a clear and undoubted apprehension of their truth, or a just valuation of their worth. Yet this difference is not much material, neither part of it, positive or negative, is any way formal or essential to the constitution of a science properly so called. For by what means soever the principles of any science become manifest and certain unto us, whether by our own industry or by the teaching of others, or whether we be taught them immediately from God, (either by the admirable disposition of his extraordinary providence, or by special infused grace,) is merely accidental to the constitution or nature of a science properly so called. He that sees the deduction of mathematical conclusions from the uncontroversed maxims of the same art as clearly as another doth, is never a whit the less skilful mathematician, although perhaps he learned the principles by the help of an extraordinary teacher, which the other attained unto by the industrious exercise of his own wit. Now if it be merely accidental to the nature of a science whether a man be avтodidakтos or aλodidaктos, his own master or another's scholar, (whether in learning the principles or conclusions,) it can be no prejudice either to his knowledge, or proficiency in such knowledge, that he hath been OcodiSaxtos, immediately taught by God, at least for the maxims. And I make no question but that the principles of some other sciences besides divinity (at least some principles of such sciences) have been immediately taught by God; or if any man list to move question or controversy about this truth, I could entertain many 575 heathen advocates for my opinion without any great costs or pains.

4. But as it is true that the principles of divinity cannot be known without illuminations more than natural, so it is certain, that since the ceasing of extraJACKSON, VOL. VII.

C

ordinary illuminations or gifts of the Spirit, the most of such principles (or so many of them as are required to the science or faculty of divinity) cannot be distinctly known without the knowledge of other arts or sciences. Most of the attributes of God cannot be well unfolded without competent skill in metaphysical learning. Many of his works can never be known nor admired aright without the science of philosophy; nor can the offices or attributes of Christ be taught aright without more skill in the learned tongues than common grammarians or general lexicons will afford. He that hopeth to attain to the true knowledge of these principles must either use the help of some lexicon peculiar to divinity, or make one of his own. Easier it were to learn the terms of law or physic out of Thomasius or Rider's Dictionary, than to know the true theological use or meaning of many principal terms in the Old or New Testament out of Stephanus or Pagninus's Thesaurus, though both of them most excellent writers in their kind. And yet, after a man hath attained by all the means aforementioned, and other like helps of arts, unto a competent knowledge of the principles, there is no less use of good logic in divinity, than in any other science whatsoever, for the right deduction of necessary conclusions from such principles, or for refuting heterodoxal doctrines, or quelling impertinent or frivolous questions. But the principles of divinity being once known, the dilatation or deduction of them into form of art or science, and the establishment of orthodoxal conclusions, may be made as certain and perspicuous by logic, as the like can be in any other science. For the use, not of usual or vulgar, but of exquisite logic, is in no art so necessary as in divinity. The method for constituting any art or science from principles known is twofold; the one, direct and positive, by affirmative

syllogisms, or by demonstration a priori; the other, by reducing conclusions contradictory ad impossibile, that is, by discovering their manifest contradiction or irreconcilable opposition unto some fundamental principles of the same science. Now what conclusions or opinions they be in particular which contradict either those theological principles that concern the nature and attributes of God, or the personal union of two natures in Christ, his prophetical, sacerdotal, or royal function, shall (by the assistance of his grace) be discussed in the second treatise of the Catholic Church. Of this in the mean time I rest persuaded-that it is neither too much learning that hath made this present age more mad than the former; nor any greater measure of God's Spirit than may be found in others, which makes many among us more bold than their brethren, than their fathers in Christ, in determining greatest mysteries of divinity.

CHAP. IV.

Of the Agreements and Differences between Theology and other Sciences in respect of their Subjects: that the true historical Belief of sacred Historians is equivalent to the Certainty or Evidence of other Sciences.

BUT in every science, oportet discentem credere, every young scholar is bound to believe his teacher, and must take some principles upon trust, until he be able to try them himself. Yet, as he is no perfect artist, or no master of science, who cannot see the evidence of principles or maxims, and the connexion between them and the conclusions issuing from them, with his own eyes; so neither doth he deserve the name of a divine, or teacher of this faculty, whosoever he be, that cannot in the first place discern the truth of the maxims or principles, or cannot in the second

576

place make demonstration of the coherence or noncoherence, or of the discord between them and such conclusions as are rightly inferred or merely pretended from them. But the best is, that as a carpenter may have skill enough to measure the timber which he buys, or a woodward the wood which he sells, or every good husbandman the quantity of the ground which he tills, and yet all their skill put together will not half suffice to make a mathematician; so may all of us be in our callings good Christians, or true believers, and yet no true divines, but more unapt to be teachers in this faculty than an ordinary carpenter to write a comment upon Euclid, or a husbandman to set forth a treatise of cosmography. Thus far the faculty or science of divinity holds exact correspondency with other sciences properly so called: and the practice of Christian men in their several callings bears the same proportion unto true divinity, which manual arts or trades do unto those sciences unto which they are subordinate.

2. A difference notwithstanding there is between divinity and other sciences; but I cannot say whether the faculty of divinity come short of other sciences properly so called, or rather exceed them in that wherein they differ. The difference is this. The total subject of other sciences (of some at least) may be exactly known in this life, though not by any one man, yet by all that may seek after it: but this subject of divinity can never be exactly known by any one man, nor by any succession of men, though all of them should study no other art besides the knowledge of God and of Christ until the world's end. From this incomprehensible amplitude of its subject it is that many principal points in divinity, points necessary unto salvation, must be believed only even by divines

themselves; we may not endeavour or hope to know them, until we be admitted into that everlasting school. And it is a great part of our profession, or Vide Ruge

rium de

of our proficiency in it, to know what questions be- quæstionilong to this present inferior school, and what they be bus. which must be reserved unto the high school everlasting.

3. But other true sciences there be, and in their kind truly noble, (whose just challenge unto both these titles no man gainsays, no man questioneth,) which have their peculiar problems, as well as unquestionable 577 principles or conclusions. It is not yet resolved by geometricians, whether the quadrature of circles be possible, or whether the continued protraction of lines not parallel make their coincidence not necessary. Astronomers are not yet agreed whether there be so many several orbs as there be planets, or how many spheres above the planets, or whether these orbs or spheres (be they few or more) be concentric. It is controversed whether, not the planets only, but those which we call fixed stars, do move in the firmament as fishes do in the water or as eagles soar in the air, or whether the whole firmament, from the region wherein the fixed stars do move, unto this lower region of the air wherein we breathe, be at all times so uniform for the transmission of light, or for the true representation of the exact distance whether of the altitude or latitude of the stars from us, as at some times it is, or as glass or the clear air is with us. This last query, were it agitated and discussed as it might be, would (I am persuaded) shake many astronomical suppositions or presumed notions concerning motum trepidationis, that is, of the supposed reciprocal motion of those which they call fixed stars, from south to north, from north to south. Great expenses, without hope either of gain