The Court of the Gentiles Part 3, Book 1 · Chapter 2
CHAP. II. The Vanitie of Philoſophie from its Mater, Parts, &c.
(1.) The Vanitie of the foreign, or contentioſe Logic, &c. Rom. 1.21. foreign, Phil. 2.14. 1 Tim. 1.6. Ariſtotle's Logic, how it became ſo Eriſtic by the Arabians and Scholemen. A general conſent of the learned againſt Eriſtic Logic, 1 Cor. 14.20. (2.) The vanitie of Phyſiologie, 1 Cor. 1.20, foreign, what. Rom. 1.20. 1 Cor. 2.6. Phyſiologie the cauſe of idolatrie, Rom. 21.23, &c. (3.) The vanitie of the Mathematics, its influence on Idolatrie and Atheiſme. (4.) The vanitie of Ethics, Eph. 5.6. 1 Cor. 1.20. foreign. The Defects of Ethics, [1.] as to its mater. [2.] As to its ends amongſt the Romans and Stoics. [3.] As to its Rule, which was foreign. [4.] As to its principe, which was foreign, Freewil, or foreign, Good-nature, or ſeeds of Virtue. Socrates oppoſed that Stoic Principe, foreign, &c. This Philoſophic Free-wil the root of Pelagianiſme: No moral virtue but what is ſupernatural, againſt the Scholemen. The defects of Philoſophic Ethics, as to ſupernatural principes, Faith, Love, &c. [5.] The Vanitie of their Politics, 1 Cor. 1.20, both comparatively and abſolutely, as the root of Atheiſme and Idolatrie, &c.
§. 1. WE have hitherto only conſidered the vanitie of Philoſophie in its Cauſes and Roots; The vanitie and corruption of foreign, or Logic.we ſhal now procede to demonſtrate the ſaid vanitie of Philoſophie from its own eſſential Idea or Nature, Parts, and Proprieties. The eſſential Idea, Nature, and parts of Philoſophie (as of other things) conſiſt in its Mater and Forme; both of which have great mixture of vanitie in them. As for the mater of Philoſophie, it contains Naturals, Morals, and Supernaturals. Natural Philoſophie comprehends Logic, Phyſics, and Mathematics. Concerning Logic, we have no ful mention of the Pythagoreans being much verſed herein; yet are we not without ſome concluding, though indirect Arguments of their skil herein. For Porphyrie tels us, That Pythagoras had, beſides his foreign, alſo foreign, a plain and familiar way of Philoſophiſing. And we have already ſhewn, how that Parmenides and Zeno the Eleatics (who belonged to the Italic Sect) did much Pythagoriſe, as in other points, ſo likewiſe, as we may preſume, in this of Logic, of which they are thought to be the firſt Inventors, at leaſt great promotors; as it appears by their foreign, that contentioſe mode of Diſputing, for which Zeno hath been ſo famoſe ever ſince. As for the vanitie of this ancient Dialectic or Logic mode of Philoſophiſing, it hath been already in part demonſtrated in the foregoing Chapter, §. 6. But in as much as I find the Spirit of God ſo much in invectives againſt this piece of vain Philoſophie, (foreſeeing that it would prove, as abuſed by Scholaſtic Divines, a main engine to pul down the Kingdome of Chriſt, and ſettle Antichriſt upon his Throne;) I ſhal follow the ſacred method herein, by endeavors to give farther demonſtration of the vanitie of this foreign, contentioſe Logic, thereby, if it may be, to open in any degree a dore to ſome more uſeful kind of Logic in the Scholes of Chriſt. And leſt I ſhould be thought ſingular herein, I ſhal follow the ſteps of Lud. Vives, Grotius, Janſenius, yea of the Philoſophers themſelves, in opening the vanitie of this contentioſe Logic. We find the Apoſtle accuſing the Sophiſts, (and I conceive particularly the Pythagoreans) of a vanitie in their reaſonings, Rom. 1.21. foreign, They became vain in their diſputes. Rom. 1, 21.For the way of Diſputation in the Old Academie was by Dialogues; which mode, I preſume, they traduced from the Jewiſh Scholes. And thus Grotius underſtands theſe reaſonings here: As the Academics diſputed for and againſt every thing. Thus is truth loſt by altercation, Jer. 11.5, by great Eſſays to act the greateſt trifles; ſuch as are not only unprofitable, but damnable to themſelves and others, Eſa. 41.29. We find the ſame word uſed, Phil. 2.14. Diſputings. Phil. 2.14.foreign, ſaith Grotius, here ſeems to be bitter railings about maters no way belonging to godlineſſe, of which there were many amongſt the Philoſophers, ſpecially the Ariſtotelics, whereof there were many in Macedon, where Philippi ſtood. So 1 Tim. 1.6, Paul mentions ſome who had turned aſide,1 Tim. 1.6. foreign, i. e. to unprofitable diſſertation or diſputation. They who uſe ſuch are called foreign, Tit. 1.10. This, 1 Tim. 6.4, he termes foreign, as ver. 20, foreign, which he oppoſeth to ſound Doctrine, 1 Tim. 1.6. We find al this fully laid open and confirmed, 2 Tim. 2.14, &c. foreign. i. e. be thine Auditors dayly remembrancer of this. The Hebrew expreſſe it by foreign. Paul chargeth him to inculcate this continually on his hearers; yea to charge them as before the Lord, foreign, That they ſtrive not about words to no profit. That this foreign is the ſame with the Philoſophers foreign,1 Tim. 6.4, 20. Contentioſe Logic, we have proved from 1 Tim. 6.4, 20, Chap. 1. §. 