wallis to the three papers of mr. hobbes . dr . wallis sayes , all that is affirmed , is but , if we svppose that , this will follow . but it seemeth to me , that if the supposition be impossible , then that which follows will either be false , or at least undemonstrated . first , this proposition being founded upon his arithmetica infinitorum , if there he affirm an absolute infiniteness , he must here also be understood to affirm the same . but in his th proposition he saith thus : seeing that the number of terms increasing , the excess above sub-quadruple is perpetually diminished , so as at last it becomes less than any proportion that can be assigned ; if it proceed in infinitum it must utterly vanish . and therefore if there be propounded an infinite row of quantities in triplicate proportion of quantities arithmetically proportional ( that is , according to the row of cubical numbers ) beginning from a point or ; that row shall be to a row of as many , equal to the greatest , as to . it is therefore manifest that he affirms , that in an infinite row of quantities the last is given ; and he knows well enough that this is but a shift . secondly , he sayes , that usually in euclide and all after him , by infinite is meant but , more than any assignable finite , or the greatest possible . i am content it be so interpreted . but then from thence he must demonstrate those his conclusions , which he hath not yet done . and when he shall have done it , not only the conclusions , but also the demonstration will be the same with mine in cap. . art. , , &c. of my book de corpore . and so he steals what he once condemn'd . a fine quality . thirdly , he sayes ( by euclides th proposition , but he tells not of what book ) that a line may be bisected , and the halves of it may again be bisected , and so onwards infinitely ; and that upon such supposed section infinitely continued , the parts must be supposed infinitely many . i deny that ; for euclide , if he sayes a line may be divisible into parts perpetually divisible , he means , that all the divisions , and all the parts arising from those divisions , are perpetually finite in number . fourthly , he sayes , that there may be supposed a row of quantities infinitely many , and continually increasing , whereof the last is given . 't is true , a man may say ( if that be supposing ) that white is black ; but if supposing be thinking , he cannot suppose an infinite row of quantities whereof the last is given . and if he say it , he can demonstrate nothing from it . fifthly , he sayes ( for one absurdity begets another ) that a superficies or solid may be supposed so constituted , as to be infinitely long , but finitely great ( the breadth continually decreasing in greater proportion than the length increaseth ) and so as to have no center of gravity . such is toricellio 's solidum hyperbolicum acutum , and others innumerable discovered by dr. wallis , monsieur fermat , and others . but to determine this , requires more of geometry and logick ( whatsoever it do of the latine tongue ) than mr. hobbes is master of . i do not remember this of toricellio , and i doubt dr wallis does him wrong , and monsieur fermat too . for to understand this for sense , 't is not required that a man should be a geometrician or a logician , but that he should be mad . in the next place he puts to me a question as absurd as his answers are to mine . let him ask himself ( saith he ) if he be still of opinion , that there is no argument in natural philosophy to prove that the world had a beginning : first , whether in case it had no beginning , there must not have passed an infinite number of years before mr. hobbes was born . secondly , whether at this time there have not passed more , that is , more than that infinite number . thirdly , whether , in that infinite ( or more than infinite ) number of years , there have not been a greater number of dayes and hours , and of which hitherto the last is given . fourthly , whether , if this be an absurdity , we have not then ( contrary to what mr. hobbes would perswade us ) an argument in nature to prove the world had a beginning . to this i answer , not willingly , but in service to the truth , that by the same argument he might as well prove that god had a beginning . thus : in case he had not , there must have passed an infinite length of time before mr. hobbes was born ; but there hath passed at this day more than that infinite length ( by eighty four years ) . and this day , which is the last , is given . if this be an absurdity , have we not then an argument in nature to prove that god had a beginning ? thus 't is when men intangle themselves in a dispute of that which they cannot comprehend . but perhaps he looks for a solution of his argument to prove that there is somewhat greater than infinite ; which i shall do so far , as to shew it is not concluding . if from this day backwards to eternity be more than infinite , and from mr. hobbes his birth backwards to the same eternity be infinite , then take away from this day backwards to the time of adam , which is more than from this day to mr. hobbes his birth , then that which remains backwards must be less than infinite . all this arguing of infinites is but the ambition of school-boyes . to the latter part of the first paper . there is no doubt , if we give what proportion we will of the radius to the arc , but that the arc upon that arc will have the same proportion . but that is nothing to my demonstration . he knows it , and wrongs the royal society in presuming they cannot find the impertinence of it . my proof is this ; that if the arc on tv , and the arc rs , and the streight line cd , be not equal , then the arc on tv , the arc on rs , and the arc on ca , cannot be proportional . which is manifest by supposing in dc a less than the said dc ; but equal to rs , and another streight line , less than rs , equal to the arc on tv ; and any body may examine it by himself . i have been asked by some that think themselves logicians , why i proceeded upon / rather than any other part of the radius . the reason i had for it was , that long ago some arabians had determined , that a streight line whose square is equal to squares of half the radius , is equal to a quarter of the perimiter ; but their demonstrations are lost . from that equality it follows , that the third proportional to the quadrant and radius , must be a mean proportional between the radius and / of the same . but my answer to the logicians was , that though i took any part of the radius to proceed on , and lighted on the truth by chance , the truth it self would appear by the absurdity arising from the denial of it . and this is it that aristotle meant , where he distinguisheth between a direct demonstration , and a demonstration leading to an absurdity . hence it appears , that dr. wallis his objections to my rosetum are invalid , as built upon roots . to the second paper . first , he sayes , that it concerns him no more than other men . which is true . i meant it against the whole herd of them who apply their algebra to geometry . secondly , he sayes , that a bare number cannot be the side of a square figure . i would know what he means by a bare number . ten lines may be the side of a square figure . is there any number so bare , as by it we are not to conceive or consider any thing numbred ? or by ten nothings understands he bare ? he struggles in vain , his conscience puzzles him . thirdly , he sayes , ten squares is the root of square-squares . to which i answer , first , that there is no such figure as a square-square . secondly , that it follows hence that a root is a superficies , for such is squares . lastly , he sayes , that neither the number , nor souldiers is the root of souldiers ; because souldiers is not the product of souldiers into souldiers . that last i grant , because nothing but numbers can be multiplied into one another . a souldier cannot be multiplied by a souldier . but no more can a square-figure by a square-figure , though a square-number may . again , if a captain will place his hundred men in a square form , must not he take the root of to make a rank or file ? and are not those men ? to the third paper . he objects nothing here , but that , the side of a square is not a superficies but a line , and that a square root ( speaking of quantity ) is not a line but a rectangle , is a contradiction . the reader is to judge of that . to his scoffings i say no more , but that they may be retorted in the same words , and are therefore childish . and now i submit the whole to the royal society , with confidence that they will never ingage themselves in the maintenance of these unintelligible doctrines of dr. wallis , that tend to the suppression of the sciences which they endeavour to advance . