The Discovery of a World in the Moone | Page 8

Angel;[1] But for my part, I thinke the world is much beholden to
Aristotle for all its sciences. But yet twere a shame for these later ages
to rest our selves meerely upon the labours of our Fore-fathers, as if
they had informed us of all things to be knowne, and when wee are set
upon their shoulders, not to see further then they themselves did.
'Twere a superstitious, a lazie opinion to thinke Aristotles workes the
bounds and limits of all humane invention, beyond which there could
be no possibility of reaching. Certainly there are yet many things left to
discovery, and it cannot be any inconvenience for us, to maintaine a
new truth, or rectifie an ancient errour.
[Sidenote 1: Rev. 16. 4.]
But the position (say some) is directly against Scripture, for
1. Moses tells us but of one world, and his History of the creation had
beene very imperfect if God had made another.
2. Saint John speaking of Gods workes, saies he made the world, in the
singular number, and therefore there is but one:[1] 'tis the argument of
Aquinas, and he thinks that none will oppose it, but such who with
Democritus esteeme some blinde chance, and not any wise providence
to be the framer of all things.

[Sidenote 1: Part 1. Q. 47. Art. 3.]
3. The opinion of more worlds has in ancient time beene accounted a
heresie, and Baronius affirmes that for this very reason, Virgilius was
cast out of his Bishopricke, and excommunicated from the Church.[1]
[Sidenote 1: Annal. Eccl. A.D. 748.]
4. A fourth argument there is urged by Aquinas, if there be more worlds
than one, then they must either be of the same, or of a diverse nature,
but they are not of the same kinde,[1] for this were needlesse, and
would argue an improvidence, since one would have no more
perfection than the other; not of divers kinds, for then one of them
could not be called the world or universe, since it did not containe
universall perfection, I have cited this argument, because it is so much
stood upon by Iulius Cæsar la Galla,[2] one that has purposely writ a
Treatise against this opinion which I now deliver, but the Dilemma is
so blunt, that it cannot cut on either side, and the consequences so
weake, that I dare trust them without an answer; And (by the way) you
may see this Author in that place, where he endeavours to prove a
necessity of one world, doth leave the chiefe matter in hand, and take
much needlesse paines to dispute against Democritus, who thought that
the world was made by the casuall concourse of atoms in a great
vacuum. It should seeme, that either his cause, or his skill was weake,
or else he would have ventured upon a stronger adversary. These
arguments which I have set downe, are the chiefest which I have met
with against this subject, and yet the best of these hath not force enough
to endanger the truth that I have delivered.
[Sidenote 1: Ibid.]
[Sidenote 2: De Phænom. in orbe lunæ.]
Unto the two first it may be answered, that the negative authority of
Scripture is not prevalent in those things which are not the
fundamentalls of Religion.
But you'le reply, though it doe not necessarily conclude, yet 'tis

probable if there had beene another world, wee should have had some
notice of it in Scripture.
I answer, 'tis as probable that the Scripture should have informed us of
the Planets they being very remarkable parts of the Creation, and yet
neither Moses nor Job, nor the Psalmes (the places most frequent in
Astronomicall observations) mention any of them but the Sunne and
Moone, and moreover, you must know, that 'tis besides the scope of the
Holy Ghost either in the new Testament or in the old, to reveale any
thing unto us concerning the secrets of Philosophy; 'tis not his intent in
the new Testament, since we cannot conceive how it might any way
belong either to the Historicall exegeticall or propheticall parts of it:
nor is it his intent in the old Testament, as is well observed by our
Countrey-man Master WRIGHT.[1]
Non Mosis aut Prophetarum institutum fuisse videtur Mathematicas
aliquas aut Physicas subtilitates promulgare, sed ad vulgi captum &
loquendi morem quemadmodum nutrices infantulis solent sese
accommodare.
"'Tis not the endeavour of Moses or the Prophets to discover any
Mathematicall or Philosophicall subtilties, but rather to accõmodate
themselves to vulgar capacities, and ordinary speech, as nurses are
wont to use their infants."
True indeede, Moses is there to handle the history of the Creation, but
'tis observed that he does not any where meddle with such matters as
were very hard to be apprehended, for being to informe