Salusbury, Thomas
,
Mathematical collections and translations (Tome I)
,
1667
Text
Text Image
Image
XML
Thumbnail overview
Document information
None
Concordance
Figures
Thumbnails
page
|<
<
of 701
>
>|
<
archimedes
>
<
text
>
<
body
>
<
chap
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>
<
pb
xlink:href
="
040/01/460.jpg
"
pagenum
="
436
"/>
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
theſe points require many ſubtil and profound Reaſons, for the
<
lb
/>
making out whether they be really ſo, or no; the undertakeing and
<
lb
/>
diſeuſſing of which is neither conſiſtent with my leaſure, nor their
<
lb
/>
duty, vvhom I deſire to inſtruct in the neceſſary matters more di
<
lb
/>
rectly conducing to their ſalvation, and to the benefit of The Holy
<
lb
/>
Church.
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg824
"/>
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
(d) De Motu
<
lb
/>
etiam Cæli, non
<
lb
/>
nulli fratres quæ
<
lb
/>
ſtionem movent, u
<
lb
/>
trum ſtet, an mo
<
lb
/>
veatur; quia ſi mo
<
lb
/>
vetur, inquiunt,
<
lb
/>
quomodo Firma
<
lb
/>
mentum eſt? </
s
>
<
s
>Si
<
lb
/>
autem ſtat, quomo
<
lb
/>
do Sydera quæ in
<
lb
/>
ipſo fixa credun
<
lb
/>
tur, ab Oriente in
<
lb
/>
Occidentem circum
<
lb
/>
eunt, Septentrio
<
lb
/>
nalibus breviores
<
lb
/>
gyros juxta cardi
<
lb
/>
nem perag entibus;
<
lb
/>
ut Cælum, ſi est a
<
lb
/>
lius nobis occultus
<
lb
/>
cardo, ex alio ver
<
lb
/>
tice, ſicut Sphæra;
<
lb
/>
ſi autem nullus a
<
lb
/>
lius cardo eſt, vel
<
lb
/>
uti diſcus rotari
<
lb
/>
videatur? </
s
>
<
s
>Quibus
<
lb
/>
reſpondeo, Multum
<
lb
/>
ſubtilibus & labo
<
lb
/>
rioſis rationibus
<
lb
/>
iſta perquiri, ut ve
<
lb
/>
re percipiatur, u
<
lb
/>
trum ita, an non
<
lb
/>
ita ſit, quibus ine
<
lb
/>
undis atque tra
<
lb
/>
ctandis, nec mihi
<
lb
/>
jam tempus eſt, nec
<
lb
/>
illis eſſe debet, quos
<
lb
/>
ad ſalutem ſuam,
<
lb
/>
è Sanctæ Eccleſiæ
<
lb
/>
neceſſaria utilitate
<
lb
/>
cupimus informa
<
lb
/>
ri:
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>From which (that we may come nearer to our particular caſe)
<
lb
/>
it neceſſarily followeth, that the Holy Ghoſt not having intend
<
lb
/>
ed to teach us, whether Heaven moveth or ſtandeth ſtill; nor
<
lb
/>
whether its Figure be in Form of a Sphere, or of a Diſcus, or di
<
lb
/>
ſtended
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
in Planum
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
: Nor whether the Earth be contained in the
<
lb
/>
Centre of it, or on one ſide; he hath much leſs had an intention
<
lb
/>
to aſſure us of other Concluſions of the ſame kinde, and in ſuch
<
lb
/>
a manner, connected to theſe already named, that without the
<
lb
/>
dedermination of them, one can neither affirm one or the other
<
lb
/>
part; which are, The determining of the Motion and Reſt of the
<
lb
/>
ſaid Earth, and of the Sun. </
s
>
<
s
>And if the ſame Holy Spirit hath
<
lb
/>
purpoſely pretermitted to teach us thoſe Propoſitions, as nothing
<
lb
/>
concerning his intention, that is, our ſalvation; how can it be af
<
lb
/>
firmed, that the holding of one part rather than the other, ſhould
<
lb
/>
be ſo neceſſary, as that it is
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
de Fide,
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
and the other erronious?