6. He is the more warme in his exhortation againſt this foreign, becauſe it was not only unprofitable, but deſtructive to their Chriſtian Faith and Communion. So it follows, foreign, to the ſubverſion of the hearers. For, ſaies Grotius, the hearers by ſuch ſtrifes are divided into parties: they loſe mutual love. It anſwers to foreign, Everſion, is in the Gloſſarie, Subverſion, Deſtruction. This Paul gives as a good Antidote againſt the contagioſe infuſions of the Pythagoriſing Gnoſtics, who by their foreign, and ſtrife about words inſinuated much of their poiſonous Doctrine, as the Scholemen after them their Antichriſtian Dogmes. Our Apoſtle inculcates this caution, ver. 16, calling theſe ſtrifes, foreign, which he ſaies, ver. 17, eat like a gangrene; and ver. 23, fooliſh and unlearned queſtions which gender to ſtrife, &c. of which hereafter. This foreign, Eriſtic Logic, began, as we have once and agen hinted, in the Italic and Eleatic Scholes, and was improved by thoſe of the Megaric Sect, Euclid, &c. It was alſo of ſome uſe in the Old Academie, The origine of this Eriſtic Legic.paſſing under the notion of foreign and of great uſe amongſt the New Academies and Sceptics. But none gave ſo great an advance and perfection to this Dialectic litigioſe mode of Philoſopiſing, as Ariſtotle; who having naturally a mighty Logical Acumen, and the ſame much improved by ſtudy and artificial diſputes, made it his buſineſſe to carp at al ſuch opinions of his predeceſſors, as were not parallel with his artificial Scheme or Method of Philophiſing. He ſpared not his own Maſter Plato, nor any other whoſe Dogmes were not commenſurate with his Phaenomena. And foreſeeing that poſteritie might with the ſame cenſorious Rod ſtrike at him, with which he had ſtruck at his foregoers; to prevent the ſame, he reduced his Philoſophie to the moſt acurate Method, his Logical head could invent; and withal frames a Logic anſwerable thereto; which he intended not only as a Key or Organ to open the way to his Philoſophie, but alſo as a Shield or Buckler to preſerve the ſame from ſuch blows or objections which poſteritie might offer againſt it. And indeed (as Learned Owen hath obſerved in his Praefat. Theolog.) Ariſtotle, in the whole of his Philoſophie, ſeems to deſign and ſtudie more how to defend himſelf from the objections of others, than to evince truth; which rendred his followers more skilful in hatching intricate controverſies, ſubtile nice diſtinctions, and wrangling Sophiſtrie, than true ſolid Philoſophie. But yet to give Ariſtotle his due, I think it may be made evident, that he was not the main Author of this Sophiſtic kind of Diſputation, which now reigns in our Scholes, but rather the Arabians, Ariſtotle's Logic ſophiſticated by the Arabians and Scholemen.Averroes, Avincenna, his Commentators; who, being wholly unacquainted with the Greek Tongue, were fain to depend upon the verſions of Ariſtotle, which being very imperfect, left them under great darkneſſe and ignorance touching Ariſtotle's mind and ſenſe; whence there ſprang a world of unintelligible Termes and Diſtinctions, with as many Sophiſtic Diſputes and Controverſies. Theſe the Scholemen (more barbarous than the Arabians) greedily licked up (as the Minor Poets Homers vomit) and incorporated with their Theologie; which filled the Univerſities of France, (where this Schole Divinitie was firſt broached) and England (which had continual recourſe to Paris for Learning) with nothing but vain foreign, or ſtrifes about words, inſtead of ſolid Philoſophie and Divinitie; far worſe than what was to be found in the Pagan Scholes: Which vain itch of Diſputation hath proved the Scab of the Church, as Eraſmus, Ludovicus Vives, Sir Thomas More, the Lord Bacon, Sir Henry Wotton, Janſenius and Owen, with other Learned men have wel obſerved. Yea,A general conſent againſt Eriſtic Logic. the vanities of this Dialectic Sophiſtrie was obſerved and decried by many of the old Philoſophers. Both the Sect of the Cynics and Stoics (as Diogenes Laertius obſerves) took away Dialectic Philoſophie as vain, holding that our end is, foreign, to live virtuoſely; which this wrangling Logic no way conduceth to. Ariſto Chius the Stoic (ſaith Diogenes) compared Dialectic Diſſertations to a Spiders Web, which is artificially made but yields no profit. And Plato, Repub. 7. gives us his judgement againſt this foreign, &c. It ſeems to me that there ſhould be no controverſie about words amongſt ſuch as have ſo great maters to diſcourſe of. Wiclef was much offended at this kind of Sophiſtic litigation in maters of Faith: So was Calvin, who affirmes, That whoever does pertinaciouſly ſtrive about words, ſoments ſome ſecret Poiſon. But in this age none hath more amply, fully, and learnedly opened the vanitie of this Sophiſtic, Eriſtic mode of Diſputation, ſo much Idoliſed by the Scholemen, than Janſenius, in his Auguſt. Tom. 2. Lib. Proaem. Cap. 28, and elſewhere; with Owen, in his Praefat. to his Theolog. alſo, Lib. 6. Cap. 7. Pag. 512 unto 520. I have inſiſted the longer on the vanitie and corruption of Sophiſtic Logic, becauſe it hath been, and ſtil is greatly abuſed and noxious in ſome of our reformed Univerſities, to the corrupting the minds of many wel-diſpoſed young Students. I muſt confeſſe my ſelf to have been too far in love with and entangled in this Snare; which had not the Lord by his ſovereign hand of free-grace broken and delivered me from, might have proved the ruine, not only of my Studies, but Soul. Thou'lt therefore, Reader, pardon this invective againſt the corruption of vain Logic; which deſignes not the utter Rejection, but Reformation of Logic in Reformed Scholes. We ſhal conclude this Digreſſion with the Apoſtles Exhortation, 1 Cor. 14.20, Brethren, be not children in underſtanding. 1 Cor. 14.20.'Tis, ſaies Grotius, the propertie of Children to make an oſtentation in things unprofitable. But in underſtanding be men, foreign, i. e. like perſons adult, Eph. 4.13, who are aſhamed to play as Children with baubles and Rattles.
