Indeed say they whatsoeuer is compounded of such a matter as this is of the sublunary creatures is subiect vnto corruption but the heauens haue a matter of a different and farre more excellent state than these vnder elements and that is the sum and foundation of Aristotle his opinion and reason touching the heauens incorruptible condition But we that make one matter of both may thus somewhat probably answer That though such a matter is alway accompanied with a capablenesse of corruption yet may it by some superior ouerruling power be preserued from all actuall cotruption And so standeth the case with the heauens which neuer had beene able of themselues so long to haue continued without alteration but by the helpe of some higher power not as the Peripateticks and Platonicks fondly imagine the Angels or Intelligences which Alcinous calleth Lesser gods but by the soueraigne appointment of God who to moderate and stay the too frequent and ouerhastie alteration of the vnder bodies hath allotted the heauens this regularity and vniformitie of motion But heere they will demand a reason what hath so fulfilled the matters desire of interchangeable succession of formes that it remaineth contented with that forme which it presently inioyeth The answer is That either the excellencie of the forme present causeth this contentment or els Gods appointment ouerswayeth its desire How then Are we Patrons or rather Authours of violence in those excellent agreeing bodies Nay rather by the limitation of the matters vnstayed indifferencie we doe more establish that their excellent harmonie For as in a city situate on the confines of two disagreeing kingdomes of it selfe inclining to neither side but indifferent for entertainment of either conquering aduersarie if after valourous conquest performed by one partie it yeeldeth it selfe to the vanquishers dominion and by the prouident industrious care of the new superuisor be fortified against the violent irruption of the forevanquished aduersaries by this new restraint of its old indifferencie suffereth no violence but rather is confirmed in a quiet and peaceable condition within it selfe so the matter of the celestiall bodies howsoeuer naturally indifferent to entertaine any forme if by the conquering action of some preuailing Agent it be possessed of so excellent and powerfull a forme as admits of no outward new impression in this limitation of its equall instable for disposition is not any way violenced but rather fitter for the intended harmonie of the celestiall bodies And that may serue for a sufficient reason of the hitherto-incorrupted condition of the celestiall bodies Now touching their future estate we shall after dispute if first wee haue their fourth argument for disproofe of the matter as also the substance of their opinion Auerroes therefore saith that heauen is a forme of a selfe-subsistence immaterial dimensional locally mooueable participating light and other accidents wherein me thinketh is a plaine contradiction for to omit the disquisition whether any forme can consist without matter what is more absurd then to imagine quantitie really separate from the matter quantitie hauing its basis and foundation in the matter and onely limitation from the forme farther whatsoeuer is capable of real diuision hath this capabilitie that I may so terme it from the matter Reall diuision I say for the Mathematicians proportionably to their mentall abstraction or separation of quantitie haue also a mentall diuision but whatsoeuer hath quantity is capable of such a diuision therefore also it hath a matter Ouer and beside all this whatsoeuer is perceiueable by sense hath a matter for the forme of nothing can be perceiued by sense but is vnderstood and conceiued by its operation in the matter but the heauen is sensible therefore also materiall To this adde Auerroes his owne testimonie set downe in his Comment vpon Aristotle his seuenth booke of Metaphysicks wherein himselfe confesseth that accidents are inseparable companions of the first Matter but the heauen by his owne authoritie in the first alleaged place hath in it light and other accidents inherent how then is it altogether voide of matter Other arguments taken from the inherencie of qualities peculiarly incident vnto things materiall for breuities sake I omit hastning to the second Patrons of the heauens immortalitie that doe acknowledge a composition of a matter and a forme in the celestiall bodies but will haue it a different and a distinct kinde from the elementish matter of the vnder bodies Touching the sense of the question Plato and some of his followers in this error interpret it as if when we say the heauens consist of elementary matter wee meant that they are so compounded of the elements as are mixt bodies heere below whereupon some of the more ancient sectaries in this kinde as Heraclitus and Pythagoras thought that it was made of fire Thales and Anaximenes of earth Empedocles of a medley of aire and fire Plato himselfe of the foure elements or as Proclus recordeth his opinion of the quintessence of them whose refutation we omit as impertinent vnto our purpose for our meaning is not that the elements are the matter whereof the heauens be made but thus we vnderstand it that the matter of the Ethereall and Elementish bodies is of the same kinde the whole first matter being diuided into these principal parts as into halfes the one halfe vnited vnto the formes celestiall the other halfe coupled vnto the formes of the elements and so as I conceiue is that place in the beginning of Genesis to be vnderstood where it is said that In the beginning God created the Heauen and the Earth that is the matter whereof heauen and the elements were afterwards made signified vnto vs by the name of those waters wherupon the spirit of God was mooued and mee thinketh the argument is very sound which is commonly alleged by our partakers for as in other kindes of causes there is one first principall whereunto all the