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a -e definition . the resurrection asserted in a sermon preached to the university of oxford on easter-day, / by john wallis ... wallis, john, - . approx. kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from -bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : - (eebo-tcp phase ). a wing w estc r ocm this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons . universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase , no. a ) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set ) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, - ; : ) the resurrection asserted in a sermon preached to the university of oxford on easter-day, / by john wallis ... wallis, john, - . [ ], , [ ] p. printed by hen. hall for james good, oxford : . reproduction of original in huntington library. "arati: phoenomena: initio" with english translation: [ ] p. at end. errata: p. [ ] at end. created by converting tcp files to tei p using tcp tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between and available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the , texts created during phase of the project have been released into the public domain as of january . anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. % (or pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf- unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p , characters represented either as utf- unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng resurrection -- sermons. sermons, english -- th century. - tcp assigned for keying and markup - spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images - mona logarbo sampled and proofread - mona logarbo text and markup reviewed and edited - pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion the resurrection asserted : in a sermon preached to the university of oxford , on easter-day , . by john wallis d. d. professor of geometry in the said university ; one of his majesties chaplains in ordinary ; and a member of the royall society . tudor rose scottish thistle oxford , printed by hen : hall for james good . . a sermon preached on easter-day , . to the university of oxford , at st. peters in the east . . cor. . . christ is risen from the dead ; and is become the first-fruits of them that slept . these words ( without farther preface ) contain two main articles of our christian faith ; ( both proper for this occasion : ) the resurrection of christ ; and that of ourselves . the former , in these words ; christ is risen from the dead : the latter in those that follow ; and is become the first-fruits of them that slept . both which , are argued at large in this chapter : and are now to be the subject of our discourse . as to the apostles manner of arguing these points ; we are to consider , that it was an usual practice of our apostle , ( as it was also of other holy writers , ) in asserting the trueths of god , to accōmodate his arguments to the princip●es & concessions of those with whom he did discourse . which though , to persons of other principles , they might seem less significant ; were , a● lest to them , cogent arguments . for it is true in other sciences , as well as mathematicks ; that , till there be some data , some concessions agreed upon ; there can be no demonstration . to him that owns nothing , we can prove nothing . and he that knows nothing , can be taught nothing . for it is , by the help of what we know , that we are to be taught what we know-not . when he had to do with those at athens , acts . inciting them to the worship of the true god ; ( the god that made heaven and earth : ) he makes use of a concession of their own poet , ( aratus , ) to that purpose ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . — ( for we are also his off-spring . ) not by ordinary generation : but in a like sense with that ( luke . ) which was the son of adam , which was the son of god. and in the same sense we are to understand that of orpheus , to the same purpose , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ( there is but one that is of himself ; and all things else are the progeny of this one. ) for though they had their daemons , and middling gods ( deos medioxumos , ) as the papists have their saints and angels , ( for particular purposes ; ) for the sheep , for the cow , for the't anthony pig , ( pan curat oves , oviumque magistros : ) yet , beside these deasters , they did acknowledge one soveraign deity , who was superior to all them ; ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : ) and , that , from him , all mankind , ( as well as other creatures , ) received their first originall : and , that him , therefore , they ought to worship . and aratus ( in the place cited by st. paul , ) owns the consequence . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . — 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . — ( let us in the first place , make our application to him : for , from him it is , that we have our first original : ) with much more to be there * seen of like import . which st paul summes up to this purpose ; that he made the world and all things therein ; that he is lord of heaven and earth ; that he gives life and breath and all things ; that he orders and disposeth of tim●s , persons , and places ; of one blood he made all man-kind ; and determined their fore-appointed times ; and the bounds of their habitations ; that , in him we live and move and have our being ; and that he is not far from every one of us ; that we are his off-spring ; and that him , therefore , we ought to seek , and serve . from whence the apostle doth farther inferre , ( as well he might from those principles , ) that we ought to have more reverent thoughts of so august a deity , than to think him confined to temples made with hands ; or standing in need of our service : or , likened to gold , or silver , or stones graven by mens art , and according to their devise , or fansy : and , that it should not be thought unreasonable , that he should one day judge the world in righteousness , by that man ordained thereunto ; of whom he hath already given good assurance , in raising him from the dead . thus he argues ( for the resurrection and a future state ) with them at athens . when he had to do with the jews , in the epistle to the hebrews ; ( for i take st. paul to be the authour of that epistle ; ) from the jewish worship and ceremonies , he argues the trueth of the christian doctrine . which , to those at athens , ( who did no more own the jewish , than the christian doctrine , ) would have been insignificant . like as on all occasions , where he hath to deal with the jews , he argues from testimonies of the old testament , to prove the doctrines of the new : and , that of the resurrection , among the rest . the new jerusalem that is above , typified by that below ; the heavenly jerusalem , by that on earth ; and heaven itself , by the holy places made with hands , ( which are the figures of the true ; ) and jesus the mediator of a new covenant ; of a better covenant than that delivered by moses ; but typified thereby ; a priest for ever after the order of melchisedek ; our great high-priest who is passed into the heavens ; typified by the levitical priesthood ; this one , by those many ; and his perfect oblation once for all , by those manifold oblations ; which were therefore repeated , because imperfect ; and his entring into heaven once for all , ( there to sit down at gods right hand , ) by theirs into the most holy place once a year ; whither we also are to enter within the vail , ( by the new and living way , which he hath consecrated for us , ) whither our fore-runner is for vs entred ; and , being himself made perfect , is become the author of eternal salvation to those that obey him . the law being but a figure for the time present ; a shadow of good things to come ; whereof the body is christ. in like manner , to the jews at antioch in pisidia , act. . he doth , by undeniable arguments , drawn from testimonies of the old testament , evince the certain●y of christs resurrection ; and that , of him , was principally intended , what was said of david but in type , thou wilt not leave my soul in hell , nor suffer thine holy one to see corruption . as st. peter had also done , to those at jerusalem , act. . and our saviour himself , mat. . argues with the sadduces , for the doctrine of the resurrection , from a testimony of moses ; ( who 's writings the sadduces did admit , though perhaps not those of the other prophets ; ) i am the god of abraham , and the god of isaac , and the god of jacob. now god is not the god of the dead , but of the living . where also he contents himself to prove the existence of abraham , isaac , and jacob , ( that they were then in being , when this was said to moses ; ) and , consequently , that the soul survives the body . for , though the souls immortality , do not necessarily infer , the resurrection of the body ; ( many of the heathens admitting the one , who never thought of the other : ) yet , to the sadduces , it was a good argument ; who did not deny the consequence of it , but the antecedent , he lays , therefore , the ax to the root of the tree ; and strikes at the foundation of their opinion . for the ground of their opinion concerning the resurrection , was , because they held there is neither angel nor spirit ; ( being of a like opinion with a late writer of ours , that whatsoever is , is body ; and that an incorporeal substance , is a like solecism , as an incorporeal body ; ) and , consequent hereunto , they held , that there is no resurrection . whereas , had they been convinced of the souls separate existence ; that ●f its re-union , would as easily have passed with them , as with the pharisees : both admitting , that they were to stand or fall together . when st. paul was arguing the same point before agrippa , act. . . he could not take the same measures , as when he was disputing with the jews . he could not , as to him , take for granted , and conclude peremptorily from , the authority of the old testament . which agrippa did not beleeve ; or at lest , not profess so to do . and what st. paul there says , king agrippa , believest thou the prophets ? i know thou beleevest : i ●ake to be rather a rhetorical insinuation , than a direct assertion . the first step he could there make , was but to shew it possible . why should it be thought a thing incredible that god should raise the dead ? ( that god , who at first made man out of the dust of the earth , should , out of the same dust , recover a body which once had been ? ) and , if not impossible , it need not , to him , seem strange that it should be defended : who , though not a professed jew , was yet expert in all the customes and questions amongst the jews ; and could not but know this to be no new doctrine , but , what their twelve tribes , instantly serving god day and night , were in expectation of , as a promise made to their fathers : and therefore , at lest by them , he was unworthily a●cused for it . that there might be somewhat of surprise in i● , to king agrippa , as to the person ; he doth admitt . for so it was to himself , at first : who verily thought with himself , that he ought to do many things contrary to the name of jesus ; and , accordingly , did so : till , by an unexpected vision from god ; as he was going to damascus , with a commission to persecute those who thus taught ; he was directed to preach , what he did before persecute : which he did accordingly ; witnessing both to small and great ( what moses and the prophets had before said should come to pass , ) that christ was to suffer , and to be the first that should rise from the dead . so that , what , by agrippa , was not to be thought impossible ; should not , by the jews , be thought vntrue ; nor he , by them , be persecuted for it . which was said with so much evidence to king agrippa , well acquainted with the jewish doctrine , ( though , to festus , who knew it not , it seemed madness ; ) and the matter of fact , which had then happened being ( at that time ) so notorious , as that it could not in reason be denied , ( for i am perswaded , saies he to festus , that none of these things are hidden from king agrippa ; for this thing was not done in a corner : ) that agrippa professeth himself almost perswaded to be a christian : the matter of fact being so evident : and the argument , so convincing . in the chapter before us , we have our apostle , from other grounds , arguing the same point , with christians , at corinth . not as if the whole church of corinth did disbeleeve the resurrection : but onely , some amongst them ( how say , some amongst you , that there is no resurrection ? ) nor did they so much doubt of the resurrection of christ , ( which seems to have been , then , a thing so notorious as not to be called in question ; ) as of our resurrection , pursuant of it . which , it seems , they did either directly deny ; or did otherwise elude , by putting some allegorical sense up ●n it ; like that of hymeneus and philetus ; who said , that the resurrection was already past . as if we were to expect no other resurrection than such as the apostle speakes of , col. . if yee be risen with christ ; seek those things that are above : that is , a dying to sin , and living again to righteousness , or newness of life . 't is much , i confess , that any , who professed them selves christians , should be found to deny so important an article of the christian faith , as is that of the resurrection . but it will appear lesse strange , in those who , from gentilism , ( not from judaism , ) were lately converted to the christian faith ; ( which was then but new , in comparison of what now it is : ) if we consider ; that , in our own days , ( when christianity hath been planted , and spread throughout the world , for more than sixteen hundred years ; ) we find those , who , ( retaining to themselves the name of christians , ) do yet leave no stone unturned , to undermine , and ( as much as in them lies ) to overthrow , the most fundamental points of christianity ; even the divinity of christ ; and his satisfaction to gods justice for the sins of men : ( on which hindge , the whole doctrine of christianity depends . ) others ; who turne the whole christian worship , into a kind of pageantry , and ridiculous gesticulations : such as are many fopperies of the romish church ; ( more absurd than those of the more sober heathens . ) setting to sale , both heaven and purgatory , for summes of money : and bartering , not onely for pardon of sins , but for leave to sin : ( as if , of them , it had been said , my house shall be called , an house of prayer ; but yee have made it a den of theeves . ) and fill their legends with such ridiculous stories , as would tempt a modest heathen , rather to reject the trueths of christ , than to admit such fooleries . and , in the mean time , make no scruple of murders , and massacres ; of treasons , and rebellions ; of assassinating princes , subverting governments , and turning the world upside down ; to propagate their devises : which , we can hardly have so much charity as to think , that themselves do seriously beleeve . others ; who make but rallery of the most serious things in christianity ; of heaven , and hell , and the day of judgement ; of the souls immortality ; of the very being , and providence of god himself . as if they were but one degree above the beasts that perish ; or rather , a degree below them . but we need not wonder , that the devil should have impudence and wiles inough , to turn himself into as many disguises for the interest of hell ; as a jesuite for that of rome . 't is , therefore , the less strange , that some , of these new christians , should ( at corinth ) doubt of the resurrection . now , of these christians who so doubted , we are next to consider , what method st. paul useth , to convince them of it . he doth not deal with them as with meere scepticks , ( that would admit of nothing : ) nor , as with heathens , ( who owned nothing of scripture ; nothing of the jewish or christian doctrine : ) nor as with jews , ( who , though they admitted the jewish , denied the christian : ) but , as with christians . and therefore takes for granted such concessions of this kind , as they did , or ought to , admitt of ; and argues from thence ; that they ought to admit of this also . he tells them , it is that gospel , which he had preached to them , which they had received ; wherein they stand ; and whereby , if they persist in it , they are to be saved . it had been delivered to them , by the same apostolick authority with the rest of their religion : which they ought not easyly to slight . it had been , in like manner , received by them : and they should not ( like children ) without just reason , part with what , upon good advise , they had once received . that , as yet , they stood fast in that religion ; ( without seeing cause to quitt it : ) and should therefore in this branch of it , as well as the rest : as being the noblest part of that salvation , which they did expect . he urgeth the authority of the scriptures ; that is , those of the old testament , ( which the christians admitted in common with the jews ; ) that , it was accord●ng to the scriptures that christ should dye for our sins ; and , according to the same scriptures , that , being buryed , he should rise again the third day . he urgeth the authority of credible witnesses , ( whom , in matter of fact , they had no reason to disbeleeve ; ) that , what had before been prophesied , was now actually come to pass . he was seen of cephas ; then , of the twelve , ( that is , those of the twelve who persisted , when judas , one of them , was fallen from them : ) he was , after , seen by more then five hundred brethren at once ; whereof the greater part were yet surviving : he was seen of james : then , of all the apostles : and , last of all , by himself also . the thing was notorious ; of which they could not be ignorant . it was seen , and owned , at divers times , and at divers places , and by a multitude of persons , and by many of them more than once . who could not be imagined to be all impostors , or all imposed upon ; or contriving to abuse the whole world ; and , themselves most of all . ( exposing themselves , without any prospect of advantage , to persecutions , and martyrdomes , and a world of miseries , not onely as the most wicked , but as the most simple people that ever were , if they had known those things not to be true . ) to which i may adde this also ; that this was professedly avowed , and publickly declared ( throughout the world , ) in a learned age : when there were a multitude of writers , greek and latine , who 's works remain ●o this day . and yet none of them , how averse soever to the christian religion , have made it their business to con●radict the history . which they would certainly have done ; ( and were much concerned so to do ; ) had not the matter of fact been , then , evident beyond dispute . nor do i see how an historical truth , can well be capable of greater evidence . ag●inst which ; that sorry shift of bribing the souldiers to say , his disciples come and stole him away while we slept ; doth sufficiently confute itself ; and rather addes to the evidence . the particulars of which are so obvious , & so often noted on these occasions ; that i shall need the less to insist on them . that it was before suspected , and that his enemies feared , ( that either he might rise indeed , or at lest be pretended so to do , ) is evident by their setting a watch. and that it would be mischievous to them , if beleeved ; themselves allege , as the reason why they sett it . and it cannot be thought , they would then be so careless , as to set such a watch as would be all asleep . nor can it be thought , that the disciples , ( being now in a posture to shift for themselves , and run-away , rather than venture on such an exploit , ) durst undertake such a thing , when the watch was sett . ( for , if the watch were indeed so sleepy ; 't was yet more then they could know before , or had reason to presume upon . and therefore , as to such a designe , it was