Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
scripture_n	church_n	council_n	trent_n	2,747	5	10.4894	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A61896	A specimen of some animadversions upon a book entituled, Plus ultra, or, Modern improvements of useful knowledge writtten by Mr. Joseph Glanvill, a member of the Royal Society.	Stubbe, Henry, 1632-1676.	1670 (1670)	Wing S6067; ESTC R24632	157,333	195

are some made by Mr Smithwick a very ingenious and worthy man which represent the Phases of the Moon very well and yet invert all Objects but that is no default or impediment where the thing looked on is round These convex Telescopes a●ter the Object in some thing else besides their proportions nor doth any such thing happen in a well-disposed Eye upon vision Secondly he might have known this further difference betwixt an un-assisted sight and what is performed by the best and longest Telescopes abo●t ordinary Objects that the Dioptrick Tubes do represent the light and colours of bodies more d●lute and remiss then they appear to the naked Eye Per Telescopia praesertim longiora objecta spectantur luce colore dilutiora quam libero oculo This is granted by Zucchius and others and the reason is given by Zucchius because that so great an expa●●●on o● amplification of the Object and 〈◊〉 of its parts one from the other is equivalent to a remission of those qualities therein But to shew Mr. Glanvill a little more of his ignorance in Telescopes I shall shew him some further differences betwixt the naked sight and what is performed by those Glasses For some of them represent some Objects greater then they appear to the naked eye Some in the shorter Tubes are represented no bigger or rather less then they otherwise seem Some Objects in the longer Telescopes are magnified indeed but nothing so much as other Objects are by the same Glasses The Experiments are obvious place a candle in the dark at some considerable distance and the flame will appear round and encompassed with rays then take a short Telescope fitly made and placed and look through it and you will see the irradiation taken off and the flame represented as oblong not round and rather seemingly less then greater then it appeared before to the naked Eye Then turn your eye unto any coloured Object and take notice how big it seems assume the same Telescope and you shall find that to be magnified above what it seemed to the naked eye by much After this take a long Telescope and view the aforesaid candle through that and at the same distance view some other coloured Object and you shall see that this last Telescope will represent both Objects much magnified but the Candle less of the two by far But I shall adde further that it is not to be doubted but that the Telescopes of Galilaeo Scheiner Rheita Gassendus Grimaldi Eustachio Divini Hevelius Hugenius Ricciolus and Zucchius were good in their kind and that they did represent Objects as truly here on earth as any could yet when they come to be applied to the Celestial Phaenomena what difference is there in their Observations How do they complain either of the default of the Telescopes or want of care or skill each in the other Simon Marius boasts of his accurateness Scheiner in his Apelles tells us Observationes omnes factae sunt summo studio coelo serenissimo semper cum observatum est obscurissimo plerumque in absentia videlicet Lunae talis vero variis excellentissimis quorum uno meliorem adhuc ad stellas non vidi But enough may be collected to this purpose out of the foregoing discourse so that I need not repeat it over again out of all which as I would not be understood totally to discredit the use of Telescopes in celestial discoveries I do not deny but some things and some motions are observed by them which a naked Eye cannot discern but this knowledge arrives to a slender degree of certainty when the Phaenomena come to be particularly explicated and theoremes or assertions framed thence so I would not have them too much relied on nor men be too confident in principles and Conclusions which have no surer Foundation then those probabilities and I do herein joyn with Claramontius in that Epiphonema In tanta diversitate quid certi ex tubo Optico habemus If I must suspect the skill or accurateness of Galilaeo Scheiner Gassendus Hevelius Fontana Ricciolus and Zucchius and such like pardon me if I know not whom to believe I have been the more large in this Point because of the insolence with which Mr. Glanvill persecutes that Reverend and otherwise learned