rest are reduced so also in this kinde of the Matter there being the like reason of al. But if we distinguish the Matter of the heauens frō that of the elements we can not come to one first Matter of al things therefore there is the same Matter both of the celestial inferior bodies to which we may adde that thredbare argument of the Philosophers Wit hout necessity we must not imagine a pluralitie in Nature forasmuch as Nature abhorreth vanitie but there is no necessitie of the matters pluralitie for the maine ground of this distinction for ought that I can see is lest they should bee forced to grant a power in the heauens tending to corruption which as is before said hath no necessary illation forasmuch as the excellency of the forme present restraineth the wandring indifferent desire of the matter resisting the violent impression of forren qualities that should breed rebellion of the subiect creatures against their commander the heauens But touching their reasons in my poore opinion they are very insufficient for first thus they dispute The
being to an vtter not being at all hauing a limited and finit power To which purpose a learned frier said excellently well That the first maker of all things in respect of its being and not being is subiect onely vnto Gods wil permitted to the rule of Naturall agents onely in regard of transmutation For a Naturall agent may induce or expell a forme either substantial or accidentall But how farre soeuer mans Power or Nature is caried in fury laboring by might and maine towards an vtter ruinating and distruction of things yet shall it neuer attaine vnto Annihilation They may indeed by tyrannous inflicting of death make that which is neere the matter of a man the matter of a carcase they may also with fire burne the dead corps but though a thousand thousand woods should bee spent in burning of one poore carcase yet were they neuer able vtterly to annihilate and bring it vnto nothing So that Nature is too weake to cause Annihilation But yet saie the scrupulous aduersaries God who by his infinite and supernaturall power was able of nothing to make the world is by the same his boundles power able at his pleasure to returne it to nothing It is true indeed out of question that God by his absolute vndecaied power is sufficient as well to distroy the world as he was at the beginning to make it by his absolute power I say considered without regard of his will but if we respect his power restrained by his will that is regard what he will and hath decreed to do if by his word we may learne his will we may truly answer that God himselfe cannot annihilate the word because he can do nothing that implieth contradiction or that any way importeth mutability whereby of God he should be made no God Nor do we heerby take away his omnipotency nay rather we establish his power it being a chiefe point of infirmity and weakenesse to bee capable of change and able to deny it selfe but God hath decreed not to annihilate the world therefore he cannot now turne it vnto nothing how then may some man say shall it haue an end for if neither of it selfe it incline nor can be by any meanes naturall inforced to Annihilation no nor God himself can turne it into nothing what end shall it haue The answer is that as man hath his end by death whereas notwithstand his soule is immortall his body is onely changed into its first matter not turned into nothing so the world though incapeable of annihilation as hath beene proued yet hath in it an end vneuitable when it shall be changed from the present corrupt estate into a far more excellent and heauenly condition of indurance and immortality But heere ariseth a doubt moued by those scoffers that Peter prophecied should come in the last daies which demaund Where is the promise of his comming For since the father fell on sleepe all things haue continued alike from the beginning of the creation Where by the way let vs obserue that they make the time of Christs comming and the end of the world things of one and the same signification so that as many testimonies of scripture as warrant the certainty of Christs comming serue also to proue the worlds end and dissolution To their reason we may answer with Peter that the worlds long and hither to vnchanged continuance is no sure proofe of impossibility to bee destroied For God that by his bare word could of nothing make the world can now also with as great facrlity alter the state of the same But their supposition is most vntrue for the world hath not from the beginning continued in the same state vnaltred the whole earth being in Noahs floud ouerwhelmed with waters But to this they may answer that it was no generall or vniuersall destruction being extended onely to the liuing creatures they also in part preserued in Noahs arke It is true indeed that this was onely a particular or partial destruction the heauens remaining altogether vntouched the other elements also incorrupted But yet this sheweth a change in the worlds estate which they seemed to deny Touching the generall distinction of all things Peter after answereth to which place we wil refer them But that wherein the difficulty of the whole controuersie consisteth is the immutable estate of the heauenly bodies wherein hath beene obserued by experience of all ages a constancy almost admirable when in this sublunary region of elementish bodies there hath beene as great variety and almost a circular alteration And indeed were the heauens capable of corruption how could the spheare of the Moone situated so neere the fire haue continued so long vnconsumed Let vs therfore a little examine how the cause stands with the heauens in the matter of corruption There are two different opinions of them that make the heauens incorruptible some to deliuer them from corruption haue made them void of all matter others allot them a matter but in a distinct kinde from that of the sublunary bodies all agreeing that they be incorruptible The chiefe of the first sect