BUt I confess (Sir) I much fear, that That which makes your Friend have such detracting thoughts of Theology, is a certain secret Pride, grounded upon a Conceit, that the Attainments of Natural Philosophers are of so noble a kind, and argue so transcendant an Excellency of Parts in the Attainer, that he may justly undervalue all other Learning, without excepting Theology it self.
You will not, I suppose, expect, that a person, who has written so much in the praise of Physiques, and laboured so much for a little skill in it, should now here endeavour to depretiate that so useful part of Philosophy. But I do not conceive, that it will be at all injurious to it, to prefer the knowledge of Supernatural, to that of meer Natural things, and to think, that the Truths, which God indiscriminately exposes to the whole Race of Mankind, and to the bad as well as to the good, are inferiour to those Mysterious ones, whose Disclosure he reckons among his peculiar Favours, and whose Contemplation employs the Curiosity, and, in some points, exacts the wonder of the very Angels. That I may therefore repress a little the overweening Opinion your Friend has of his Physical Attainments, give me leave to represent a few particulars conducive to that purpose.
And first, as for the Nobleness of the Truths taught by Theology and Physicks, those of the former sort have manifestly the Advantage, being not onely conversant about far nobler Objects, but discovering things that Humane Reason of it self can by no means reach unto; as has been sufficiently declared in the foregoing part of this Letter.
Next, we may consider, that, whatever may be said to excuse Pride (if there were any) in Moscus the Phoenician, who is affirmed to have first Invented the Atomical Hypothesis, and in Democritus and Leucippus, (for Epicurus scarce deserves to be named with them,) that highly Advanc’d that Philosophy; and in Monsieur Des-Cartes, who either Improv’d, or at least much Innovated the Corpuscula[…]ian Hypothesis: Whatever (I say) may be alledged on the behalf of these Mens pride; I see no great Reason, why it should be allowed in such as your Friend; who, though Ingenious Men, are neither Inventors, nor eminent Promoters of the Philosophy they would be admir’d for, but content themselves to Learn what others have Taught, or at least to make some little further Application of the Principles that others have Established, and the Discoveries they have made. And whereas your Friend is not a little proud of being able to confute several Errours of Aristotle and the Antients, it were not amiss if he consider’d, that many of the chief Truths that overthrow those Errours, were the Productions of Time and Chance, and not of his daring Ratiocinations: For, there needs no great Wit to disprove those that maintain the Uninhabitableness of the Torrid Zone, or deny the Antipodes, since Navigators have found many Parts of the former well Peopl’d, and Sailing round the Earth, have found men living in Countreys Diametrically opposite to Ours. Nor will it warrant a man’s Pride, that he believes not the Moon to be the onely Planet that shines with a borrowed Light, or the Galaxy to be a Meteor; since that now the Telescope shows us, that Venus has her Full and Wain like the Moon, and that the Milky way is made up of a vast multitude of little Stars, inconspicuous to the naked Eye. And indeed of those other Discoveries that overthrow the Astronomy of the Antients, and much of their Philosophy about the Celestial Bodies, few or none have any cause to boast, but the excellent Galileus, who pretends to have been the Inventor of the Telescope: For that Instrument once discover’d; to be able to reject the Septenary number of the Planets by the Detection of the four Satellites of Jupiter, or talk of the Mountains and Valleys in the Moon, requires not much more excellency in your Friend, than it would to descry in a Ship, where the naked Eye could discern but the Body of the Vessel, (to descry, I say) by the help of a Prospective Glass, the Masts, and Sails, and Deck, and perceive a Boat tow’d at her Stern: Though indeed Galileo himself had no great cause to boast of the Invention, though we are much oblig’d to him for the Improvement of the Telescope, since no less a Master of Dioptricks than Des-Cartes, does acknowledge with other Writers, that Perspective-Glasses were not first found out by Mathematicians or Philosophers, but casually by one Metius, a Dutch Spectacle-maker. On which occasion I shall mind you, that to hide Pride from Man, divers others of the chief Discoveries that have been made in Physicks, have been the Productions, not of Philosophy, but Chance, by which Gunpowder, Glass, and, for ought we know, the Verticity of the Load-stone, (to which we owe both the Indies) came to be found in these later Ages; as (more recently) the Milky Vessels of the Mesentery, the new Receptacle of the Chyle, and that other sort of Vessels which most men call the Lymphae-ducts, were lighted on but by Chance, according to the Ingenious Confession of the Discoverers themselves.