all one as if they had been awake . ) and , in case they durst attempt it : yet the rolling away so great a stone ; ( whereon also , in likelyhood , the souldiers might be then sitting ; ) and removing the body , ( with all the circumstances attending it ; ) could hardly be done with so little noyse , as not to wake some of them . nor would the disciples have been so carefull , to stripp the body , and fold up the linnen , and lay all in order , before they went ; being every moment in fear of the souldiers waking . or ( if the souldiers were indeed so fast asleep , as that nothing of all this could waken any of them ; ) how could they tell , who took him away ? he might , indeed , be risen ( for ought they knew , ) as was pretended . vvhich was much more likely , than that he should , so , be stollen away . ( a thing so improbable ; that the souldiers , without a good bribe , and good security to save them harmless , durst not venture on a lay so unlikely to be beleeved . ) and , when all is done , ( allo●ing it the greatest advantage that may be , ) it can amount to no more but this , that the body was gone they knew not how , and ( for ought they knew ) the disciples might have stollen him away while they sl●pt . which could be of no consideration , against the positive testimony of such persons ( as was before said ) who saw him alive after his resurrection . and even that allegation , as weak as it was , it seems the souldiers were rather passive in , than active that is , they suffered the high-priests ( without any great contradiction of theirs , ) to publish such a story . yet not so silently , but that the truth also brake forth , notwithstanding this subornation . for from them also it came to be known , that there was a great earth-quake ; and the appearance of an angell , who rolled away the stone , and frighted the keepers , that they became as dead men ; ( with other circumstances thereun●o appertaining : ) and , that they told this to the chief-priests ; and were by them hired with large money ; to say as they we●e taught , rather than what they knew . 't is certain therefore , ( so far as an historicall truth can be made certain , ) that christ is risen from the dead . which is the first branch of the text before us ; concerning the resurrection of christ , as to his own person . the second branch , concerns , the effect of chri●●s resurrection , in that of ours . he is become the first-fruits of them that slept . the term of first-fruits , is metaphorical : alluding to the oblation of the first-fruits , in the levitical law ; as an acknowl●dgemen● , that the whole was gods ; and , that of his bounty they did receive it : and , by offering of which , the rest was sanctified to their use , ( according to that , rom. . if the first-fruits be holy , the lump is also holy . ) for which cause it was , that they were not to eat any of the harvest , ( bread , or parched corn , or green ears , ) till the first-fruits had been first offered . and with a like allusion , he is elsewhere called , the first-born from the dead , and the first begotten from the dead . for as the first-fruits , in lieu of all the crop : so , the first-born , in lieu of all the brethren , was consec●ated unto god ; implying his title to all the rest . but , when he is called , the first-fruits of them that slept ; it is not so to be understood , as if he were the first that slept ; ( as if he had been , simply , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : ) but , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( the first-fruits from the dead , of them that slept : ) as he is elsewhere called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the first-born , from the dead . for i take the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in the text , to have an aspect both ways : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . from the dead he is risen , the first-fruits ( from the dead ) of them that slept . that is , the first that should rise againe , of them that slept : or ( as act. . ) the first that should rise from the dead . yet not , absolutely , so neither ; as if he were absolutely the first that was raised . for we read of one raised by eliah ; another , by elisha ; and christ himself raised lazarus , and some others . but these were so raised , as to dy again . ( their corruptible had not putt on incorruption ; nor their mortal , immortality . ) he was the first that was raised to life immortal . if it be said , that enoch , who was translated that he did not see death ; and eliah , who 's body was taken up into heaven in a fiery chariot ; did , before the resurrection of christ , injoy , what is equivalent to the resurrection of the body . ( according to what is here , after , implyed , we shall not all dy , but we shall all be changed : the trumpet shall sound , the dead shall be raised , and we shall be changed . ) yet ( without disputing , how far forth they injoyed a glorified body ; ) even that , though antecedent , in time , to the resurrection of christ ; was , in nature , consequent to it , and an effect of it . for though , in a physical causality , the effect is never , in time , before the cause : yet , in a moral causality , it may be . as , when a debt is acquitted , a captive released , an inheritance purchased , and accordingly injoyed , upon prospect of a price or ransome , to be payd , by the surety , somewhile after . and , in this sense , may christ be said to be the lamb slain from the foundation of the world , rev. . if , at lest , those words , from the foundation of the world , relate there to that of the lamb , slain ; and not rather to that former clause , written in the book of life . who 's names are not written ( in the book of life of the lamb slain ) from the foundation of the world : that is , who 's names were not written , from the foundation of the world , in the lamb's book of life . according as the s●me is again repeated rev. . who 's names were not written in the book of life , from the foundation of the world , without mention of the lamb slain . but , whatever be the construction of those words ; sure it is , that the efficacy of christs death and resurrection , did as well look backward , to the beginning of the world ; as forward , to the end of it . and we are expressely told , heb. . that it was by faith , that enoch was translated that he should not see death . even by the same faith which he there describes to be the substance of things hoped for , and the evidence of things not seen ; by which the elders obtained a good report : and of which he had said , a little before , the just shalt live by faith ; and , by which we beleeve to the salvation of our souls . 't was by faith therefore in christ , who died and rose again , that enoch was translated so as not to see death ; as well as we , from death are raised , so a life immortal : and christ , at lest virtually , the first-fruits of both . now , the notion of first-fruits , implies two things : a possession of so much ; and a title to the rest . if the first-fruits be holy , the lump also holy : if god hath right to the one , he hath to the other also . it is in the nature of an earnest-penny , ( a similitude oft used by our apostle to the same purpose ; ) which is both part of payment , and an ingagement to pay the rest , and what , in one place , he calls , the first fruits of the spirit ; ( our selves also , who have the first-fruits of the spirit , wait for the adoption , to wit , the redemption of our body : ) the same he calls ; elsewhere , the earnest of the spirit ; ( who hath sealed us and given us the earnest of his spirit in our hearts ; and again , ye were sealed with the holy spirit of promise ; which is the earnest of our inheritan●e untill the redemption of the purchased possession . ) the first-fruits of the spirit , which they had then received , was not onely a part of the purch●se ; but was an earnest penny , to bind the bargain , for what was af●erward to co●e . and such is the resurrection of christ , as to our resurrection . not as a thing , wnich , being once accomplished , was to rest so : but as that which was to draw more after it . we have hope ( saith the apostle ) which entereth within the vail , whether our fore runner is entred , for vs ; ( as it were , to take livery of seisin in our stead . ) and i go ( saith christ ) to prepare a place for you ; that , where i am , you may be also . and that other phrase , the first-born from the dead , implies , that there were more to follow . ( that he may be the first-born amongst many brethren . ) and , when st. paul called ipenetus , the first-fruits of achaia unto christ ; he intimates a larger harvest . and the like of stephanas elsewhere . the word first , being an ordinal , is spoken with respect to others that are to follow . in what respect christ is singular ; he is not called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the first-begotten , ( as here , the first begotten from the dead : ) but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the onely-begotten ( of the father . ) and that , in this place , he is called the first-fruits from the dead , with respect to a larger crop ; is evident from the words next following , where the same is further amplified . for since by m●n came death ; by man also came the resurrection of the dead : for as in adam all dy ; so in christ shall all be made alive : but every man in his own order : christ the first-fruits ; afterwards they that are christ's , at his coming . like as that sentence on adam , in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely dy , was intended with respect to those that are his , ( by natural generation : ) so that of christ , thou art my son , this day have i begotten thee , ( expounded of his resurrection , act. . ) do influence also those that are christ's ( by spiritual regeneration . ) and therefore , heb. . where the same is , again , so applyed to him , ( thou art my son , this day have i begotten thee ; ) he is not called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( the only-begotten ; ) but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the first begotten ; ( when he bringeth his first-begotten into the world ; ) because this had an aspect on those that are his brethren ; and were , on that account , so called : ( as it after follows , for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren . ) and this i have the more insisted on , because it is the apostles great argument , ( for proving our resurrection from that of christ , ) that he rose , not only as a single person ; but , as the first-fruits of those slept : and , that , in pursuance thereof , those that are christs are likewise to expect a glorious resurrection . for , as we have born the image of the earthy , ( dying a natural death as adam dyed ; ) so shall we bear the image of the heavenly ▪ ( in a glorious resurrection like that of christ. ) and he who raised up the lord jesus , shall raise vs also by jesus . there is yet one thing more , very considerable , for the explication of this place . to wit , that the apostles argument and discourse , ( both in this verse , and the whole chapter , ) extends only to prove the resurrection of the righteous ; not that of the wicked . 't is , of christ the first-fruits , afterwards those that are christs : ( of those who are not christ's , he says nothing . ) as we have born the image of the earthy , so we shall bear the image of the heavenly ; ( which can be meant of the righteous onely . ) it is sown in dishonour , it is raised again in glory ; or , it is sown a vile body , it is raised a glorious body ; ( which cannot be understood of the bodies of wicked men ) and it is agreed , for ought i find , by all expositors , ( and , amongst the r●st , by grotius and dr. hammond , ) that , this whole discourse , is not at all to be understood , of the resurrection of the wicked ; but , of the glorious resurrection of the righteous onely . and , that , in those words , as in adam all dy , so in christ shall all be made alive , the word all is not of the same extent in both clauses : but extends , in the first clause , to all that appertain to adam ; that is , to all mankind : in the l●tter clause , to all that are christs ; that is , to all the faithfull . ( for 't is those onely that are made alive by christ : that of the wicked being an eternal death : as our saviour himself distinguisheth , joh , . they that have done good to the resurrection of life ; and they that have done evill , to the resurrection of damnation . ) and , that the parallel is thus to be understood ; as all that are in adam , do dy in him ; so all that are in christ , a●e by christ made alive : ( j●stified , sanctified , and saved . ) and this grotius parallels with that of rom. . as by the offence of one , ( that is of adam , ) judgement came upon all men to condemnation : so by the righteousness of one , ( that is , of christ , ) the free-gift came upon all-men , for justification of life . where , by all-men in the first clause , grotius understands all mankind ; by all-men in the second clause , all beleevers . making this the adequate sense of both places ; as all that are in adam , that is , all the race of adam , do by adam come to dy ; so all that are in christ , are justified by christ , and by christ raised to a life of glory . but what must we then say ? that the wicked are not also to be raised ? or , that st. paul did not know it ? no : we must s●y neither of these . that the wicked shall be also raised by christ ; himself tells us expressely , joh. . all that are in the graves shall h●ar the voice of the son of man , and come forth ; they that have done good , to the resurrection of life , and they that have done evill , to the resurrection of damnation . and , that st. paul knew it so to be ; himself assures us , in his discourse to felix , act. . ( not as his own faith onely , but that of the fathers also . ) so worship i the god of my fathers ; beleeving all things which are written in the law and the prophets ; and have hope toward god ( which themselves also allow ) that there shall be a resurrection of the dead , both of the just and vnjust . than which nothing can be more express . for though the wicked , by reason of their impenitence and unbelief , do not injoy the benefits of christs redemption to the resurrection of life : yet are they subject to christs dominion ( as the judge of the world , ) and shall be raised by his power to the resurrection of damnation . which though it be not the business of this place before us , is proved by divers others . but why then ( you will ask ) doth st. paul say nothing of it in this place , where he speaks so copiously of the resurrection ? to which i make this answer . we are to take notice of st. paul as a close disputant . it was his manner of arguing ( here and elsewhere , ) to keep himself close to the point in question : both as to the conclusion he was to prove ; and as to the topicks from whence he fetched his arguments . now the matter in question , with these corinthians , was not , what should become of those that were out of christ , and not to expect benefit by him : ( and therefore , of that , he saies nothing . ) but , what are the benefits , which they that are in christ , receive from him . amongst which , that of eternal life was the main ; and , of which they doubted . to this therefore he applies his arguments , ( not to the other , ) selecting such as were most proper for this conclusion . ( waving the other ; but , not denying it . ) in like manner as , in our creed ; we profess to beleeve the resurrection of the body , and the life everlasting ; without mentioning that of eternal death , or the state of the wicked after this life . yet this we beleeve also : according to what our saviour tells us , math. . these shal go into everlasting punishment ; but the righteous into life eternal . the same is implyed also in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , of those that slept . that is , of those that are dead in christ. for , to the death of the righteous , the scripture doth usually apply the soft term of sleep . lazarus slepeth . david slept with his fathers . stephen fell a-sleep . and ( ver . . of this chapter , ) he was seen of five hundred brethren at once , whereof some are fallen asleep . whereas the wicked are said to perish , to be cut off , to go down to the pit ; with other the like hard expressions . and , in a parallel place to this , ( thes. . ) it is expounded by those that are dead in christ. i would not have you ignorant concerning them which are asleep ; to sorrow as others that have no hope . for if we beleeve that christ died and rose again : even them also that sleep in jesus , will god bring with him . i or we that are alive and remain at the coming of the lord shall not prevent them that are asl●ep . for the dead in christ shall rise first : then we which are alive and remain , shall be caught up together with them ; and so shall we be ever with the lord. hence it is , that the place of christian burial is wont to be called coemeterium , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a dormitory or place to sleep in ; from whence , at the resurrection , ( as the phrase is dan. . ) they that sleep in the dust shall awake . and the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in the former clause , fitly answers to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the latter . for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( suscitari , ) doth properly signify to be awakened or rise from sleep . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . christ is ( awakened , or ) risen from the dead ( as f●om a sleep , ) the first fruits of those that slept ; . that is , of the dead which dy in the lord. for of their resurrection it is that the apostle is here discoursing . now as for the persons , with whom he doth here dispute ; and the arguments suted to those persons ; ( for this branch , as well as the former : ) we are to consider , that they were christian gentiles . who had before learned the heathen philosophy , but did now imbrace the christian religion , and acknowledged most of the doctrines thereof . onely this they doubted of ( as not consistent with their philosophy , ) that the dead should rise again . and therefore the arguments he makes use of , are drawn from principles of christianity . if there be no resurrection , then is not christ risen : ( which yet is a matter of fact , so notorious and fully testified , that you christians cannot doubt it . ) and , if christ be not risen ; our preaching is vain , and your faith is vain ; and , those that are fallen asleep in christ are perished ; and , we are found false witnesses of god , who have testified that he raised up christ. ( which consequents were things unworthy to be admitted , by any who professed themselves christians . ) and , if in this life onely we have hope ; we are of all men most miserable . ( we apostles , and you christians ; who , upon this account , are exposed to a multitude of miseries in this life ; and do therefore most egregiously play the fools , if in another life there be not a compensation . ) all which arguments , though to one who is not a christian they would be very insignificant , are very cogent to one that