<
lb
/>
</
s
>
<
s
>Can an Opinion be Heretical, and yet nothing concerning the
<
lb
/>
ſalvation of ſouls? </
s
>
<
s
>Or can it be ſaid that the Holy Ghoſt purpo
<
lb
/>
ſed not to teach us a thing that concerned our ſalvation? </
s
>
<
s
>I might
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg825
"/>
<
lb
/>
here inſert the Opinion of an Eccleſiaſtical ^{*} Perſon, raiſed to the
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg826
"/>
<
lb
/>
degree of
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Eminentiſſimo,
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
to wit,
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
That the intention of the Holy
<
lb
/>
Ghoſt, is to teach us how we ſhall go to Heaven, and not how Hea
<
lb
/>
ven goeth.
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg825
"/>
* Card. </
s
>
<
s
>Baronius.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg826
"/>
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Spiritu ſancti
<
lb
/>
mentem fuiſſe, nos
<
lb
/>
docere, quomodo ad
<
lb
/>
Cælum eatur: non
<
lb
/>
autem, quomodo
<
lb
/>
Cælum gradiatur.
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
<
lb
/>
Cardinal. </
s
>
<
s
>Bar.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>But let us return to conſider how much neceſſary Demonſtra
<
lb
/>
tions, and ſenſible Experiments ought to be eſteemed in Natural
<
lb
/>
Concluſions; and of what Authority Holy and Learned Divines
<
lb
/>
have accounted them, from whom amongſt an hundred other atte
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg827
"/>
<
lb
/>
ſtations, we have theſe that follow:
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
(e) We must alſo carefully
<
lb
/>
heed and altogether avoid in handling the Doctrine of
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
Moſes,
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
to
<
lb
/>
avouch or ſpeak any thing affirmatively and confidently which
<
lb
/>
contradicteth the manifeſt Experiments and Reaſons of Philoſo
<
lb
/>
phy, or other Sciences. </
s
>
<
s
>For ſince all Truth is agreeable to Truth,
<
lb
/>
the Truth of Holy Writ cannot be contrary to the ſolid Reaſons
<
lb
/>
and Experiments of Humane Learning.
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg828
"/>
</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg827
"/>
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
(e) Illud etiam
<
lb
/>
diligenter caven
<
lb
/>
dum, & emnino
<
lb
/>
fugiendum eſt, ne
<
lb
/>
in tractanda
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
Mo
<
lb
/>
ſis
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Dectrina, quic
<
lb
/>
quam affirmate &
<
lb
/>
aſſeveranter ſen
<
lb
/>
tiamus & dica
<
lb
/>
mus, quod repug
<
lb
/>
net manifeſtis ex
<
lb
/>
perimentis & rationibus Philoſophiæ, vel aliarum Diſciplinarum. </
s
>
<
s
>Namque cum Verum omne ſemper cum Vero
<
lb
/>
congruat, non poteſt Verit as Sacrarum Litterarum, Veris Rationibus & Experimentis Humanarum Doctrina
<
lb
/>
rum eſſe contraria.
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
Perk. in Gen. circa Principium.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg828
"/>
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
(f) Si manife
<
lb
/>
ſtæ certæque Rati
<
lb
/>
oni, velut ſancta
<
lb
/>
rum Litterarum
<
lb
/>
objicitur autori
<
lb
/>
ritas, non intelli
<
lb
/>
git, qui hoc facit;
<
lb
/>
& non Scripturæ
<
lb
/>
ſenſum (ad quem
<
lb
/>
penetrare non po
<
lb
/>
tuit) ſed ſuum po
<
lb
/>
tius objicit verita
<
lb
/>
ti: nec id quod in
<
lb
/>
sa, ſed quod in ſe
<
lb
/>
ipſo velue pro ea
<
lb
/>
invenit, opponit.
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>And in St.
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Auguſtine
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
we read:
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
(f) If any one ſhall object
<
lb
/>
the Authority of Sacred Writ, againſt clear and manifeſt Reaſon,
<
lb
/>
he that doth ſo, knows not what he undertakes: For he objects
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
</
s
>
</
p
>
</
chap
>
</
body
>
</
text
>
</
archimedes
>