is Auerroes a learned Turke who expostulating the matter with vs demands by what meanes we came to know the matter of the heauens For the onely meanes to prooue the existence of matter in any thing is as he calleth it Substantiall transmutation or more plainely the succession of formes But in heauen there hath beene no such succession no nor any alteration of qualities therefore the heauens are immateriall But wee may answer first that the being of matter in anie thing is knowen as wel by accidentary or locall as by substantiall transmutation But the heauens haue a locall Motion or Mutation at least in their parts therfore they consist of matter Secondly we answer thus that although the heauens haue all this while lasted without change in their substance yet seeing they are capable of future transmutation we may thence conclude the presence of matter in them For who would say that there is in a sucking child no reasonable soul because he seeth in him no actuall vse of reason or present conceit of learning we know that his potentiall disposition and sitnesse to conceiue is testimony sufficient of that soule which is in him Their second argument is this all things consisting of a corporall matter are withall corruptible for the ability of receiuing the yet absent formes being a propertie inseparable from the matter which also is accompanied with a longing desire to supply its defects there must needs be granted an expulsion of the incumbent forme for induction of a new successor wherein is corruption or els this The matters inclination and ingrafted desire as it were must be alway frustrate which folly the most wise God of Nature detesteth therfore there is in the heauens no such matter as we talke of To which argument they that make the matter of the celestiall bodies different from that of the sublunary creatures frame this answer
formes of the sublunary bodies may be separated from their matter but the heauens forme is vnseparable when in my iudgement they proue rather a distinction of formes than any diuerfity of the matter Or if they thence prooue a diuersity of matter because the formes incident are of greater and lesse excellency one in respect of an other we may as well say that the body of a man is of distinct matter from that of the other more base creatures because his form is so passing excellent Or if they restraine their comparison onely to the power of separation that because the matter of the heauens is ioyned inseparably to the forme when contrariwise the elementish matter hath often separation therefore there is not the same matter of both wee answer that the same matter in kinde may so inseparably bee vnited to its forme as that it can neuer be seioyned not that we deny a power of future separation of the heauens matter from the present forme but that this may bee a sufficient reason of their hitherto inseparable vnion A second argument is that of Aristotle saith he whatsoeuer things participate the same matter are capable of mutable transmutation but the heauens can neuer bee changed into the inferior bodies for somuch as the elements are altogether passiuely disposed for receit of the heauens action without any reaction vpon the heauens therefore there is not the same matter of both To which we answer that the proposition or first sentence must be vnderstood of a potentiall transmutation and that with this exception vnlesse the matters imperfectiō be perfected by the formes inherent excellency or resistance be made of some superiour forme to turne away the violence of the oppugning agent We say that the forme now being in the heauens is of so powerfull and vnconquerable a nature as that no naturall contrary agent is able to compasie any the least new impression Thirdly thus they reason Were the heauens of the same matter with the bodies of the elements then in like fort should they at least by nature be corruptible but the corruption is altogether abhorrent from the heauens nature To which assumption Damascen answers by a flat deniall for euen the heauens in his Philosophie are naturally subiect to corruption To which accordeth that of Plato in his Timaeus that attributes the heauens incorruptiblenes to a superior more powerfull cause For so hee brings in the maker of the world speaking vnto the celestiall bodies By nature you are dissoluble but through my will preserued from dissolution Nor shall the destintes of death preuaile ouer you to destroy you because my will is a bond of more power to keepe you from corruption than that wherewith at your first making you were holden together And thus haue we hastily runne ouer the difficult question of the heauens matter Touching the certainty and meanes of their dissolution we will briefly speake by and by after the resolution of the other ar-arguments for the non-dissolution of the world Simon Magus as it is recorded lib. 3. Recog Beati Petri. cap. 3. if the records be true thus replied vpon the learned Apostle for the worlds immortalitie If God be infinitely and only good and the world also good how shall God in the end destroy the world If hee destroy that which is good how shall himselfe continue good If hee pull it downe because it is euill how shall he then be free from euill that made it euill To which wee answer with S. Peter in the same place That the world in its first originall state was good yet so as it was foreordeined to dissolution nor doe wee thereby detract from Gods goodnesse for the heauens the most excellent part of the world being not made for themselues but for some end after to be reuealed how good soeuer yet were to be dissolued that that for which they were ordeined might appeare which also Peter thus familiarlie sheweth Who seeth not how cunningly an egshell is framed yet for manifestation of the end of its making it must be broken of necessitie So must the present estate of the world of necessitie be destroyed that the more excellent condition of the kingdome of heauen may be made manifest at