We may farther consider, that those very things which are justly are alledg’d in the praise of the Corpuscularian Philosophy it self, ought to lessen the pride of those that but make use of it. For that Hypothesis, supposing the whole Universe (the Soul of Man excepted) to be but a great Automaton, or self-moving Engine, wherein all things are perform’d by the bare motion (or rest) the size, the shape, and the scituation or texture of the parts of the Universal Matter it consists of; all the Phaenomena result from those few Principles, single or combin’d, (as the several Tunes or Chimes that are rung on five Bells,) and these fertile Principles being already establish’d by the Inventors and Promoters of the Particularian Hypothesis; all that such Persons as your Friend, are wont farther to do, is but to investigate or guess, by what kind of Motions the three or four other Principles are varied. So that the World being but, as it were, a great piece of Clock-work, the Naturalist as such, is but a Mechanitian; however the parts of the Engine, he considers, be some of them much larger, and others much minuter, than those of Clocks or Watches. And for an ordinary Naturalist to despise those that study the Mysteries of Religion, as much inferiour to Physical Truths, is no less unreasonable, than it were for a Watch-maker, because he understands his own Trade, to despise Privy-Counsellers, who are acquainted with the secrets of Monarchs, and Mysteries of State; or than it were for a Ship-carpenter, because he understands more of the Fabrick of the Vessel, to despise the Admiral, that is acquainted with the secret Designs of the Prince, and imploy’d about his most important affairs.
That great Restorer of Physicks, the illustrious Verulam, who has trac’d out a most useful way to make Discoveries in the Intellectual Globe, as he calls it, confesses, that his work was (to speak in his own terms) partus temporis potius quám ingenii. And though I am not of his opinion, where he says in another place, that his way of Philosophizing does exaequare ingenia; yet I am apt to think, that the fertile Principles of the Mechanical Philosophy being once setled, the Methods of inquiring and experimenting being found out, and the Physico-mechanical Instruments of working on Natures and Arts Productions being happily invented, the making of several lesser improvements, especially by rectifying of some almost obvious or supine Errours· of the Schools, by the assistance of such facilitating helps, may fall to the lot of persons not endow’d with any extraordinary Sagacity, or acuteness of parts. And though the Investigation and clear establishment of the true Principles of Philosophy, and the devising the Instruments of Knowledge, be things that may be allowed to be the proper work of sublimer Wits; yet, if a man be furnish’d with such assistances, ‘tis not every Discourse that he makes, or thing which he does by the help of them, that is difficult enough to raise him to that illustrious rank. And indeed, divers of the vulgar Errours, as well as of Scholars as other men, being mainly grounded upon the meer, and often mistaken, Authority of Aristotle, and perhaps some frivolous Reasons of his Scholastic Interpreters of such precarious and ungrounded things, that to ruine them, does oftentimes require more of boldness than skill; it may perhaps be said of your Friend, in relation to his Philosophical Successes against such vulgar Errours, as I am speaking of, what a Roman said of Alexander’s Triumph over the effeminate Asiaticks, Quod nihil aliud quám bene ausus sit Vana contemnere. And in some cases it happens, that, when once a grand Truth, or a happy way of Experimenting has been found, divers Phaenomena of Nature, that had been left unexplain’d, or were left mis-explain’d by the Schools, did, in my opinion, require a far less straining Exercise of the mind to unriddle and explain them, than must have been requisite to dispel the darkness that attended divers Theological Truths that are now clear’d up, and perhaps than I have my self now and then imploy’d in some of those Attempts, to illustrate Theological Matters, that you may have met in some Papers that I have presum’d to write on such Subjects. And indeed the Improvements, that such Virtuosi as your Friend are wont to make of the fertile Theorems and Hints, that have been presented them by the Founders or prime Benefactors of true Natural Philosophy, are so poor and slender, and do so much oftner proceed from Industry and Chance, than they argue a transcendent sagacity, or a sublimity of Reason, that, though such persons may have cause enough to be Delighted with what they have done, yet they have none to be Proud of it; and their Performances may deserve our Thanks, and perhaps some of our Praise, but reach not so high as to merit our Admiration; which is to be reserv’d for Those, that have been either Framers, or Grand Promoters, of True and Comprehensive Hypotheses, or (else) the Authors of other noble and useful Discoveries, many ways applicable.
