A14095:156
A discovery of D. Jacksons vanity. Or A perspective glass, whereby the admirers of…A discovery of D. Iacksons vanitie. Or A perspective glasse, wherby the admirers of…
A discovery of D. Jacksons vanity. Or A perspective glass, whereby the admirers of D. Jacksons profound discourses, may see the vanity and weakness of them, in sundry passages, and especially so far as they tend to the undermining of the doctrine hitherto received. Written by William Twice, Doctor of Divinity, as they say, from whom the copy came to the pressA discovery of D. Iacksons vanitie. Or A perspective glasse, wherby the admirers of D. Iacksons profound discourses, may see the vanitie and weaknesse of them, in sundry passages, and especially so farre as they tende to the undermining of the doctrine hitherto received. Written by William Twisse, Doctor of Divinitie, as they say, from whom the copie came to the presse
Amsterdam: printed by the successors of Giles Thorp, 1631
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Yet is this a very improper speech, because comparisons ought to be of things in the same kind. But Gods greatness & the worlds greatness are far different in kind; the greatness ⟨p. 104⟩of the world, being quantitas motis, quantity of extension; & the greatness of Gods being quantitas virtutis, quantity of spiritual perfection. Yet in this sense it may pass. He is virtually greater then the space of this world, because he could & can produce a greater space then this. You say he is more infinite then capacity it self; Belike you suppose capacity to be infinite, in saying God is more infinite. But created capacity cannot be infinite; though greater, and greater it may be in infinitum, yet still finite; and this is all the infinity, that we do or can conceive by succession or addition; & so Gods power to produce greater neither doth nor can receive any bounds or limits. And as God is able to enlarge time and place, so is he able to limit it, but by your leave with distinction. It is not possible that time past should be made less, then it is. But if I mistake not you overlashe, when you say, that God by his essential presence or coexistence is able to limit time and place. For as the limitation of things proceeds from Gods will, not from his essential presence; so likewise, it is Gods power that denominates him able to limit all things according to the pleasure of his will, and not his essence, or essential presence or coexistence. It is true, that nothing could have beginning or continuance of being but by him: and it is true also, that all other things have had beginning, and still have continuance, and that from him. Though this was no Article of the Peripatetics faith, yet it is an Article of our Christian faith. And herehence, to wit, from Gods preserving all things, and working in all things, doth Aquinas infer, that God by his essence (not only by his power) is in all things, because, and that according unto Aristotle's doctrine, Movens & motum must be simul. But then again you know, or may know how this inference is impugned by Scotus and his followers. As if this were the 1property of a finite Agent, to work only on things indistant from it. But God being an infinite Agent, they conceive it to be his property, to be of power to work upon that which is distant from him;
Yet is this a very improper speache, because comparisons ought to be of thinges in the same kinde. But Gods greatnes & the worlds greatnes are farre different in kinde; the greatnes