§. 2. The vanitie of Pagan Philoſophie diſcovered it ſelf much in their Phyſics, The Vanitie of their Phyſics.which are at beſt darke and cloudy, but for the moſt part fabuloſe, grounded only upon ſome broken Traditions, traduced from Moſes's deſcription of the Creation, Gen. 1, and Job's Diſcourſes of Meteors, &c. with Solomon's Natural Philoſophie of Plants, Animals, &c. which being but imperfectly traduced unto, and more imperfectly underſtood by theſe blind Philoſophers, they turned al theſe Jewiſh Traditions of the origine of the Univerſe, of the firſt principes of Bodies, of Plants, of Animals, &c. into mere Fables, or unintelligible Speculations and Controverſies. This vanitie of their Phyſics our Apoſtle ſeems to ſtrike at (incluſively if not excluſively) 1 Cor. 1.20,1 Cor. 1, 20. Where is the diſputer of this world? foreign: This (ſaies Grotius) ſtrikes at the Inquiſitor or ſearcher into the natures of things, which the Hebrews cal foreign of this world, i. e. the Phyſiologiſt. This ſtudie they are wont to cal foreign, which properly anſwers unto foreign, Diſputation: So Baruch, 3.23, &c. foreign, are Phyſiologiſts. The Apoſtle Paul chooſeth to cal him foreign, a Diſputer, rather than foreign an Inquiſitor, (as Baruch) becauſe their Phyſic queſtions were wont to be ventilated or agitated by many Diſputations, which is foreign. Hence the Syriac Verſion renders it, foreign, Inveſtigator; and the Arabic by a word that ſignifies Scrutator: Becauſe ſuch Phyſiologiſts ſpent their whole time in acute Reſearches and Inquiſitions into the Bowels of nature, which afforded infinite vain Diſputes. And indeed their Phyſics did abound with almoſt as much foreign, or Verbal, Captioſe, Sophiſtic Queſtions and Controverſies, as their foreign, or Logic: which made the Cynics, as alſo the Stoics (who ſymboliſed much in this as in other points) to reject Phyſics or Natural Philoſophie as wel as Logic. Socrates alſo ſeems to be much of the ſame perſuaſion, who perceiving how much his Predeceſſors, Thales, &c. (who were generally Phyſiologiſts) had abuſed Phyſics, addictes himſelf chiefly to Moral Philoſophie. The like is reported of Padre Paul, that great Venetian, who finding the vanitie of contemplative Philoſophie, converted his ſtudies to Active, or Moralitie. But it follows in the ſame verſe 20, Hath not God made fooliſh the wiſdome of this world? foreign, from foreign a Fool or Madman, 1 Cor. 1.20.anſwering to the Hebrew foreign, ſignifies here to convince of folie, or make to appear as ſuch, according to the import of Verbes in Hiphil amongſt the Hebrews; as if he had ſaid: hath not God made al thoſe pompoſe contemplations of theſe proud Philoſophiſts (who have pried into the Bowels of Nature for hidden Philoſophie) to appear to be fooliſh and vain? in that they have not as yet, by al their Natural Philoſophie, attained to any true notion and diſcoverie of the firſt Principe or God of nature, which is the chief end of al natural as wel as other Philoſophie? So it follows verſ. 21: For after that in the wiſdome of God the World by wiſdome knew not God. foreign, The wiſdome of God (ſaies Grotius) he here cals, That knowlege of God, which reſults from the contemplation of Natures Bowels. This anſwers to that Rom. 1.20,Rom. 1.20. The viſible works of God have impreſſed upon their natures certain viſible ſtamps or legible Characters of the inviſible glories of God, which theſe purblind Phyſiologiſts could not, by al their natural Inquiſitions, come to any ſerious reverential acknowlegement of. So much is implied in foreign, as it is uſed in the ſame ſenſe, Joh. 1.10, and anſwereth to foreign, Rom. 1.21. Al their anatomiſings of Natures bowels could not give them any true Idea or notion of the firſt Principe or God of Nature. Which gives us an evident demonſtration, that al their Natural Wiſdome was but folie, becauſe it reached not its firſt Principe and laſt end. Therefore it follows, It pleaſed God by the fooliſhneſſe of preaching to ſave them that believe. 1 Cor. 1.20.i. e. Our Goſpel, which ſeems folie to theſe Sophiſts, or Naturaliſts, has availed more to the knowlege of God, than al their Phyſiologic Contemplations. The ſame v. 27. But God hath choſen the fooliſh things of the world to confound the wiſe: i.e. Our Goſpel, which ſeems fooliſh in the worlds eye, in regard of the diſcoveries it makes of God, leaves a bluſh and confuſion on al the vain Contemplations and Philoſophie of theſe proud Naturaliſts. We find the like encomium of Goſpel-light and depreſſion of Natural Philoſophie,1 Cor. 2.6. 1 Cor. 2.6, Howbeit we ſpeak wiſdome among them that are perfect: Yet not the wiſdome of this world. foreign, i. e. (faies Grotius) not that Phyſic or Natural Philoſophie, of which above Chap. 1.20, &c. This great vanitie and folie, which attended the Natural Contemplations or Philoſophie of theſe Pagan Phyſiologiſts, proceded not from any defect in the objective wiſdome, or light of Nature, but from the ſubject; the darkneſſe, pride,Rom. 1.21. luſts, and vanitie of their hearts, as Rom. 1.20, 21. The viſible works of God have as wel ſince, as before the Fal, ſenſible images, or viſible glorioſe Ideas of the inviſible glories of God, his Wiſdome, Power, and Goodneſſe ſtamped on their Beings and Operations; but the moſt acute Philoſophers (like Seneca's fool, who went up and down his houſe complaining the rooms were dark, when as the darkneſſe lay in her eyes), could but go up and down groping after God, by their Phyſic contemplations, as Act. 17.27.Natural Philoſophie the cauſe of Idolatrie. Yea, the moſt ſharp-ſighted of theſe Heathen Philoſophers, though by the Divine aſſiſtance of ſome influential raies of commun illumination, they eſpied ſome veſtigia or obſcure impreſſes of Gods glorioſe Wiſdome, Power and Goodneſſe ſhining in created emanations on his Works; yet were they ſo far from glorifying God as God, and giving thankful acknowlegement of that commun light they had received,Rom. 1.21, 23. (according to Rom. 1.21.) as that they changed the glorie of this incorruptible God into an Image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, &c. Rom. 1.21, 23. i. e. they idoliſed thoſe Divine Virtues, Powers and Excelences, which they found in the Creatures. Not that the Philoſophers or wiſer Heathens made the Creatures the ultimate object of their worſhip; no, that groſſe Idolatrie was peculiar to the Mythologic Poetic Theologie: But the great Idolatrie of theſe fooliſh ſophiſts was, that where they eſpied any eminent Divine Qualitie or Power ſhining in the creature, they idoliſed that creature ſo far, as to make it a Mediator or medium of their worſhip performed to the great God. This they caled foreign, Natural Theologie, we rather, Idolatrie, which was the fruit of their Natural Philoſophie; of which more hereafter.
