non folum fecundum quod in fe eft, fed fecundum quod eft Participabilis, fecundum aliquem madum fimilitudinis, a Creaturis. Unaquaq; autem Creatura habet propriam fpeciem, fecundum quad aliqno made participat Divine Effentia fimilitudinem. Sic igitne in quantum deus cagnofcit fuam effentiamnt fic imitabilem a tali Creatura cognofcit eam ut propriam rationem & Ideam hujus Creature. A Testimony fo ve ry clear and appofite, that it would not be very eafy for a Man that loved Authority never fo well, and wanted it never fo much, to forge one more to his Purpofe. And yet whoever would fee this Matter deduced more at large, let him read (and well worth his Reading it is) the 54th Chapter of the firft Book of this, Great Author Contra Gentiles, with the Illuftrations of his Excellent Commentator Fer rarienfis upon it, where he will alfo find feveral Things of great Importance to the Point in Hand, and that will ferve to Clear as well as to Confirm the preceding Account of it, as alfo to fupply fome Omiffions in it.

SECT. III

Wherein is confider'd what part is affignable to the Divine Ideas in the Formation of the Natural or Senfible World.

WE

E have hitherto been accounting for the Divine Ideality fo far as concerns the Nature of Ideas, and the Manner of their being in God. And whatever Imperfections the Account may la

A

bour under through the great Infirmity of him that gives it, befides the fublimity and difficulty of the Argument, yet I hope that even those who do not think it fo fully Satisfactory in every Particular as their Curiofity may prompt them to defire, will yet allow it to be Intelligible as far as it goes. And now after the Confideration of thefe Ideas as they are in God, it is but a Natural Tranfition to reflect a little upon their Influence ad extra, and fince we find a Senfible World in being whereof they are the Reprefentatives, to confider what part they had in the Formation of it. For that they had fome may justly be fuppofed, fince befides the obvious Impoffibility of making a World without the Mediation of Ideas, it would be a moft ftrange and ill confifting Thought, that that which is the very Ground and Measure of the Poffibilities of things fhould have no Concern in the Actualizing of them.

Fiat for their Production, he * Con fulted himself again, thofe Ideas which he had in himself, and which. Plato in äre himself, his Coeffential and Con

bis Timaus, p. 28.

fubftantial Word and Wisdom, the Eternal Iffue of his Fruitful Mind, who is the true Intelligible World, and in whom the Ideas of all things thine forth with Original and inimitable Beauty, full of Grace and Truth, and form'd them according to that bright and glorious Pattern in the Myftical Mount. Mofes infinuates this particularly in the Formation of Man, Let us make Man in our Image, after our Likeness, &c. and the fame is as true in Pro portion of all other things, that is, I mean, that they are in fome refpects Imitations and Refemblances of God, in as much as they were made according to their respective Ideas in his Omniform Effence, and are as it were Copies taken from those Divine Originals.

3. I do not fay imperfect Ones. For tho' even the beft and nobleft Pieces of the Creation are most imperfect and defective Imitations of God, who has but one perfect Image of himself, even his Natural Picture, his Coeternal and Consubstantial Son, yet they were all fo artfully and masterly drawn, and Copied, as I may fay, fo very near the Life by the skilful Pencil of the Soveraign Artift, as to be truly and duly conformable to those Ideas upon which they were form'd (that is, I mean, in a way of Intelligible Proportion, and as far as any thing out of God can be conformable to what is in him) as may be gather'd from that Approbatory Judgment pafs'd on them by their Maker, who upon a Critical Review of them pronounc'd them Good, S yea

yea very Good, that is perfectly answerable and conformable to thofe Ideal Measures he had of them in himself, and by which he made them. And confi dering the Perfection and Uniformity of the Divine Operation, for ought we know, the meanest Infect may be made as Conformably to its proper and refpective Idea, as the Seraphin and Cherubin were to theirs, upon which Confideration, by the way, I understand not the Philofophy, nor the Decency, nor the Piety of their Language, that shall call any of God's Creatures ugly or deform'd. I mean as to the Kinds of them. For as to the Particulars or Individuals of thofe Kinds, they may indeed upon a Principle of Reafon be faid fometimes to be deform'd, fo far as by Accident they depart from their Ideal Standards. But as to the feveral Kinds or Species of Being, the Cafe is clear otherwife. They were all made by God in Number, Weight, and Measure, form'd according to their feveral Ideas,and those Ideas truly Divine,and therefore how we can call any of those things ugly, that had fuch a Maker and fuch a Pattern, without a profane Reflection upon either one or the other, or both, .he must be a Nicer Cafuift than I am that can tell. It is faid that he that mocketh the Poor reproaches his Maker, and can he then do any lefs that fhall upbraid the meanest of God's Creatures with a Specific Deformity. But the very Expreffion implies a Contradiction, 'tis impoffible any thing fhould be ugly in its Kind, and 'tis moft certain (whatever weak Understandings may fancy) they have no fuch real Deformity in them, nor does God that made them and perfectly underftands their Frame, fee any. On the contra

Prov. 17. 5.

ry

ry 'tis faid that he faw every thing that he had made, and that behold it was very Good. And how dare we then to oppose our weak Judgments to his, fo as to write ugly where he has written Fair and Beautiful! It is certainly a fenflefs, unprincipled, and profane way of talking, and fuch as nothing but the Ignorance or Inconfideration of those that use it can excufe. For in fhort, God fees no Deformity (how quick-fighted foever we may be) but in a distorted or irregular Body, and in a corrupt and depraved Mind. The Monster and the Sinner are the only real Deformities in Nature.':

4. But to the Exemplarity of our Ideas. To the Question that asks what part they had in the Work of the Creation, the general Answer it seems is that they ferv'd as Patterns for the Formation of things. They were the Archetypal Seals from which the fe veral Prints of Being were taken, or the Intelligible Moulds (if I may be allow'd to condefcend a little to Imagination in the Representation of the moft Abstract Spiritualities) in which they were caft. And accordingly Plato in the Ac

count of Aquinas affigns a double Sum. Theol. Part I. ufe of Ideas, one to be the Princi. 15. Art. 3. ples of the Knowlege of things, and the other to be the Principles. of the Generation (meaning I fuppofe the Origination) of them. And the great School-Divine tells us that they ferve both Purpofes as they are in the Mind of God. Only he here minds me of a Diftinction of fome Confe quence to be heeded for the better clearing of the Doctrin of Ideality in general, as well as that part of it we are now upon, and that is, that Ideas cons fider'd as they are the Principles of Knowlege are

S 2