person whom he represents to the world as He pleaseth and accordingly treats him with that contempt and scorn which is less allowable towards a Divine and such a one as is and always hath been in that Countrey very much esteemed by several honourable Families as well as others However God hath so providentially ordered the dispute thereby to check the pride of our Virtuoso that The Man of Words cannot triumph over the Man of Axiomes And if it be true that our Aristotelean was amazed at the hard words of Dioptrick Tubes c. as if there had been Magick in them I doubt not to Justifie Him in it for the insolent Virtuoso made use of them not as became a knowing person but as Conjurers use strange termes and of an uncouth sound though perhaps really Hebrew Latine or Arabique Besides all this perhaps Mr. Cross seems to have been offended at something in that mixt discourse or dispute that might derogate from the Authority of the Scripture many sayings are not innocent but as they are worded or uttered To say the Scripture was written to mens fancies is an expression very unwary in a Divine although a convenient interpretation may excuse it To say it is not written according to vulgar Methods may so be spoken that the action may render the words culpable And in another Age they might have passed better then now when men are prone to vilifie the Scripture especially the little Wits I perceive Mr. Sprat is not over-tender of the dignity of the Scripture for although there be an ancient Canon of the Church against the applying the Sacred Word of God ad scurrilia adulatoria which Canon is authorised even by the Council of Trent yet doth he encourage men to apply it to ordinary Raillery The Wit that may be borrowed from the Bible is magnificent and as all the other Treasures of knowledg it contains inexhaustible This may be used and allowed without any danger of prophanenesse The Ancient Heathens did the same They made their Divine Ceremonies the chief subjects of their phansies by that means their Religions had a more awful impression became more popular and lasted longer in force then else they would have done And why may not Christianity admit the same thing if it be practised with Sobriety and Reverence What irreligion can there be in applying some Scripture-expressions to Natural things Why are not the one rather exalted and purified then the other defiled by such Applications The Case is clear Gentlemen Hath not the Lord said What hast thou to do to take my words into thy mouth since thou hatest to be reformed Besides methinks our Divine might have remembred

of a Peacock I observe that there is such a difference betwixt those two Writers that as one of them must needs be in an errour so I am apt to think that our Virtuoso is the person see Mr. Hooke p. 167 168 169 170. and Zucchius Philos. opt part 2. tr 3. c. 7. sect 4. pag. 349 350. If England do yield better Microscopes then those of Eustachius Divinius then I am ready to change my judgement Where Mr. Glanvill speaks of going to the World of the Moon and I animadvert upon the difficulties of the journey and that his lodging will be too hot for him adde in the Text these words page 43. Besides the other difficulties of the journey 't is further considerable that from the Centre of the Earth to the Moon according to the calculation of Tycho Brahe there is near 56 semidiameters of the Earth which is about 192416 miles and admit it be supposed that Mr. Glanvill flie 20 miles every day in ascending towards that world he should be above 15 years before he could come to the Orbe of the Moon Where I speak against the accommodating of Scripture to common railing p. 49. I adde that not only the Council of Trent fas est ab hoste doceri hath prohibited Sess. 4. that any should apply the holy Scripture ad scurritia fabulosa vana adulationes but also that the first Council at Millain forbids the using it ad ●jocum ostentationem contumeliam superstitionem impietatem And to upbraid our Divine-Railleurs a little more an ancient African-Council decrees Si Clericus aut Monachus verba scurritia jocularia risumque moventia loquitur acerrime corripiatur The words of which Canon viz. Scurritia jocularia are by a learned Frenchman rendred raillery Nous avons le Canon d' un ancient Concile d' Afrique qui parle en ces termes Si quelqu ' un du Clerge ou si un Religieuse dit des paroles de raillerie des choses plaisantes enjouces qu' il soit chastie tres severement Qu' eussent dit a vostre avis ces bons Peres si ces railleries eussent este terees