which time also this degenerated euill state of corruption shall be done away that a more glorious estate of incorruption may be restored So then that the world shall haue an end I take it it is manifest and that not an end of annihilation but of corruption which indeed shall be a way vnto its perfection Now concerning the times and seasons of the worlds dissolution we will not take vpon vs curiously to determine seeing God the beginning and end of all things hath left the time vnreuealed vnto vs. Touching the means and maner of the dissolution the Stoicks glanced at it a farre off being of opinion that the world should by fire be dissolued For thinking the starres and the skies fire to haue a wasting action vpon the inferiour elements their nourishing moisture by little and little decaying when neither the earth can haue refection by the water nor the aire procreation after its absolute consumption there shall-remaine nothing but fire to consume both the heauens and the earth of which afterward a new world should be made whose opinion is very consonant vnto that of Peter saue onely that they thought this destruction should come of a natural necessity for Peter also taugnt it should be by fire wherewith God withdrawing his hand of preseruation should consume this world and of the ashes heereof create a new yet so as neither the seate of the blessed souls in heauen nor the dungeon of the damned in hell should be destroied that neither the iotes of the Saints nor the torments of the wicked should be interrupted As for the firmament and the other inferiour spheres together with the elements they shal be indued with another that a far more excellent cnodition putting off these accidents and affections of corruption fit for the continuall generation and corruption of the naturall bodies and receiuing other qualities agreeable to the incorruptible estate of the world to come so that their substance shall be all one howsoeuer they alter their qualities As in the resurrection mens bodies shall bee of the same substance but of a different disposition For this corruption must put on incorruption and this mortall must put on immortality So that as Saint Paul said our imperfect knowledge which we haue in this life shall in the after-world be abolished because then we shall haue a morefull and perfect knowledge of God and his Christ So may we well say this world shall be destroied because it shall lose this present estate of imperfection and put on a more glorious condition fit for the world to come And so as I take it are those places of scripture to bee vnderstood where niention is made of the worlds perishing that is the present estate of this world shall
be abolished and the same substance indued with a more glorious condition To which accordeth that of Dauid Psa 102. They shall perish but thou shalt indure they shall all wax old as doth a garment as a vesture shalt thou change them and they shall bee changed plainely signifying that the perishing of the creatures shall be onely an alteration which God shall bring vpon them Now to that fruitlesse question of the heauens motion or rest we may answer probably that they shall haue an end of moouing for their motion being ordained onely for ordering things below especially for continuance of their generation seeing all propagation of the species in liuing creatures as also mutuall procreation in the elementish liuelesse bodies being ended to what purpose should the heauens mouing longer indure Which may also semblably be answered touching the action and passion of the elements as also for the being of things compounded of their mixture as plants and sensible creatures being things ordained onely for mans helpe and sustenance who in that blessed state of immortality without the least defect shall neede no such supply of his wants which quiet restfull estate of these under-vnder-bodies is not as some haue fondly imagined to be attributed onely vnto the quiet rest of the heauens for when at the praiers of Ioshua the Sunne stood still and with it the rest of the celestiall bodies vnlesse we imagine the whole course of them to haue beene peruerted yet ceased not the naturall actions of things below for euen at that time did Ioshua fight But the true cause of their rest from motion is the will of the first cause without whose adiuuant-fellow-working the secundary causes are quite disabled to performe their functions From hence therefore namely from the certainety of the worlds dissolution we thus reason for our maine position For if the world vncapable of eternity haue a limited time of endurance which it cannot passe then hath man also his continuance bounded at least within compasse of the worlds lasting For location being a thing inseparable from existence the world mans habitation and mansion house being dissolued man the principall inhabitant must haue aioynt and fellow dissolution But for the more through-handling of this vndoubted truth our purpose is more particularly to treat thereof therefore to leaue this farre fetched though not impertinent reason taken from the worlds ineuitable destruction we will come to a neerer and more proper disquisition holding our selues within the compasse of mans owne nature I haue read of a late liuing learned Physitian Paracelsus by name who had such confidence in the absolute perfection of his skill that he doubted not to professe himselfe able by Physicke to preserue a man in so perfect a temperature that he should neuer die by sicknesse but his owne hastie leauing of his life was confutation sufficient of his either false ostentation or extreme madnesse For himselfe either not able which bewraied his vnskilfull impotencie or els vnwilling which shewed his wilfull folly ere he came to the prime of his age before he was thirtie yeeres old ended his daies learning at length by his owne experience that arte can neuer ouercome the necessitie of nature nor mans cunning preuent or preuert the decrees of the destinies