It will not perhaps be improper to add on this occasion, that, as our knowledge is not very deep, not reaching with any certainty to the bottom of Things, nor penetrating to their intimate or innermost Natures; so its Extent is not very large, not being able to give us, with any Clearness and particularity, an account of the Celestial and deeply Subterraneal parts of the World, of which all the others make but a very small (not to say contemptible) portion.
For, as to the very Globe that we inhabit, not to mention, how many Plants, Animals, and Minerals, we are as yet wholly ignorant of, and how many others we are but slenderly acquainted with; I consider, that the objects about which our Experiments and Inquiries are conversant, do all belong to the Superficial parts of the Terrestrial Globe, of which the Earth, known to us, seems to be but as it were the Crust or Scurf. But what the Internal part of this Globe is made up of, is no less disputable than of what Substance the remotest Stars we can descry, consist: For even among the modern Philosophers some think, the internal Portion of the Earth to be pure and Elementary Earth, which (say they) must be found there, or no where. Others imagine it to be Fiery, and the Receptacle either of Natural or Hellish Flames. Others will have the Body of the Terrestrial Globe to be a great and solid Magnet. And the Cartesians on the other side, (though they all admit store of Subterraneal Loadstones) teach, that the same Globe was once a Fix’d Star, and that, though it have since degenerated into a Planet, yet the Internal part of it is still of the same Nature that it was before; the change it has received proceeding onely from having had its outward parts quite cover’d over with thick spots (like those to be often observ’d about the Sun,) by whose Condensation the firm Earth we inhabit was form’d. And the mischief is, that each of these jarring Opinions is almost as difficult to be demonstratively prov’d False as True. For, whereas to the Centre of the Earth there is, according to the modestest account of our late Cosmographers, above three thousand and five hundred miles; my Inquiries among Navigators and Miners have not yet satisfi’d me, that mens Curiosity has actually reached above one mile or two at most downwards, (and that not in above three or four places,) either into the Earth or into the Sea. So that as yet our Experience has scarce grated any thing deep upon the Husk, (if I may so speak) without at all reaching the Kernel of the Terraqueous Globe.
And alas! what is this Globe of ours, of which it self we know so little, in comparison of those vast and Luminous Globes that we call the Fix’d Stars, of which we know much less? For, though former Astronomers have been pleased to give us, with a seeming accurateness, their Distances and Bignesses, as if they had had certain ways of measuring them; yet Later and Better Mathematicians will (I know) allow me to doubt of what Those have deliver’d. For since ‘tis confess’d, that we can observe no Parallax in the Fix’d Stars (nor perhaps in the highest Planets,) men must be yet to seek for a Method to measure the distance of those Bodies. And not onely the Copernicans make it to be I know not how many hundred thousands of miles greater than the Ptolomeans, and very much greater than even Tycho; but Ricciolus himself, though a great Anti-Copernican, makes the distance of the Fix’d Stars vastly greater, than not onely Tycho, but (if I mis-remember not) than some of the Copernicans themselves. Nor do I wonder at these so great Discrepances, (though some amount perhaps to some millions of miles,) when I consider, that Astronomers do not measure the distance of the Fix’d Stars by their Instruments, but accommodate it to their particular Hypotheses. And by this uncertainty of the remoteness of the Fix’d Stars you will easily gather, that we are not very sure of their Bulk, no not so much as in reference to one another; since it remains doubtful, whether the differing Sizes, they appear to us to be of, proceed from a real Inequality of Bulk, or onely from an Inequality of Distance, or partly from one of those causes, and partly from the other.