de l' Escriture This Question hath been agitated with much wit and address in French betwixt Mr. de Girac and Mr. Costar in sundry books wherein any man of common reason and piety will give the advantage to adversary of Voiture who is justified by the concurrent opinion of Balzac in his remarks sur les deux sonnets and to these Writers I refer our Virtuosi such as reckon upon all other learning as Pedantry may inform themselves thence as out of Writers which transcend not their breeding and studies Whereas pag. 58. I speak somewhat in commendation of the ancient Aristotelean Monks I finde that their esteem is much advanced by the learned Gabriel Naudaeus in these words After the last taking of Constantinople Learning began to creep out of Monasteries which for all the time before had been as it w●re publike Christian Schools where not only youth but also such men as would apply themselves that way were instructed in all manner of Disciplines Sciences and Morality and that to such an height that not content with that so famous Quadrivium of the Mathematicks which besides all that is now shewn in Colledges was then taught Medicine both as to Theory and Practice was so well cultivated that we need no more to convince us how expert they were therein then the Writings of Aegidius Constantine and Damascene Joannitius Peter of Spain and Turisanus So that it were easie for me to answer them who charge them with illiterature and ignorance Where I speak out of G. Hofman and others that it is sufficient for a Physician that he proceed upon such rules and methods as may most commodiously guide him in his practice without being solicitous whether they be rigorously and philosophically true pag. 75. I adde that there are others as eminent as any that ever pretended to cure which concurre with me in this opinion As Avicenna and Riolanus the words of the latter in his Examen of Harvey c. ●9 are these Quapropter cum Avicenna doctr 6. cap. distinguo sermonem utilem a vero Medicus qua Medicus inquit ille non curat quid in veritate sit sed contentus est Phaenomenis quibusdam quae sunt satis illi in curatione morborum I adde unto the passages pag. 97. which relate unto the diligence of the Ancients in Dissections this That the Ancients and particularly the Peripateticks were very curious and inquisitive into Anatomy appears by this passage out of Chalcidius in his discourse upon the Timaeus of Plato he lived about one thousand one hundred and seventy years ago and the passage which relates to the Platonick notion about vision in the Latin Edition of Meursius pag. 340 runs thus Quare faciendum ut ad certam explorationem Platonici dogmatis commentum vetus advocetur medicorum item Physicorum illustrium sane virorum qui ad comprehendendam sanae naturae solertiam actus humani corporis facta membrorum exsectione rimati sunt qui existimabant ita demum se suspicionibus atque opinionibus certiores futuros si tam rationi visus quam visui ratio concineret Demonstranda igitur oculi natura est de qua cum plerique alii tum Alcmaeus Crotoniensis in Physicis exercitatus quique primus exsectionem aggredi est ausus Callisthenes Aristotelis auditor Herophilus multa praeclara in lucem protulerunt Out of which it is manifest that the Ancients especially the Aristotelians for such were Calisthenes and Herophilus did with some curiosity examine the Phaenomena of nature and regulated their opinions by sensible experiments and that this was the practice of most of the eminent Physicians and Naturalists of old The Letter of Hippocrates to Damagetas mentioned pag. 89. though cited as genuine by Galen is suspected by Jo. Baptista Cartes miscell medic dec 1. c. 4. Caeterum hac Epistola quae sub nomine Hippocratis circumfe●tur suspecta est mihi primum quia Diogenes Laertius lib. 9. in vita Democriti scribit illum nequaquam ridentem quanquam concedat ab Hippocrate fuisse visitatum non quidem ut ipsum sanaret quo tempore jam Democritus erat decrepitus nec amplius aptus sectioni cadaveram nam Hippocrates 436 annos ante Christum natus Democritus vero 492 ita ut ita ut Democritum nativitate secutus sit Hippocrates 56 annis tum sive ad videndum sive ad sanandum eum conveniret vigesimum quintum annum attigisse verisimile videtur cum tunc temporis Hippocrates medici famam adoptus esset quod non poterat nisi per longum temporis cursum varia experimenta in Medicina facta sibi comparare Sed probandam provectiorem Hippocratis aetatem majorem senectam Democriti ejusdem Laertii testimonium extat dicentis Ultimum quod in vita