§. 3. What hath been diſcovered of the vanitie,The vanitie of the Mathematics. yea Idolatrie of the Phyſiologiſts, is applicable to the Mathematicians, both Pythagorean, as wel as other. Indeed the Mathematics ſeem to be the ſoundeſt, the moſt pleaſant, and moſt uſeful piece of their Natural Philoſophie; yet it hath not been exemt from much corruption and vanitie. For 1. It had the ſame curſed effect on their corrupt fooliſh minds, as that Natural Phyſiologie before mentioned: namely thoſe blind Mathematicians, by continual Aſtronomic contemplations of thoſe glorioſe Celeſtial bodies, fel firſt into deep admiration of them,Aſtronomie the cauſe of Idolatrie. their excellent compoſure and perfection, their excellent virtues and powerful influences on al ſublunaries, their admirable order and harmonious regular motions. Theſe and ſuch-like eminent qualities, which ſhone ſo brightly, could not (and that juſtly) but fil them with Admiration. And this Admiration, which ſhould have led them to admire infinitely more the Creator and Conſerver of theſe glorioſe creatures, was ſo far from having ſuch an influence, as that it drew their Idol-framing hearts to ſet down and terminate their Adoration on theſe creatures, the Sun, Moon and Stars, &c. And this Idoliſing theſe Celeſtial creatures as Gods opened alſo a dore to their Judicial Aſtrologie, or the black Deviliſh Art of Divination by the Stars, wherein the Pythagoreans pretended to have a more than ordinary skil; which Pythagoras brought with him from the Chaldeans, who were the firſt that fel into this piece of Idolatrie or Star-worſhip, and that from their Aſtronomic obſervations and admirations of theſe Celeſtial Bodies; as we have afore ſhewn in the origine of the Chaldean Philoſophie, from Job. 31.26, 27. P. 2. B. 1. C. 4. §. 3, 4. Of which more hereafter.
2. Another great Corruption which attended their ſtudie of the Mathematics, 2. Of Atheiſme.was, that it determined in Atheiſme, and that two manner of ways; (1) Indirectly and Conſequentially, in that it brought them firſt into Polytheiſme, or belief of many Gods; which had this fate attending it, that at laſt it led them to Atheiſme, to believe there was no God: for Polytheiſme naturally degenerates into Atheiſme. (2) But the ſtudie of the Mathematics has this more direct influence on blind proud hearts to lead them into Atheiſme, in that Mathematicians being wholly verſed in Demonſtrations, and thoſe for the moſt part ocular and moſt evident, they cannot bring their proud minds to ſtoop or aſſent to any thing, no not to Divine Revelation, without a Demonſtration. This made Ariſtotle, who had a Mathematic head, to reject al the Oriental Traditions which his Anceſtors Thales, Pythagoras, and Plato had gathered up, touching the origine of things and Divine maters; and rather to believe an Eternitie of mater, becauſe thoſe Jewiſh Traditions were not backed with Demonſtrative Arguments. This alſo made the Epicureans and Stoics reject Paul's new Doctrine, (albeit they ſeem at firſt a little tickled with the novilty of it) becauſe his Teſtimonie was not backed with Demonſtrative Arguments; though indeed Paul gave them ſufficient Demonſtrations, had they had eyes to ſee them, Act. 17.18, to 30. This Mathematic humor was that which made the Grocians generally offended at the Goſpel, accounting it but fooliſhneſſe, becauſe it was not proved by Demonſtrative Reaſons and Arguments, as Paul frequently obſerves, ſpecially 1 Cor. 1.20, 21. & 2.6. of which before. And indeed this has been the ſad fate of ſome great Mathematicians of this, and of former ages, who being wholly taken up in Demonſtrations, expect the ſame in Divine maters; and not finding that footing their Atheiſtic hearts expect for their Mathematic phantaſies to build upon, in order to a Demonſtration of the Scriptures authoritie, &c. they reject al Divine Revelations, yea al true and found notions of a Deitie and of the Creation, with inclinations rather to believe the Worlds Eternitie, or ſuch like monſtroſe Phanomena. I wiſh there were not too many ſuch Mathematic Atheiſts breathing in Chriſtian air. But of this more hereafter.
