they had usually found the deviations from the course of nature to be more revealing of the divinity of the universe than the creation's ordinary workings. Cotton's father, Increase, found special providences fascinating and collected tales of them assiduously; and in the face of the new astronomy, he maintained that cometary motion had always been irregular and would continue to be so. Increase, like many of his generation, also tended to think of nature as an "art" which expressed the divine mind. Hence, it was comfortable for him to ascribe an emblematic character to the special providences in creation. The comets shooting across the sky were more than Heaven's handiwork; they were symbols, perhaps of God's displeasure, and a sign of a coming affliction. The earthquakes too possessed symbolic importance, and floods, and droughts; the task of a science was ultimately to recognize them for what they wereportents of the Lord's intentions. 4
|
Cotton Mather had no desire to repudiate his father's scientific attitudes; and maintaining throughout his life a capacity for holding conceptions inconsistent with one another, he managed to repeat them even while he embraced a different, and contradictory, set. Even as Increase wrote on comets and published accounts of special providences, the science of the day was changingand Cotton Mather came of age as it raced towards discoveries of universal laws of regularity and order. So, though like his father before him he sometimes heard God's voice in thunder and witnessed His signs in lightning, he had also to concede that the magnificent rhythm of the celestial system bespoke a God of order and regularity. 5
|
The problem faced by admirers of the new astronomy was to avoid being carried away by their admiration into deism or, worse, some sort of mechanism that denied the existence of God altogether. Such a possibility had dawned slowly on New England. A few years before Cotton Mather's birth in 1663, the Copernican views had made their way into Harvard's curriculum. Most of the founders had learned the Ptolemaic cosmology, but they adjusted to the new thought with remarkable ease. They may not have accepted all the tenets of the heliocentric universe, but most like John Davenport, for example, did not consider them threatening to the true religion. Galileo, Boulliau, Gassendi, Kepler, and Wing were simply names to him, Davenport
|
|