But to the matter in hand the question is whether man by nature is subiect vnto death the end of nature To which we answer that mans nature hath a double consideration first in the incorrupt stare and puritie of creation secondly in the degenerated condition of corruption which although it were altogether vnknowen vnto the Gentilish Philosophers yet is its consideration in part Philosophicall therefore not wholly to bee omitted Now in the first cōsideration of nature we answer negatiuely forasmuch as vndefiled nature was vncapable of the soules separation from the bodie betweene which there was so absolute and perfect an harmony and consent that as the vnderfaculties of the soule were in subiection to the reasonable and most principall part thereof without the least iarre and disagreement so fared it in the bodie though compounded of the contrarie natures of the foure elements yet so wel tempered by proportion that there could bee no obseruance of the least discord But after that mans pride set abroch by the diuels suggestion ventred to taste of the forbidden fruite for desire of knowledge the light of reason being the life of the soule ouercast by the vnauoidable cloudes of ignorance there grew a disagreement and quarrell among the subiect inferior parts of the soule from whence followed the warre of the elements in the bodie neuer to bee ended till the field were lost by blood and therefore excellent was the speech of the Frier Ferus The diseases of the bodie came from sinne the soules sicknesse the death of the body from the death of the soule and who dares say the dealing is vnequall that hee should incurre the death of the body who wilfully reiected the life of the soule or who marueils that the diuell by Gods sufferance tormenteth the bodie with diseases that gaue the diuell a place of dwelling in his soule so that the death of the bodie being the separation of the soule from the bodie was a punishment inflicted for mans wilfull sequestration of himselfe from God and it is a good collection more then coniecturall that the bodie had neuer beene subiect to the corruption of destruction had not the soule beene tainted with the corruption of defiling Man therefore in his primarie state of creation was not naturally subiect vnto death but in the defiled condition of corrupted nature death is become ineuitable and therefore Thales Milesius one of the seuen wise men was wont to say that there was no difference betweene a mans life and his death being both things agreeable vnto nature and thence proceeded their resolute contempt of death because they thought it was ineuitable whereupon the Epicure himselfe considering the ineuitablenesse of deaths comming was as Maximus witnesseth wont to say that against other things we must finde some defence and remedie onely death was vnresistable our bodie the vndefenced citie of our soule being all vnsufficient to withstand the violent assaults of death But to leaue the infinite testimonies of the learned grounded vpon so long experience let vs deale with reasons more artificiall and shew this trueth first in particular that euery man hath his endurance dated which he cannot passe afterward goe vnto the species to declare it also in the whole kinde The principall and maine reason is taken from his composition for man consisting of a matter and a forme as doe also the other bodily liuing creatures though the spirituall substance of his soule be immortall yet his body being made of the first matter whose inseparable companion is a desire of change there must of necessitie follow dissolution for God and nature according to our presupposition doing nothing in vaine this insatiable appetite of receiuing newe formes shall
spirits whereby the heat was as it were with smoke chaoked The like is reported of Diodorus a logician who for shame that he could not at the first answer the trifling question which Stilpo put out suddenly ended his daies Which is also written of Homer who in the I le Ios sitting on the sea shore demanded of the fisher-men if they had taken any thing they thus obscurely in riddle-wise made ananswer Those that we tooke we left behind those that we could not catch we bring with us For in the sun-shine as they say it is shipmens fashions they made inquisition for their backbiting familiars and some they tooke and cruelly pressed vnto death leauing their liuelesse carcases to bee deuoured of the fishes those that craftily had insinuated themselues either into their flesh or into the inside of their apparrell they were faine to bring away with them But quicke witted Homer not able on the sudden to expound this probleme for shame as Plutarch and Herodotus write of him gaue vp the ghost For the spirits and blood as in all kinde of feare it falleth out retiring to the inward parts as to a tower of defence by their sudden retrait and reuerberation redouble the heate and so inflaming the heart not able to be cooled againe by respiration stifles the patient Concerning Venery deaths best harbinger I shall not neede to recite the infinite examples of them that by meanes therof haue hastened their deaths nor indeed is it possible to number those innumerable troops that through lust either before the actuall accomplishment or after the too frequent satisfying the same haue ended their youthfull daies It was well said of one that Venus prouideth not for those that are already borne but for those that shal be borne and therefore Auicenna a learned Philosopher Physitian doubted not to say that the emission of a little seed more than the body could well beare was a great deale more hurtfull than the losse of fortie times so much blood For it wasteth the spirits weakeneth the stomack enfeebleth and drieth vp the braine and marrow whereby especially it hastneth death And the truth heereof Aristotle prooueth by his experimentall obseruation for so hath he noted the cocke-sparow by immoderate and too frequent vse of Venery very seldome to liue out the tearme