These arguments from Archbishop Tillotson that evidence for God's existence are sui generis because of the particular nature of God, which it would be incongruous to demand to be proven by other empirical or mathematical methods, reminds me of "proving" physical phenomenon like subatomic particles, etc.
If one demanded to see subatomic particles optically, that would simply be impossible. But this must be understood correctly. It isn't impossible merely to the naked eye but which can be seen by optical magnification, it can't be seen *at all*, not by any possible future optical instrument, any more than one can build a perpetual motion machine. It is a matter of the laws of physics itself.
This has to do with the nature of light. Atoms are shorter than the wavelength of any visible light, and as such, there is no way to "resolve" the image because of the diffraction of light. Thus, to ask for evidence of the existence of particles, we need other methods of proof, and not ask to see it with one's eyes/optically, because particles are not the sort of thing to be seen optically.
You can say that we can discern the effects of the subatomic particles, but how is that any different from discerning the effect of the divine action in creation?