§. 4. We procede to ſhew the vanitie and corruption of Moral Philoſophie,The Vanitie of Moral Philoſophie. as wel amongſt the Pythagorean as other Philoſophers. Moral Philoſophie (as has been mentioned) regards either ſingle perſons, and ſo it's ſtiled Ethics; or Corporations and Societies, and ſo it paſſeth under the name of Politics. Both of theſe had great corruptions attending them, both in the Italic and Jonic Scholes. As for Ethics, it's true, the Pythagoreans with the other Philoſophers had their foreign, Ethic ſentences, or Symbolic characters, anſwering to, and, as I preſume, traduced from the foreign Proverbial ſayings amongſt the Jews: yet we are to remember, that theſe their Ethic precepts were at beſt very imperfect, and not without a great mixture of vanitie and corruption. As for the Pythagorean Ethics they were very mythologic and enigmatic, wrapped up under ſuch dark ſymbols and figures, as that it was difficult to come to a true underſtanding of them. The firſt that reduced Moral Philoſophie to a naked familiar dreſſe was Socrates, who yet was excedeing defective both in his precepts and practice of Moralitie; for Inceſt, Fornication and Sodomie, were things not only allowed, but the later of them practiſed by him, if he be not belied, on his Minion Alcibiades: and Plato brings in Socrates expreſſing great affection to Alcibiades, telling him that he loved him for himſelf, &c. which argued an extreme affection towards him. Grotius informs us, that this ſin of Sodomie was generally allowed by the Philoſophers. So on Epheſ. 5.6,Epheſ. 5.6. Let no man deceive you with vain words. foreign, i. e. with vain Reaſonings or Philoſophie. He notes here (ſaies Grotius) the Philoſophers, who taught there was no ſin in Inceſt, and foreign, Sodomie; and who commended foreign, communitie of Wifes, (which Plato did) and who thought that it was lawful for buyers and ſellers to circumvent each other. Whence the Apoſtle exhorts them, Ver. 15, To walk circumſpectly, not as fools but as wiſe; Ver. 15.foreign. He does (ſaies Grotius) by a witty Paronomaſia or alluſion cal the Philoſophers (thoſe proud Sophiſts) foreign, unwiſe, in as much as their Moralitie was but vain and fooliſh if compared with the Goſpel; wherefore he exhorts them, Ver. 14. Awake thou that ſleepeſt, and ariſe from the dead, Ver. 14.and Chriſt ſhal give thee light. Al their Moral Philoſophie was but a dreaming, dead, ſhadowy light; 'twas Chriſt only that gave them the true foreign, or light. So 1 Cor. 1.20. foreign,1 Cor. 1.20. &c. Where is the wiſe? foreign, ſaith Grotius, amongſt the Greeks, as foreign amongſt the Hebrews, were, by way of excellence, ſuch as delivered Moral precepts, as thoſe ſeven Wiſe-men ſo famoſe in Grece, and after them Socrates with others. The meaning is, ſhew me the Philoſophers and Philologiſts, who have reduced ſo many perſons to ſuch Probitie and Moralitie, as we have done by the preaching of the Croſſe. Their Diſciples are but few in compariſon of ours; and they continue Fornicators, if not ſome ſomewhat worſe: They continue foreign, emty veſſels ſilled with nothing but vain opinion and oſtentation, as Timon ſaid; they remain proud, litigious curſers, &c. So Grotius on 1 Cor. 2.14. The Greek Philoſophers were Fornicators, corruptors of youth, hunters of Vain-glorie, curſers, envious, &c. Thence ſaith, Minutius Faelix, We contemne the proud looks of the Philoſophers, whom we have known to be corruptors of youth (or Sodomiſts) and Adulterers, and Tyrants, and alwaies eloquent againſt their own vices. And indeed it was juſt with God to leave the wiſeſt and beſt of their Moraliſts to fal into ſins againſt nature, who abuſed their natural light unto ſo much pride, preſumtion and vain oſtentation. Yea take Moral Philoſophic in its higheſt elevation and refinement, as ſeated amongſt the Stoics, and we ſhal find it a very poor imperfect vain ſhadow, if compared with thoſe precepts of Moralitie contained in the Word of God.The defect of Ethics as to its mater. For firſt if we conſider the mater of al their Philoſophic Moralitie, it was verie narrow and far ſhort of thoſe Moral duties taught us in the Word of God. (1) The Philoſopher's foreign, right Reaſon, which they made the meaſure and rule of their Moralitie, being but crooked and depraved, allowed them many ſins, as Inceſt, Fornication, Sodomie before mentioned, which Gods Law forbids. So Grotius on 1 Cor. 5.2, tels us, that both the Cynics and Stoics judged Inceſt amongſt their foreign, things indifferent. (2) Neither did it give any conviction or prohibition of the firſt motions or ebullitions of Original Sin. (3) Neither did their Right Reaſon back its precepts with ſuch forcible promiſes, motives and threats, from future happineſſe or puniſhment, as the Word of God doth.
2.Pagan Ethics vain as to its end. Neither were the Ethics of the Stoics and other Moraliſts defective, and ſo vain in the mater and duties only, but alſo in the principes, forme, and manner of Moralitie: For (1) The ſoul and ſpirit of al Moralitie is placed, and that by the Philoſophers themſelves, in the End. For, ſay they, ſuch as the forme is in Naturals, ſuch is the end in Morals and Spirituals; ſuch as the Principe is in Demonſtration, ſuch is the end in Action: Or, the end has the ſame place in Actives, as the Principe has in Speculatives. The perſection of every thing is meaſured by its end, which is the terme of al actions, as the forme is of productions. Now it is moſt certain, that the chief, yea the only ſupreme End of al Moralitie (as wel as of Divinitie) can be no other than the glorifying and enjoying of God; as Auguſtin long ſince, and Janſenius out of him hath demonſtrated, Tom. 2. l. 3. c. 17. pag. 208. And how far theſe proud Moraliſts were from this End is apparent to al that are verſed in their Ethics. the Romans end vain-glory.For (1) what was the main End which the ancient Romans (amongſt whom the Pythagoreans flouriſhed) propoſed as the ſcope of their Moralitie? ſurely nothing but Honor, Renown, or Vain-glorie; ariſing from the ſplendor, luſtre, or ſhine of their glittering heroic and ſeemingly virtuoſe actions, which rendred al their good works but ſplendid ſins, as Auguſtin. (2) The Stoics and Peripatetics ſeem a little more noble and refined in their ends,The Stoics end to live virtuoſe. propoſing it as their main deſign, foreign, to live according to virtue; or, to deſire virtue for virtues ſake. But what was the virtue they aſpired unto? it was a virtue ſpun out of the bowels of their own free-wil: ſo that they ſtil make Self the objective mater of their felicitie: they deify and idolife Self, their own home-ſpun Virtues. Whence Auguſtin pronounceth univerſally of theſe Stoics, That they lived according to the fleſh no leſſe than the ſenſual Epicureans; for (ſaith he) to live according to the fleſh is to live according to a mans Self, his own Virtues, &c. as Janſ. Aug. Tom. 2. l. 4. cap. 14.