of two yeeres and the same reason hee giueth why the Mule a mixt creature begotten betweene an horse an asse is longer liued thā either of them for his insting in that kinde is but once only through the whole course of his life To which we may adde the diuersity of the sex for the male according vnto Aristotle in euerie kinde almost is by nature better fitted for long life than the female hauing greater force of heat and the moisture more firm better able to resist than the fluid substance of the female and thence it is that women for the most part are sooner perfected than men being sooner fit for generation sooner in the flower and prime of their age and finally sooner old for their heat though little yet sooner preuaileth ouer that fluid thinne substance and moisture of theirs than it possibly can ouer that solid and compact humiditie which is in man But lest our Treatise grow too big we wil proceed to those other outward causes of long life such as bee the influences of the Stars either in our conception and birth or in the country soile wherin we liue as also the goodnesse of the soile it selfe both of the earth aire For though it be true that the celestiall bodies haue no direct action either of inclination or constraint vpon the reasonable soule of man which is immateriall yet is it as true that they haue singular and especiall operations vpon our bodies for so wee see the fruitfulnesse and barrennesse of the earth depends vpon the heauens good and bad aspect the sea followes the motion and alteration of the Moone the yeere distinguished into its foure parts according to the accesse or farther absence of the Sun and therefore Galen the father of Physitians counselled his scholers to haue especiall respect vnto the coniunction of the Planets in their signes whensoeuer they vndertake any cure and which is more fit for the present purpose the Astrologers haue assigned vnto euery Planet a monthly dominion ouer the childe conceiued in the wombe according to their order and situation The first moneth is allotted vnto Saturne the second vnto Iupiter and so foorth in order vntill they haue all finished their dominion and then they begin againe which is the especiall reason alleaged by some why the childe that is borne in the eight moneth for the most part dieth when as oftentimes those that are brought foorth a moneth sooner or later liue in verie good health for Saturne is a planet whose influence causeth colde and drinesse which both are qualities enemies vnto life Now followeth the last though not the least cause of long life and that is the goodnesse of the soile and wholesomnesse of the aire for it is so recorded in Histories and approoued by the testimonie of our late trauellers that in that part of India which is called Oner the inhabitants are very long liued and for the most part very healthfull insomuch that many of them liue vntill they bee aboue an hundred yeeres old and wee see by experience in our country how perilous not onely pestilent aire is but euen the vnholesomnes of the fennie countries that are often anoied with stinking and vnsauorie fogges Aristotle in his treatise of the length and shortnesse of life maketh choice of a hot countrey as fittest for preseruation and maintenance of life for so he obserueth it that serpents bred and brought vp in hot countries are generally bigger bodied then those that are found in colder climets and those fishes that breed in the red sea are also longer than those in the seas which are not so hot and that though they bee of the same kinde which is a manifest proofe of their longer continuance els how commeth it to passe that they haue greater growth and againe those creatures that liue in cold climets haue a more waterish kinde of humour and fitter for congelation whence followeth the speedier destruction of the inhabitants but the trueth is that neither hot countries nor colder climets are of themselues any furtherance vnto long life for those that are of a cholericke fierie constitution liue longer in cold countries and such as be of colder complexion liue best and longest in hot regions but according to the diuersitie of mens complexions so liue they better or worse in diuers countries Those that are too hot of cōstitution by my counsell shall make choice of a country in some measure and degrees cold lest the outward heat of the circumiacent aire increase the fire within and make it more vehement and thence is it that those in the hottest part of Ethiopia are shortest liued hauing that
Eternall which neither had beginning nor shall haue end and such is God alone who onely being immutable subiect to none no not the least alteration is therefore only from euerlasting to euerlasting for that cause termed in holy writ the Ancient of daies amongst the old Egyptians resembled to a decrepit-old-man and pourtraied like a youth in the prime of his flourishing yeares by that first Image signifying his long continuance from before by the second his liuelinesse and immunity from all manerdefect and alteration by cancred corrupting time For as his power is infinite extended not onely to all things in the world but euen vnto things which are not as first hee made all things of nothing as his greatnesse is vnmeasurable not limited or bounded by any place or compasse and therefore said to haue his centrum vbique from which the essence of al things is drawen as lines and where they end and are all conioyned his circumference no where finally as all his attributes are infinite and immeasurable so is his continuance altogether boundlesse Wherefore not to enter at all into this inextricable Labyrinth of Gods infinite continuance let vs proceed vnto the next part of the distinction Beside God who is onely Eternall there are other things in a middle degree tearmed by the moderne Philosophers Euiternall hauing beginning from God the fountaine of being yet without end either of annihilation or corruption such are all spirituall creatures Angels and