is . and good reason the apostle had to argue at this rate . not onely , as being the part of a good disputant , to take advantage of the true concessions of those with whom he disputes ; as good foundations of a concl●sive argument : but especially , because these are the true topicks in disputes of this nature . for , the truthes of religion being of ●wo sorts ; some discoverable by natural light ; others by revelation onely : those of the later sort are not to be proved conclusively , without admitting that revelation , by which alone we can come to know them . thus ; that there is a god that made the world ; and , that this god is to be obeyed and worshiped ; and , this in such manner as himself would have it ; are things which may be argued from natural light. and , that of the souls immortality also ; at lest with a great deal of probability ; if not with so much evidence as to convince a wilful sceptick ; who therefore sees not ( not for want of light , but ) because he shuttes his eyes . but , the doctrine of the trinity ; of salvation by faith in christ ; and the resurrection of the body ; are purely matters of faith ; and their certainty depends onely on divine testimony . that god is able to raise the dead ▪ and that there is no inconsistence in the thing ; may be discoursed from natural light. but , that he will do it ; and , in what manner ; we can no otherwise know than as he hath declared to us : ( either by himself immediately ; or , by such as , we have good reason to beleeve , are sent by him . ) thus christ , arguing the same point with the sadduces : yee err ( saith he ) not knowing the scriptures ; nor , the power of god. had they well understood the power of god ; they would not have doubted its possibility : and , had they well understood the scriptures ; they might thence have learned , that it must be so . and , in st. pauls discourse with king agrippa , act. . as to himself , he had no more to say , but why should it be thought a thing incredible , that god should raise the dead ? but , as to the jews , ( who owned the scripture then extant , ) he pleads , the promise made to the fathers ; to which promise their twelve tribes , instantly serving god day and night , hoped to come . to him who did not admit the scriptures ; he could onely argue , that the thing was not impossible , not incredible ; but , to them that did ; he argues the certainty , and that they ought to beleeve it . and , in this chapter , he argues it yet further : as having , here , greater concessions ( from christians ) than from the jews . as to the possibility ; he argues ( ab esse ad posse ) christ is risen ; therefore , the thing is possible . which matter of fact ( that christ is risen ) he argues , from the notoreity of it , and from the testimony of so many eye-witnesses as themselves could not but beleeve : ( the proper topicks to prove matter of fact. ) and , what was actually done in him , was no● impossible as to others . but , as to the futuriti●n , ( that indeed it shall be so , ) he argues from divine revelation : not onely as testified in the scriptures , ( of moses and the prophets ; ) but also by christ himself ; and his apostles , by commission from him . 't is ( saith he ) the gospel which i have preached to you ; and which you have re●eived ; and whe●ein you stand ; and whereby , if you persist in it , you are to be saved nor is it a forgery of my own fansy ; but what i delivered , i first of all received , that is ( as chap. ) i received of the lord , what i delivered unto you : and , what i taught , was taught also by the rest of the apostles , according to such directions as they received from christ. ( whether i , or they , so we preach , and so yee beleeved . ) and if , as to the rest of the christian doctrine , you receive our testimony ; you have no reason to think , that in this we prevaricate , as false witnesses of god. thus arguing , with christians , from the doctrine of christ ; as elsewhere , with the jews , from that of moses and the prophets . and thus much for the explication of the text , and the doctrines thereof . i shall now , by way of corollary , observe three things . first , that this method of the apostles arguing , may be a good direction for us in like cases . when we are preaching to christian auditories ( such as this ; ) it is not prudence to quit the principles of christianity , and divert to those of reason and natural light onely : as if we were preaching to heathens , not to christians . much of our religion , depends on revelation : and , though not repugnant to reason , is yet much above it ; and not discoverable by it , without the scriptures , where those revelations are recorded . we do but too much gratify men of atheistical and unchristian principles , when ( to comply with their cavills , ) instead of holding fast what is good ; we let go our hold , and dispute our principles : as if we were now planting christianity amongst heathens ; and not , edifying a christian church . 't is true , that , in building , great care is to be taken , that the foundations be well lay'd ; otherwise the building cannot be firm. but there is a time , wh●n , leaving the principles of the doctrine of christ , and laying again the foundation ; we are to go on to perfection , and build upon the foundation so layd . not like children ; who when for the time we ought to be teachers , have now need to be taught , what are the first principles of the oracles of god ; as having need of milk , not of strong meat and , when will this time be , if , after more than sixteen hundred years possession , we do yet admit the foundations of christianity , for matter of doubtfull disputation . if , out of a needless scrupulosity , to satisfy the cavils of those who do not desire to be informed ; we be alwaies digging at the foundation , upon pretence of searching it : we do thereby weaken , rather than strengthen it ; and ( like the foolish builder ) having layd the foundation , shall never be able to finish it : ever learning , and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth . the being , and providence of god ; the authority of the scriptures , his written word ; the divinity , and incarnation of christ ; his satisfaction for the sins of men ; and our salvation by faith in him ; the necessity of holyness , and a godly life ; the immortality of the soul ; and the resurrection of the body ; and the judgement to com● ; a heaven for the righteous ; and a hell for the wicked ; are fundamentals in the doctrine of christianity , well setled long agoe . and , if any go abou● to shake these foundations ; we are not therefore , in compliance with their humours , to admit for disputa●le , what ever they please to cavill at : but to hold fast the truth ; to hold fast the form of sound words ; as well settled , and long since agreed upon : and , if any man list to be contentious , ( sayth the apostle ) we have no such custome , nor the churches of god. if they demand new miracles , and new revelations , of what hath been sufficiently revealed and confirmed already : our savior tells us ( in the parable of lazarus and the rich glutton , ) they have moses and the prophets ; let them hear them ; ( and we have , moreover , christ and his apostles : ) if they hear not these ; neither would they be perswaded , though one should rise from the dead . now , if the miracles and revelations , in the time moses and the prophets , were sufficient for those who lived in the days of christ ; ( notwithstanding that they lived not in moses days : ) much more may those also of christ and his apostles , suffice for those that live in our days . and , if a sufficient evidence , ( such as would be enough for a sober person , that is willing to be taught , ) prevail not with them : neither would they be perswaded , though they should be gratifyed in what they now demand . our saviour did not think fit to gratify the humours of the scribes and pharises , whensoever they listed to ask a ( new ) sign . but refers them to that of the prophet jonas . nor are wee to be always casting our perls before swine : but , ( after a competent instruction , ) they are to be neglected , as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , self-condemned persons : who 's error lyes more in their will , than in their understanding . 