2. Hence follows another great ſpring of vanitie and corruption in al their Philoſophic Moralitie; in that,The Moraliſts make ſelf the firſt efficient of al good. as they made Self the great ſtandard, meaſure, and laſt end, ſo alſo the firſt influential and effective principe of al their good works. They acted al not only for, but alſo from Self their great God, or Idol, as Nebuchadnezar, Dan. 4.30, BY the might of my power, and FOR the honour of my Majeſtie. He makes himſelf his firſt principe and laſt end, which is the higheſt Idolatrie. So theſe proud Moraliſts they al made ſelf as the laſt end, ſo the firſt ſpring of Moralitie. For (1) They al ſuppoſed thoſe foreign,1. Their foreign is their rule. commun principes, which ſome called foreign, preſumtions, or preſuppoſitions of natural light remaining in their corrupt underſtandings, to be if managed aright a ſufficient Rule or Law to guide them in their Morals. Whence theſe dark glimmerings of corrupt nature were generally ſtiled by the Platoniſts, as alſo by the Stoics, foreign, right reaſon. Though indeed Plato now and then ſeems a little modeſt in acknowlegeing his ignorance, yet generally they ſuppoſed an foreign, a right reaſon, which if wel improved might bring them to the foreign, or top of their Moralitie. This right reaſon was in a more particular manner the Stoics (who paſſe for the greateſt Moraliſts) Diana or Goddeſſe, as we find it excellently obſerved by Janſenius, in his Auguſt. Tom. 2. lib. 4. cap. 12. pag. 205. The Stoics (ſaies he) and al other, who thought the offices of Virtue were to be deſired for their own honeſtie and pulchritude, made human reaſon, to which they thought this was moſt conſentaneous, Judge; and they would that ſhe as Miſtreſſe and Queen ſhould governe al; to whom, as holding the chief ſupremacie over the other parts of the Soul, al ſhould be obedient. For hence it is they ſo often crack, that the duties of Virtue are therefore honeſt and deſirable, becauſe they are conſentaneous to right reaſon: But in this mode of deſiring Virtue there lies hid the greateſt Pride; for that which terminates their appetite is their very Reaſon, as ſhe is the Queen and Empereſſe, and utmoſt rule of a good life. Whence it comes to paſſe, that whoſoever deſireth Virtue in this manner adores his own Reaſon as the Princeſſe which he ſerves, which without al peradventure is the worſhipping, and honoring, and taking complacence in himſelf. Here we may ſee whence the Scholemen borrowed their Recta ratio, right reaſon, which they make with the Philoſophers to be the Regula eſſe moralis, the rule of Moral Beings and Actions. So Suarez in his 1a 2ae, or Ethics, touching eſſe Morale, its rule, &c. Yea indeed the Scholemen herein came much ſhort of many of the more modeſt Philoſophers, namely Socrates and Plato, who make frequent acknowlegements of the imperfection of their Natural light, and therefore by their foreign ſeem to underſtand the objective Divine light, or Law of God,The Heathen Moraliſts aſſert a freewil, or ſeeds of virtue. of which I dout not but they had received ſome notices from Jewiſh Traditions, as we have proved, Court Gentiles, P. 2. B. 2. c. 10. §. 2. (2.) The Heathen Moraliſts, both Romans, Pythagoreans, Platoniſts, Peripatetics, and Stoics, ſuppoſed there was in men a Good-nature, diſpoſition, ſeeds of Virtue, or Moral Free-wil, which if wel improved would raiſe men to the higheſt elevation of Virtue. This the Romans, (where the Pythagorean Philoſophic flouriſhed) called the Elements, or root of Virtue. Some Platoniſts cal it foreign, a Good-nature; The Ariſtotelics foreign, Free-wil; The Stoics, the ſeeds of virtue. And none abounded more in this Idoliſing of their own Free-wil than the Stoics, whoſe foreign, firſt truth, or according to the Chriſtians Philoſophic, foreign, firſt lye, was, That it was in the power of a mans own Free-wil to make himſelf virtuoſe or wicked, happy or miſerable; yea a God if he pleaſed. So Diogenes Laertius in the life of Zeno tels us, the Stoics held foreign, &c. That virtue was teachable, becauſe good men are made of bad. Agen (ſaies he) becauſe reaſon is given to reaſonable creatures, foreign, To live rightly according to reaſon happens to men naturally. He alſo tels us, that the Cynics held the ſame principe, foreign, that virtue was teachable. Plutarch has a Book thus titled, foreign, that virtue is a thing teachable. Yet we muſt confeſſe that ſome of the more modeſt Moraliſts made it a mater of queſtion, Whether virtue were teachable? Plato, or rather Socrates, in Plato's words, utterly denies it: ſo Meno pag. 89, he brings in Socrates thus ſpeaking,Socrates againſt Free-wil. foreign, I have often ſought if there were any Preceptors of virtue; and doing al I can, I can find none. Whence he concludes, foreign, Virtue comes not from nature, neither is it teachable, but foreign, by a Divine fate it is produced, without the active concurrence of the mind in thoſe where it is. Thus Socrates in Plato's Meno, foreign pag. 99. whereby it ſeems he had ſome apprehenſion of the inſufficience of corrupt nature, or Free-wil, to afford any ſpark of true Virtue, and that it muſt come from ſome Divine fate. Though what this Divine Fate was, and how Virtue was communicated by him, he was altogether at a loſſe. Timaeus Locrus the Pythagorean, from whom Plato borrowed the main Ideas of his Phyſics, aſſerted ſeeds of Virtue in corrupt nature. Thus pag. 103, foreign, The Principes of theſe Virtues are from nature, but the middle and end from diligence, with the benefit of Philoſophic inſtitution, which nouriſh and