the Soules of men Where notwithstanding there is a doubt to be answered For in the whole Historie of the Creation recorded by Moses we finde no mention of the making of Angels nor any word of them till the narration of the Womans treacherous seduction by the diuel in the serpent so that either they were not created and so were from euerlasting or else Moses his Chronicle is in this point defectiue But wee may well answer that they had a beginning seeing that eternity is Gods peculiar attribute and the same though inclusiuely expressed by Moses in his booke of beginnings for by Heauen is signified not onely the body of heauen but the things also therein contained Now of the indirect and inclusiue mention made of these admirable creatures there may this reason be giuen The men of those times being very superstitious and giuen vnto Idolatry for the Egyptians euen at that time worshipped the Sunne the hosts of heauen Moses fearing to giue new occasion to their false will-worship of purpose refrained from expresse mentioning of their names or natures in his history For if these bodily visible creatures wrung from them such diuine worship the Angels by how much more excellent their nature is would haue so much the more added new fewell to their begun fire of superstition Secondly lest the detractory Nature of corrupted man should haue ascribed some part of the glory of the worlds creation to those heauenly creatures the wise pen-man of this excellent story of purpose concealed what hee knew either of their Creation or Nature so that Moses his history is in this regard not defectiue howsoeuer giuing no expresse notion of the creation of Angels Neither are the Angels though most excellent creatures void of beginning there being but one thing which one made all things of it selfe eternall The third degree is of those things that had both beginning with time and shal haue their end in time such are all bodily creatures as well simple as mixt although touching the celestiall bodies there be some doubt Now as concerning the world the question is to which of these three kinds it may and ought to be referred And I finde three seuerall opinions The first is of them that make the world eternall wanting beginning and incapeable of end The second of them that grant both beginning and end of being There is a third sect that parts these two opinions affirming that it had a beginning and shall haue no end But lest wee sticke in the words let vs in one word or two set downe the sense and meaning of the Question and because that crror is the child of confusion distinguish the things doubtfull lest through the equiuocation of the words by mistaking wee come vnto a contrary sense By the world therfore sometime is meant the whole compasse of things that are as well spirituall as bodily extended in this sense euen vnto God himselfe Secondly it is taken for all things only God excepted euen the whole worke of the Creation excluding no creature how excellent soeuer no not the Angels Thirdly it signifieth onely the circuite of bodily Creatures whether you interpret bodily things to be such as haue bodies as parts of them or such as though in regard of composition haue no bodies yet haue their being onely in creatures bodily as those things which we call Accidents For the first acception it concerneth not our purpose For Nature it selfe excludeth God from all kinde of beginning and it is a principle both in reason and in religion that God is from euerlasting In the second sense wee may take it comprehending all things both spirituall and bodily for euen the Angels as is before said had their beginning by creation but we rather hold our selues vnto the last signification as being most vsually meant by those that handle this controuersie And this also according to its threefold consideration hath three seuerall acceptions For first it is taken for that Idaea type preconceiued of the Maker God by which he was ruled and directed in the building thereof And this is tearmed by Plato the Ideal or exemplary world as it were the copie which God followed in the creation whereby if he vnderstand Gods decree to create we may without error entertain it otherwise it is somwhat harsh for we are not to imagine that God needeth any long premeditate or fore-conceiued type of his workes as our finite artificers do but as his wisedome and power is infinite so doth hee in an vnutterable manner at the same moment deuise the manner and performe the worke and yet not rashly but most wisely and with great deliberation For as he said in another sense so may I say in this case One day with God is as a thousand yeares and a thousand yeares as one day length of time adding nothing to his ability and wisedome nor fewnesse of daies any way detracting from the perfection of his workemanship Secondly it is taken for the vniuersity of things contained within the compasse and cope of heauen and earth now really and actually subsisting and this is called of Plato the world reall as hauing an actuall and externall being in Nature not onely in conceit and intention Thirdly man is called the lesser world in regard of that perfect analogie and similitude betwixt him and this greater world wherein there is nothing whose likenesse and resemblance may not be seene in man and this you may call the Analogicall world Now by the world in our question we
