_I cannot with those in that great Father securely interpret the work of the first day_, Fiat lux, _to the creation of Angels_.] This great Father is S. _Chrysost. Homil. in Genes_. But yet 'tis his opinion, as also of _Athanasius_ and _Theodoret_, that there is express mention of the creation of Angels, so that they need not rest upon this place, which they admit to be somewhat obscure. The place which they take to be express, is that of the 130 _Psalm_, where _David_ begins to speak of the Majesty of God, in this manner: _Confessionem sive majestatem et decorem induisti, amictus lumine sicut vestimento_: Next he speaks of the Heavens, saying, _Thou hast stretched them out over us like a Tent._ Then he speaks of the Angels, _Qui facis Angelos tuos spiritus_. Now if it shall be objected, that this expression is onely of the time present, and without relation to the Creation: Answer is given by Divines, that the _Hebrews_ have but three Tenses in their Verbs, the Preterperfect, Present, and Future Tense; and have not the use of the Preterimperfect, and Preterpluperfect, as the _Greeks_ and _Latines_ have; whence it ariseth, that the Present Tense with the _Hebrews_, may, as the sentence will bear it, be translated by the Preterimperfect, as also by the Preterperfect and Preterpluperfect Tense; and this (they say) is practised in this very passage, where the Phrase, as it is in Hebrew, may be rendered as well _qui faciebas_, as _qui facis Angelos_, etc. Vid. _Hieronym. in Ep. ad Titum, et Thom. Aqu. 1. p. qu. 61. art. 3_. The Latine Annotator saith, the Father meant by the Author, is St. _Aug._ and quotes him, _l. II. de Civ. Dei_ cap. 9. which place I have perused, and find the expression there used by St. _Aug._ is but hypothetical; for these are his words: _Cum enim dixit Fiat lux, et facta est lux, si rectè in fine luce creatio intelligitur Angelorum_, etc. Where you see 'tis but with a _Si_, and therefore I conceive the Author intends not him, but _Chrysostom_. _Where it subsists alone, 'tis a Spiritual Substance, and may be an Angel._] _Epicurus_ was of this opinion, and St. _Aug. in Euchirid. ad Laurentium_. _Sect. 35. Pag. 52._ Moses _decided that Question, and all is salved with the new term of Creation._] That is it which _Aristotle_ could not understand; he had learned that _ex nihilo nihil fit_, and therefore when he found those that disputed that the World had a beginning, did maintain that it was generated, and he could not understand any generation, but out of matter præ-existent _in infinitum_, therefore he took their opinion to be absurd, and upon that ground principally, concluded the World to be eternal: whereas, if he had understood that there may be such a thing as Creation, he had not done it, for that solves his _processus in infinitum_. Take from _Plato_, that the World had a beginning, and from _Aristot._ that it was not generated, and you have the (true) Christian opinion. _Sect. 36. Pag. 54._