corroborate virtue, as exercices do the bodie, &c. This Philoſophic Dogme of a Moral foreign, good nature, free-wil, or ſeminal virtue implanted in corrupt nature is excellently opened to us by Janſenius, Auguſt. Tom. 2. lib. 4. cap. 12. pag. 256. This Dogme, ſaies he, which aſſerteth ſeeds of Virtue to be implanted in men naturally, we admoniſh that it ſprang from the Gentile Philoſophie. For the Philoſophers, when they obſerved that there flouriſhed in every mans nature a certain judgement concerning the honeſtie of many Acts, and a remorſe of Conſcience following their pravities, &c. they attributed to the human mind ſeeds of al virtues; which would by good culture and exercitation bud forth and grow up unto ripe Virtue! Hear Tullie attributing the Elements of the more refined Peripatetic and Stoic Virtue to nature it ſelf, Tul. lib. 5. de finibus: Nature brought in the Elements of virtue — but it only began virtue and nothing more. It's true, (as Janſenius before wel obſerves) if we conſider Virtue only in regard of its office, dutie, or mater, it may not be inconvenient to allow ſome more noble ſpirits, ſome kind of ſeminal inclinations or radical diſpoſitions to many heroic actions materially good, with which many Noble Romans and Grecians were endowed. But alas! ſuch ſeminal material diſpoſitions to actions materially good, are but the corps or bodie of Moralitie, or Virtue; it is the Principes ſpecially the End, that is the ſoul, which ſpirits and informes every good act, and renders it truly virtuoſe: in which regard to ſuppoſe with the Philoſophers any ſeeds of virtue in corrupt nature, is to ſuppoſe a contradiction, or an oppoſite in an appoſite, i.e. pure nature in corrupt. From this Philoſophic Dogme of the ſeeds of virtue in human nature, the Pelagians and ſemi-Pelagians, Caſſianus, This Doctrine of the ſeeds of virtue or free-wil the root of Pelagianiſme.&c. drew their Doctrine of Free-wil, which Auguſtin does ſo greatly inveigh againſt. This opinion has been ſince eſpouſed by the Scholemen, who finding themſelves oppoſed herein by al Chriſtian Catholics, they invented this new ſtratageme or blind to ſalve their Phaenomena, namely by diſtinguiſhing Virtues into Natural or Moral and Supernatural or Divine. Whereas indeed there can be no Virtue truly Moral, but what is alſo Supernatural or Divine; No moral or natural virtue but what is divine and ſupernatural.for according to their own Schole-maxime, Bonum conſtat ex cauſis integris, malum ex quolibet defectu, Good must have al its cauſes, but evil ariſeth from any defect. We find this piece of Scholaſtic vanitie or corruption fully laid open by Janſenius, Auguſt. Tom. 2. lib. 4. cap. 12. pag. 256. On thoſe ſeeds of Virtue the Pelagians and Semi-Pelagians firſt founded their Hereſie; which afterwards the Scholemen brought into the Chriſtian Scholes, to no ſmal prejudice of Scholaſtic Doctrine. For theſe Heretics affirmed, That from theſe Philoſophic Seeds true Virtues might, by the alone power of the human wil, ſpring; which the Scholemen perceiving to be manifeſtly repugnant to the moſt conſtant Catholic Doctrine, they framed a double man in one man, a double Charitie, double Virtues, double Workes; the one Natural, the other Supernatural, of which in the whole Doctrine of Auguſtin, &c. there cannot be found the leaſt Veſtigium. As if thoſe very Virtues, which the Philoſophers and Scholemen cal Natural, would not have been called by Auguſtin Vices. That there is no Virtue natural, or truly moral, but what is ſupernatural, ſee Court Gent. Part 4. Book 1. Chap. 2. §. 4. Indeed herein the vanitie and corruption of the Pelagians and Scholemen excedes that of the Philoſophers:The Pelagians worſe than Philoſophers. for theſe having no Divine Revelation to meaſure Virtue by, but only ſome dark glimmering of Nature's light, could not attain unto any entire or true Idea and notion thereof, as to its principe and ſpiritual qualitie, and therefore no wonder if theſe poor Philoſophers, who by reaſon of their darkneſſe accounted the picture, ſhadow, or mater of a good action to be Virtue, ſuppoſed an foreign, or ſome ſeminal diſpoſitions to the mater of Virtue to be Virtue. But as for the Pelagians and Scholemen, who have a clear rule to judge of Moral good by, and alſo confeſſe, that every good action muſt conſiſt of al its cauſes; for ſuch to allow of any ſeeds of Virtue, or Moral Free-wil in corrupt Nature, is a piece of pride and vanitie far beyond that of the Philoſophers.
3. Hence follow many other Eſſential defects in al the Philoſophic Ethics of the Pagan Moraliſts.3. Other Eſſential defects as to the Principes of their Morals. (1) We find no one precept in al their Rules of Moralitie, preſſing men to ſpiritual povertie, ſelf-emtineſſe, &c. which Chriſt's Ethics make the foundation of Virtue, Mat. 5.3, 4. But we find the quite contrary every-where in the Philoſophers Morals, which wholly tends to feed ſpiritual pride. (2) We find no mention of Chriſt, and Dependence on Him, which is Eſſential to every good work. 'Tis true, Socrates bids his Friend, foreign, depend on God, and pray for aſſiſtance to performe good acts: But 'tis moſt probable he knew not what this Dependence meant, or where to pitch it on its right Object: for if he had, he might have been reckoned a Believer, which we have no ground to believe he was, but the contrary. (3) In al their Philoſophic Ethics we find not any one word of performing Virtuoſe Acts out of Filial love to God, which is part of the ſpirit, or Eſſential conſtitution of Moralitie. Many other defects in their Ethics might be mention'd.