before time to make in time Therefore by his euer being goodnesse he for euer purposed by his eternall wisedome hee alway disposed that which by his euerlasting power he once composed Fiftly they reason from the Eternitie of time in this sort Time is Eternall therefore there is also an Eternall motion for Time is the measure of moouing Now the antecedent is thus prooued That which hath beene alway and shall be for euer is Eternall but such is the condition of time for you can designe vs no moment or instant before which Time was not and after which Time shall not remaine For as Aristotle saith euery now or instant of time is the end of time past and begining of time to come as in a right line euery middle point is the end of the fore-part of the line and the beginning of the part following To which we may answer by reiecting this their discription of time for as Scaliger hath well obserued motion is rather the measure of time and thence it is as I take it that Plato called the Sunne and Starres times Instruments and as it were the Iacobs staffe of time because by their motion and dircumuolution we measure the indurance of the world And therefore also as I conceiue of it the Poets called Saturne that is Time Heauens Sonne because that from their circular mouing came the distinction of Daies and Moneths and Yeeres And to say the truth there is a more generall and true definition of times then this of Aristotle and it is this The past present and future indurance of things Which also the authours of this discription distinguish into it kinds There is say they a time perpetuall or eternall Gods owne peculiar attribute who alone indureth from generation to generation and there is an indurance or Time momentary incident vnto the creatures In this sense therefore it is no absurdity to say there was a time when Aristotles time was not for hee maketh time of the same age with the heauens motion so that vntill the heauens began to bee mooued Aristotles time was not yet was there time before the heauens creation that is a long space of indurance in which God alone had being But because time is indeed proper vnto the creatures being as other bodily and spirituall creatures in scripture said to be made by God let vs follow Aristotle in his owne Definition and to his obiection out of his Schoole-interpreters we may fetch this answer That euery Now and instant of time is not both beginning of time to come and end of time past for there is a threefold instant or Now. The first is instans or Nunc initiatiuum an instant onely of beginning The second they tearme Nunc continuatiuum a continuing instant and that is both beginning in respect of time following and end in regard of time past There is a third instant or moment and that they call Nunc finiens or terminatiuum and that is such an instant as only is an end of time foregoing They may all bee thus illustrated as in a straight line the first pricke or point is onely the begining of the line the last point onely the end of the same the rest in the middle are both the end of that part of the line which was before drawn and the beginning of the hinder part So in time we may point out an instant that is onely beginning another that is onely an end a third that is both a beginning and end Aristotle his authority therefore can truely be vnderstood onely of the continuing and coupling instant But against this distinguishing answer Aristotle hath this exception If there be any such instant as is only a beginning in respect of time â—llowing and no end of that time which went before then before this instant there was no time What then Therefore there was an Ante without time which is absurd For Ante and Post before and after are differences of time As for example When we say Philip liued before Alexander this word before signifies a difference in time betwixt Philip and Alexander his sonnes being But who seeth not more subtilty than soundnesse in this reply of Aristotle for we will in like sort thus reason against him In his Physicks he hath this Position Extra coelum nullus est locus Beyond heauen there is no place therefore there is some extra in which is no place For extra and intra without and within are differences of place as for example when we say he is without doores our meaning is that he is in some place without the house Now if wee should thus reason against Aristotle There is out of heauen a roome or place to be in for extra without is a difference of place things being said to be without onely in regard of place But Aristotle saith extra coelum therefore there is without the inward hollow compasse of heauen an external out-roome would he not straight and that iustly reproue our sophistrie for Aristotle his meaning in that place is that all things whatsoeuer are conteined within the inside of the body of heauen and it is as if hee had said there is no place but within the inside of the ouercast circle of heauen In like sort when we say that before this first moment of the heauens motion there was no time our meaning is that all reall time had beginning with the heauens mouing Reall time I say for there is time only imaginarie improperly called time as being rather a part of eternitie and of that indurance and long continuance which wee conceiue to haue beene in God before the creation of the world And thus shall wee reade the words Before and After vsed among the ancient Writers both Christian and Prophane for so did Ouid vse it in the beginning of his Metamorphosis Ante mare terras quod tegit omnia coelum Before that heauen and earth was made So in the Scripture Before the foundations of the world were layd thou art God from euerlasting world without end Where it signifies no true and really subsisting time for this time began only with the motions of the heauens as Aristotle himselfe witnesseth In briefe therefore to shut vp this argument and this whole controuersie The first instant and moment of time reall before mentioned was both a beginning and end a beginning of time reall and an end of time imaginary nor is it any absurdity to say that time imaginary was before true and really subsisting time And thus haue we with all possible speed runne ouer the reasons which be vsually brought to proue the worlds being from euerlasting let vs now with like or lesse breuitie passe ouer those reasons which serue to improue this errour and they are only two which we will but propound auoiding ouer-tedious long discourse and so go on to the other part of the question First then from our owne experience we reason thus It is a trueth confirmed by the triall of all