't was , because they did not like to retain god in their knowledge , ( rom. . ) that god gave them over to a reprobate sense , ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ) a mind void of judgement . and , it was not so much , because they could not beleeve the truth , as , because they did not love it , . thes. , ( because they received not the love of the trueth that they might be saved , ) that god sent them strong delusions to bel●eve a lye , that they might be damned . because they did not love what they should beleeve , god left them to beleeve what they loved : and , because they did not love those trueths by which they be saved ▪ he left them to beleeve those lyes , by which they should be damned . in the last times ( we are told ) there shall come scoffers , walking after their own vngodly lusts ; and therefore mocking at the promise of christs coming . men of corrupt minds ; and therefore reprobate concerning the faith : mockers and filthy dreamers ; who therefore beleeve not the trueth , because they take pleasure in vnrighteousness : who do not so much doubt of it , as cavill at it to their own destrction . to those that are contentious , ( says the apostle , ) and obey not the truth ; ( to those who out of contention , or a spirit of contradiction , cavill at the truth sufficiently discovered ; ) indignation and wrath. and , if our gospell be hid ; it is hid to those that are lost. it may , perhaps , pass for a piece of witt ( not of wisdome ) amongst debauched persons , ( with whom atheism and ribaldry pass for witt ; ) to be able to speak plausibly , against those things which the common sense of man-kind admitts for true. ( and 't is very easy , for any man , that will allow himself to be profane , thus to be witty : ) but st. paul gives it a truer character , rom. . ( speaking of wiser persons than these are , ) professing themselves to be wise , they became fools ; ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ) while they pretend , to be witty , they play the fool. and , tim. . reduceth it to its true cause , pride and ignorance . if any man consent not to wholsome words , and the doctrine which is according to godliness : hee is proud , ( or foolish , ) and ●noweth nothing : doting upon questions and strife of words , or idle cavils ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ) from whence come railing and perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds , and d●stitute of the trueth , ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , blaspemies , and ●dle discourses , as of crack-brain'd men , and void of sense : ) from whom turn away ; have nothing to do ●i●h them . while we are taking pains to satisfy such ( who resolve , not to be satisfyed ; ) we may sooner raise new scruples in the minds of well-meaning persons , than satisfy those who are willfully ignorant . be not deceived ( sai●h our apostle here ) evil communications corrupt good manners : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . or , ( as dr. hammond chooseth to render it ) good dispositions such corrupt discourse ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are apt to seduce or work upon ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) good dispositions , or well-meaning people . expounding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , good-natured persons and easy to be imposed upon . like as in that other verse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( slow-bellies ) are usually interpreted ( as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , gluttons . we are not therefore to hold parly with them , ( as eve with the serpent : ) but rather ( as the apostle directs ) they are to be rebuked sharply , that they may be sound in the faith ; their mo●thes to be stopped , that they subvert not whole houses ; and , that their folly proceed no further . a second thing that i here observe , is this ; that the promise of a glorious resurrect●on , concerns not vs onely ; but the fathers also before christ. we are not to think , that they had onely promises of temporal things ; but of eternal also . christ is the first-fruits of those that slept ( for the time past , ) as well of those that were to sleep for the time to come . 't is true . the mystery which had been hidden from ages and generations , is now made manifest to the saints : it is now more clearly reveiled , then before it was . and christ is the mediator of a better covenant ( than that delivered by moses ) established upon better promises : better , as to the way of administration , and the clearness of discovery ; but the same , as to the substance of the things promised . christ , as to this , is the same yesterday , and to day , and for ever . 't is the same faith , by which the elders obtained a good report ; and , enoch was translated that he did not see death : by which we beleeve to the saving of our souls . and st. paul proves ( rom. . ) that we are justifyed by faith ; because abraham , and david , were so justified . nor was this unknow'n to the jewish church . for , though the sadduces denyed the resurrection : yet they were herein singular ; the pharisees professed it ; with the rest of the jews . search the scriptures , ( sayth christ to the jews , ) for in them yee think to have eternal life . and st paul frequently , from moses and the prophets , and from the promise made to the fathers , argues the point of the resurrection . and our saviour himself , ( after his resurrection , ) first to the two disciples going to emmans ; and then to the eleven at jerusalem ; doth from moses , and the pr●phets , and the psalmes , and all the scriptures , make it evident , that thus it behoved christ to suffer , and to rise from the dead the third day ; and that repentance and remission of sins should be prea●hed in his name among all nations . and ( before that ) he proves to the sadduces , the doctrine of the resurrection , from that of god to moses , i am the god of abraham , and of isaac , and of jacob ; and that they did therefore erre , because they knew not the scriptures , nor the power of god. which he would not have sayd , had not the doctrine of the resurrection been taught in the scriptures that then were ; that is , those of the old testament . so that the socinians , without allowing that christ is god indeed ; if at lest they will but allow , that he is a good man , and a wise man , ( one who did understand the consequence of an argument , and did not designe purposely to impose upon us ; ) must needs acknowledge , that the doctrine of the resurrection was taught in the scriptures of the old testament ; ( for sure it is , that christ thought so : ) and that the promises made to the fathers , were not onely promises of temporal things , but of eternal life . they may as well say , that the threatning to adam , in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt dy the death , was meant onely of a temporal death ; ( and then surely god would not punish , beyond what he threatned ; ) contrary to which , st. jude tells us , that those before christ , ( as well as since , ) do suffer the vengeance of eternal fire . the third and last thing which i here observe , is this , that the rewards and punishments of another life , do concern us , not onely as to our personal capacities ; but , as to our relative and politick capacities also , as we are incorporated into kingdomes , cities , families , and other societies . we must all appear before the judgment seat of christ , to receive according to the things done in the body , whether good or bad. whatsoever is done in the body ; in whatsoever capacity . it may be objected , that kingdomes , and cities , and bodies politick , shal not , in that capacity , rise againe : and therefore cannot , in that capacity , be punished , or rewarded . and , consequently , god being equally obliged to punish the sins of societies , as of single persons ; he is obliged , in this world , to punish the sins of societies ( and to reward their good acts ; ) since that , hereafter , it cannot be done . but this argument , i take to have more in it of witt and rhetorick , than of logick , or sound divinity : and would do better in a poem or panegyrick , than in a sermon . for , by the same reason , we may as well say that the sins of father and child ; of master , and servant ; of husband , and wife ; must be allways punished in this life , ( and in this onely ; ) because that , in the resurrection , they do neither marry , nor are given in marriage . for oeconomical relations shall then cease , as well as political . if it be said , that , these relations , are but relations between single persons , ( not societies ; ) and therefore the sins thereof may , in those persons , be punished . i say , that this doth not alter the case at all . for , beside that this is not universal ; ( for a father may have many children , and may sin against his whole posterity , to the third and fourth generation ; and a lord or master may have many servants , and may sin against his whole family ; and a man may be servant to a society , as well as to a single person : ) beside this , ( i say , ) if this exception were cogent ; we might thence as well conclude , that kings because single persons ) may , hereafter , be punished for oppressing their subjects , ( and that eternally ; ) but the states ( in an aristocrary ) are punishable onely in this world , ( and but with temporal punishments , ) because these are a collective body . and it would hence follow likewise , that the greatest villanies of societies , are at lest one degree below that of the papists venial sins . for , i presume , the jesuites themselves will not say , that their whole societie ; shall , in that capacity , be punished in hell , not yet in purgatory , for the greatest villanies by them committed , as a socie●y . but , venial sins , they acknowledge to be punished , at lest in purgatory , though not in hell. and , by this means also , the greatest number of sins , and those the most hainous , would , as to another world , remain unpunished , ( and good actions , unrewarded . ) for much the greater number of actions , and the most considerable , are those of persons in their relative capacities ; ( as parents , children ; masters , servants ; husbands , vvives ; friends , enemies ; neighbours , strangers ; pastors , people ; princes , subjects ; societies , and combinations ; not of single persons onely , in a meer personal independent capacity . i adde also ; that , on this account , no sins of societies could ever be pardoned . for it not societies , but single persons , that are regenerate and do beleeve in christ ; without which , there is no remission . vve say therefore ; that ( as societies are but made up of single persons , so ) the acts of societies , and of persons related ( in such relative capacities , ) whether sinfull , or virtuous ; are indeed and in gods account , the acts of particular persons ( in such relations and societies : ) and are , in those persons , punished and rewarded , according to their deserts ; both in this world , and in that which is to come . and thus the cities ( of sodome and gomorrha with those about them , ) are sayd to suffer the vengeance of eternal fire ; when indeed it is the persons of those cities that so suffer . 