But ‘tis not my design to take notice of those Things, which the famous Disputes among the Modern Astronomers manifest to be dubious. For I consider, that there are divers things relating to the Stars, which are so remote from our knowledge, that the Causes of them are not so much as disputed of, or inquired into, such as may be among others, Why the number of the Stars is neither greater nor lesser than it is? Why so many of those Celestial Lights are so plac’d, as not to be visible to our naked eyes, nor even when they are help’d by ordinary Telescopes? (which extraordinary good ones have assured me of.) Why among the familiarly visible Stars, there are so many in some parts of the Sky, and so few in others? Why their Sizes are so differing, and yet not more differing? Why they are not more orderly plac’d, so as to make up Constellations of regular or handsome Figures (of which the Triangle is, perhaps, the single Example) but seem to be scatter’d in the Skie as it were by Chance, and have as confus’d Configurations, as the Drops that fall upon ones Hat in a shower of Rain? To which divers other Questions might be added, as about the Stars, so about the Interstellar part of Heaven, which several of the Modern Epicureans would have to be empty, save where the beams of Light (and perhaps some other Celestial Effluvia) pass through it; and the Cartesians on the contrary think to be full of an Aethereal matter, which some, that are otherwise favourers of their Philosophy, confess they are reduc’d to take up but as an Hypothesis. So that our knowledge is much short of what many think, not onely if it be consider’d Intensively, but Extensively, (as a Schoolman would express it.) For there being so great a disproportion between the Heavens and the Earth, that some Moderns think the Earth to be little better than a Point in comparison even of the Orb of the Sun; and the Cartesians, with other Copernicans, think the great Orb it self, (which is equal to what the Ptolomeans call’d the Sun’s Orb) to be but a Point in respect of the Firmament; and all our Astronomers agree, that at least the Earth is but a Physical Point in comparison of the Starry Heaven: Of how little extent must our knowledge be, which leaves us ignorant of so many things, touching the vast Bodies that are above us, and penetrates so little a way even into the Earth that is beneath us, that it seems confin’d to but a small share of the superficial part of a Physical Point! Of which consideration the natural result will be, that, though what we call our Knowledge, may be allowed to pass for a high Gratification to our minds, it ought not to puff them up; and what we know of the System, and the Nature of things Corporeal· is not so perfect and satisfactory, as to justifie our despising the Discoveries of Spiritual things.
One of the former parts of this Letter may furnish me with one thing more, to evince the Excellencies and Prerogatives of the knowledge of the Mysteries of Religion; and that One thing is such, that I hope I shall need to add nothing More, because it is not possible to add any thing Higher; and that is, That the Preeminence above other Knowledge, adjudg’d to that of Divine Truths by a Judge above all Exception, and above all Comparison, namely, by God himself.
This having been but lately shown, I shall not now repeat it, but rather apply what hath been there evinc’d, by representing, that if He, who determines in favour of Divine Truths, were such an one, as was less acquainted, than our over-weening Naturalists with the secrets of their Idoliz’d Physicks; or if he were, though an Intelligent, yet (like an Angel) a Bare Contemplator of what we call the Works of Nature, without having any Interest in their Productions, your Friends not acquiescing in his estimate of things might have, though not a fair Excuse, yet a stronger Temptation.
But when he, by whose direction we prefer the higher Truths revealed in the Scripture, before those which Reason alone teaches us concerning those comparatively mean Subjects, things Corporeal, is the same God that not onely understands the whole Universe, and all its parts, far more perfectly, than a Watch-maker can understand one of his own Watches, (in which he can give an account onely of the Contrivance, and not of the Cause of the Spring, nor the Nature of the Gold, Steel, and other Bodies his Watch consists of,) but did make both this great Automaton, the World, and Man in it: We have no colour to imagine, that he should either be ignorant of, or injuriously disparage, his own Workmanship, or impose upon his Favourite-Creature, Man, in directing him what sort of Knowledge he ought most to covet and prize. So that since ‘tis He who fram’d the World, and all those things in it we most admire, that would have us prefer the knowledge he has vouchsafed us in his Word, before that which he has allow’d us of his Works, sure ‘tis very unreasonable and unkind to make the Excellencies of the Workmanship a disparagement to the Author, and the Effects of his Wisdom a Motive against acquiescing in the Decisions of his Judgment; as if, because he is to be admir’d for his Visible Productions, he were not to be believ’d, when he tells us, that there are Discoveries that contain Truths more valuable than those which relate but to the Objects, that he has expos’d to all men’s Eyes.