§. 6.The Vanitie of Philoſophic Politics. 1 Cor. 1.20. A ſecond part of Moral Philoſophie is Politics, wherein the Philoſophers were not a little vain and corrupt. So 1 Cor. 1.20, foreign; Where is the Scribe? foreign, (ſaies Grotius) according to the Hebrew foreign in the Helleniſtic manner of ſpeaking, ſignifies him that is skilled in the Law or Hiſtorie. So in Baruc. 3.23, &c. foreign, are ſuch as have skil in the Law or Hiſtorie. There was a twofold Scribe among the Hebrews, the one Politic, the other Eccleſiaſtic. The Politic Scribes were, (1) Miniſters of State, ſuch as were the King's Privie Counſellers, or perſons conſtituted in ſome Office of truſt. Thus foreign Officers, Exod. 5.6, is rendred by the Seventy foreign,Ezr. 4.8. Scribes. So Ezra 4.8, foreign, Scribe, notes civil Dignitie and Office; whence it is rendred in our Margines, Secretary. (2) There were alſo among the Hebrews inferior or plebean Scribes, for the making private Contractes, anſwerable to our public Notaries. The Eccleſiaſtic Scribe was a Doctor, Expoſitor, and Interpreter of the Law; whoſe Office it was to meditate on, expound and vindicate the Law. Scribe here is to be underſtood chiefly in the laſt ſenſe, yet not excluſively as to the firſt notion of it. But we find a more ful account of the Vanitie of al Philoſophic Politics, or Civil Wiſdome, 1 Cor. 2.6,1 Cor. 2.6. foreign, Nor the wiſdome of the Princes of this world. He means (ſaies Grotius) Politic Wiſdome, to which belongs Juriſprudence, or skil in Laws and Hiſtories. As if he had ſaid, Take notice, that al theſe proud Monarchs, notwithſtanding al their Politic Laws & Government, are come to nought, or ſpoiled of al their Politic Deſignes and Intereſs. For this ſeems the proper import of foreign, that come to nought. foreign is ſaid (1) Of that which has loſt its efficacitie, as Luk. 13.7. (2) Of that which is aboliſht and made void. Politic Philoſophie has loſt its ſpirits and efficace. So Grotius. The Empires that now are ſhal periſh, as wel as thoſe figured by Daniel's Image, Dan. 2.44, &c. 1.1. Their imperfection in compariſon of Divine Politics. The Vanitie of al Human Politics diſcovers it ſelf by their imperfection if compared with Divine Politics. Human Politics conſiſt of two parts, Legiſlation and Adminiſtration. Legiſlative Politics had for their main Inſtitutors Minos the Cretian Legiſlator, Lycurgus who gave Laws to the Lacedemonians, Solon the Athenian Law giver, with Draco. Alſo amongſt the Romans, Numa Pompilius, who gave Laws to Rome; Zaleucus the Locrian Legiſlator, and Charondas the Thurian, both Pythagoreans. Amongſt the Philoſophers, who gave an Idea both of Legiſlative and Adminiſtrative Politics, we have firſt Pythagoras, who ſpent the Afternoon in inſtructing his Diſciples in Politics; beſides his foreign, which Laertius ſaies he writ. Alſo Plato who left behind him an excellent Idea of Politics, both Legiſlative, in his ſeveral Books of Laws, and Adminiſtrative, in his Books of a Communwealth. Ariſtotle likewiſe has given us a good Idea of Politics. Yet al theſe Human Politics, both Philoſophic, or Contemplative and Active, if compared with Divine ſeem but ſhadows,The imperfection of Human Politics. 1. As to their origine and extent. very imperfect, yea vain: for (1) Al theſe Human Politics were but broken imperfect derivations or traditions from the Divine Jewiſh Politics; as elſewhere. (2) Al Human Politics were very narrow and particular, not general and comprehenſive of particular circumſtances. Therefore Ariſtotle, lib. 1. Polit. obſerves wel, foreign, Al things are moſt evident to ſuch as conſider particulars, but they who pronounce univerſally, deceiving deceive themſelves. So Trajan in his directions to Plinie, ſaies, That nothing could be conſtituted univerſally as a certain forme. (3) Hence it follows, that al their general Laws and Politic Precepts, whether Ideal or Practic, were liable to a world of Exceptions, Reſtrictions, Limitations and Alterations: for their beſt Idea of Politics was but foreign, for the moſt part, not univerſally true and good; becauſe particulars, the object thereof, are infinite. Hence, ſaies Ariſtotle, Rhet. l. 1. c. 8. foreign, no Art conſiders (or comprehends) particulars, becauſe infinite: which is moſt true of al their Human Politics, which could not conſider or comprehend thoſe infinite circumſtances which attend Human actions; and therefore ſuch of them as ventured to lay down an univerſal Idea, or general Rules of Politics, diſcovered much vanitie and imperfection; beſides the many Exceptions they were fain to admit: and after al their moſt poſſible exactneſſe in their Politic Conſtitutions, they were forced to have recourſe to their foreign, the Law of Equitie, or Court of Chancerie, for the emendation, correction, or ſupplement of ſuch things as were not excepted or provided for in their univerſal Idea of Politics. But now the Divine Politics admit not of ſuch imperfections; becauſe the Divine Law is the moſt Auguſt, Equal, Ʋniverſal, Adequate Rule of al Politics, as wel as Eccleſiaſtics, as we have copioſely proved,Philoſophle Politics vain. Idea Theolog. l. 1. c. 8. 2 Theſe Human Philoſophic Politics are not only imperfect and vain comparatively in regard of Divine Politics, but likewiſe in themſelves, in regard of that Corruption, both inherent and ſubſequent, which attends them.1. As to their End. As (1) in regard of their End, in that they made their carnal Intereſt the only meaſure of Good and Evil, without the leaſt reſpect to Divine Intereſt,2. As to their Mater. or Glorie, as before. (2) The mater of their Politics was very corrupt, in that they allowed many things in themſelves evil, and very deſtructive to Human Societies: as Communitie of Wives, Fornication, Inceſt, Sodomie, Drunkeneſſe,3. As to their effects. &c. (3) But the greateſt Corruption in their Human Politics was in regard of their ſad effects many waies.1. Atheiſme. [1] In that al their Politics were the mother and nurſe of Atheiſme: For (1) they made Religion ſubſerve their Politic Intereſts and Conſtitutions. So Owen Theol l. 1. c. 8. Theſe Law-givers, in framing their Politic Theologie, had ſcarce any thing elſe in their aime, but how they might ſo temper Religion, that thence there might not ariſe any diſturbance or evil in the Civil ſtate. Such was Numa's Politic Religion with the reſt. (2) Their Politics were the mother and nurſe of Atheiſme, in that theſe great Politicians attributed the good or il ſucceſſe of Human affaires to their Politic wiſdome or contrivances. In which regard they made their Human Prudence their God, or great Idol, unto which al the great occurrences and diſpoſitions of Providence muſt ſtoop, which opened the dore to Atheiſme, 2. Idolatrie.and ſhut God out of the World. [2] The Philoſophic Politics opened the dore alſo to Idolatrie: for theſe Politicians had their foreign, a Politic Religion, which out of compliance with the peoples Idolatrie humor proved a great nurſe to Idolatrie, as hereafter.