't is true that , in this world , god doth many times punish the sins of men , in a way sutable to those capacities wherein they are committed : ( the sins of a father , by loss of children , or by a disobedient child , or unhappy children ; the sins of a prince , by loss of his dominions , or rebellion of his subjects ; the sins of a nation , by a common calamity , wherein the innocent do many times suffer with the guilty : ) god by this means , pointing out the sin in the affliction or punishment . but he doth not allwayes do so : ( the sins of a parent , may be sometimes punished by the hand of the magistrate ; and the sins of a prince , by the hand of a traitor , whom he had not offended : ) much less is he obliged so to do . and when he doth so : he doth not therefore do it because he cannot otherwise reach them : nor is this the adequate punishment of those sins ; but onely a part of it . the greatest part of their punishment , even for these sins , being that of another vvorld . and though the sins of men combined in societies , are , in the judgement of men , accounted as one joint act ; ( wherein the innocent are oft involved with the guilty , and suffer accordingly : ) yet the judgement of god , is according to trueth . he will distinguish between the innocent and guilty in a mixt society ; and spare the one , or but afflict th●m ( for their good , ) while he doth properly punish the other : ( and , as abraham speaks , not destroy the righteous with the wicked : ) and , those that are guilty , each according to the proportion of his guilt . not alwayes in this world : ( where , some times , all things fall alike to all ; and one event to the righteous and to the wicked : or where , sometimes , it happeneth to the righteous , acording to the work of the wicked ; and to wicked according to the work of the righteous : ) but , at lest , at that day ; at the day of the revelation of gods righteous judgement ; when he shal render to every man according to his deeds ; when he shall bring every work into judgement , and every secret thing . in that day ; the sentence of go● ye cursed ; for i was hungry , and yee gave me no meat ; i was sick , and ye visited me not ; vvill as well reach the sins of societies , in not providing for the sick and needy ; as of those persons who do not relieve them . it is a righteous thing with god ( sayth st. paul ) to recompense tribulation to them which trouble you ; ( whether they be societies or single persons ; ) in that day ; when the lord jesus shall be reveiled from heaven ; in flaming fire , taking vengeance on them that know not god , and that obey not the gospel : who shall be punished with everlasting destruction . and st. jude tells us expressely , that sodome , and gomorrha , and the cities about them ( as well as single persons ) do suffer the vengeance of eternal fire . and our saviour ( upbraiding the cities wherein most of his mighty workes were done ) tells us of chorazin , and bethsaida , of capernaum , and the cities against which the disciples should shake off the dust of their feet upon refusal to receive them ; that it shall be more tolerable for tyre and sidon , for sodome and gomorrha , in the day of judgement ; than for those cities . and thou capernaum , which art exalted unto heaven , shall be cast down to hell. and what is sayd of cities ; may be equally understood of kingdomes nations , towns , families , and other societies . there be many practical uses , which be proper consequents from this doctrine of a glorious resurrection to eternal life . as , that of st. peter ; seing all these things must be dissolved ; what manner of persons ought we to be , in all holy conversation and godlynesse ; looking for , and hasting to , the coming of the day of god. and that of st. paul ; having these promises , ( dearly beloved ) let us cleanse our selves from all filthyness of flesh and spirit ; perfecting holyness in the fear of god. and that in the close of this chapter ; wherefore , beloved brethren , be ye stedfast and vnmovable , allways abounding in the work of the lord ; for as much as yee know , that your labour is not in vain in the lord. but , of these things , i shal say nothing at present ; that i may not anticipate the following discourses on subjects of this nature . now our lord jesus christ himself , and god even our father ( who hath raised up christ from the dead ; ) who hath loved us and given us everlasting consolation , and good hope through faith ; confirm and stablish us in every good word and work ; and preserve us ( blameless , ) unto his heavenly kingdome ; and to the glorious appearing of the great god and our saviour jesus christ ; who shall change our vile bodies , and make them like unto his glorious body ; according to the working whereby he is able to subdue all things to himself : to whom be glory for ever and ever . amen . finis . arati phaenomena : initio . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ............. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . errata . read . pag. . l. ult . of its . p. . l. . as if it had . p. . l. . to a. p. . l. . might be . in english thus . begin we , first of all , with god on high : ( men as we are ! ) by no means passe him by . his presence fills all places , far and near . where ever men assemble , hee is there . the sea is full of him : and havens wide . and all mankind his influence abide ; need his assistance ; all , in every thing . his progeny wee are : from him we spring . hee 's kind to man : affording seasons good . he stirs them up to labour : gives them food . he tells the husband-man , when earth is made fit for the plough ; when , fitter for the spade . he points out proper seasons : how to know , what time , to plant ; what time is fit to sow ; and , what for every seed . 't is he sett fast his signes in heav'n ; his stars in order plac't . and , by the stars , he measures out the year : pointing , by them , what proper seasons are for every mans affairs : that all things may in steady course proceed , without decay . that , with his favour , he would us befriend : with him we first begin ; with him we end. o thou , so highly wonderfull ! o thou , the great support of man ! to thee i bow . and humbly make address . while i repeat ( by thy good leave ) the stars in order sett ; vouchsafe me thine assistance all along ; with thy successefull ayd , direct my song . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a -e act. . . luk. . . virgil ▪ homer . arati phaenomena . * see the place of aratus , at large , at the end of this sermon . act. . . ver . . ver . . ver . . ver . . ver . . ver . . ver . . ver . . ver . . ver . . ver . . ver . . gal. . . heb. . . heb. . . heb. . . & . . heb. . . & . . heb. . . & . . heb. . . heb. . . ver . , . heb. . , . & . . heb. . , , , , . heb. . , . heb. . . heb. . . heb. . . heb. . . heb. . . heb. . . & . . col. . . act. . . . psal. . . act. . . . mat. . . exod. . . mat. . . exod. . . mat. . . act. . . act. . . ver . . ver . . ver . . ver . , . ver . . . ver . . ver . . ver . . ver . , ver . , . ver . , . ver . . ver . . ver . . ver . , . ver . . ver . . ver . . cor. . ver . . tim . , . col. . . rom . , , . mat. . . psal. . . cor. . , . ver . . ver . . ver . . ver . . ver . . ver . . ver . . ver . . mat. ● . , . mat. . , , ver . . mat. . . . joh. . . mat. . , . luk. . . joh. . , . mat. . , . ver . . . ver . . ver . . ver . . ver . . ver . . lev. . &c. rom. . . levit. . . col. . . rev. . . col. . . rev . . act. . . kin. . . kin. . . & . . joh. . . mat. . . luk. . . cor. . , . gen. . . heb. . . kin. . . cor. . . ver . . rev. . . rev. . . heb. . . ver . . ver . . heb. . . ver . . rom. . . rom. . . cor. . . cor. . . e●h . . , . heb. . , . joh. . , . col. . . rom. . . rom. . . cor. . . rev. . . joh. . , . cor. . . ver . . ver . . ver . . gen. . . psal. . . act. . . heb. . . ver . . heb. . . cor. . . cor. . . cor. . . cor. . . ver . . ver . . ver . . joh. . . rom. . . joh. . . ver . . act. . . ver . . math. . . thes. . . joh. . . kin. . . & act. . . act. . . cor. ● . . thes. . . ver . . ver . . ver . . ver . . dan. . . rev. . . cor. . , . ver . , . ver . . ver . . ver . . mat. . . act. . . ver . , . cor. . ver . , . ver . , , , . ver . . . ver . . ver . . ver . . chap. . . chap. . . ver . . ver . . thes. . . luk. . , . heb. . . heb. . , . rom. . . luk. . . tim. . . psal. . . prov. . . tim. . . cor. . . luk. . . ver . . mat. , , . mat. . , . mat. . . tit. . , . rom. . . thes. . , , . pet. . , . jude , . tim. . . jud. , . . thes. . . pet. . . rom. . . cor. . , . rom. . . tim. . , , . pet. . . cor. . . menander . latter edit of his paraphrase on the n. test. tit. . . epimenides . canterus . gen. . , &c. tit. . . ver . . tim. . , . cor. . ● . coll. . . eph. . , . heb. . . heb. . . heb. . . ver . . heb. . . rom. . , . mat. . . act. . . joh. . . act. . , . act. . , . act. . . act. . , , , . act. . , . luk. . , , , , , . mat. . , . mat. . , . gen. . : jud. . cor. . . mat. . . exod. . . jude . rom. . . mal. . , . psal. . , . cor. . . gen , . eccl. . . eccl. . . thes. . . rom. . . ver . . eccl. . . mat. . , , . psal. . . in the communion service . thes. . . ver . . ver . . ver . . ver . . jud. . mat. . , , . mat. . , . ver . . math. . , . ver . . mat. . . mat. . , . , . . pet. . . ver . . cor. . . cor. . . thes. . . cor. . . col. . . thes. . . ver . . thes. . . & pet. . . & cor. . . tim. . . tit. . . phil. . . tim . .