Part 42

4. But though it be never so freely and fully granted, that in the ages and times mentioned in the Old and New Testament (nay it may be for a century or more after) there were persons that were possessed and afflicted with Devils, and also that for that time there were many miracles wrought: Yet now it will be said that miracles are totally ceased as not being any way necessary to confirm the Gospel, which is now established and setled. This we confess is so strongly and convincingly proved by the Divines of the reformed Churches, that we account him wilfully blind that will oppose it. Yet notwithstanding all this that miracles are totally ceased, I grant that there are some strange things that have happened in late ages, and some in our own time, that cannot be any way solved by meer ordinary natural causes, and apparitions made by some kind of creatures that must be derived from some such causes as those of good or bad Spirits, or from creatures of the like nature. And that though miracles be ceased, it will not therefore follow that every thing that hath a cause above or differing from the usual and ordinary course of nature, must be also ceased, for _quanquam nunc non sint miracula, possint tamen esse miranda_: and though that miracles be ceased, yet it will not follow that apparitions are so also, because apparitions are not miracles; for a good Angel to be sent and to appear, cannot be said to be a miracle, because it is the end for which he was created, they (that is the Angels) _are all ministring spirits sent forth for the good of those that shall be heirs of Salvation_. And it cannot be said otherwise of evil Angels or of any other creatures that may make these apparitions, for as they are and must be creatures, so there is and must be some certain ends, for which they were created and are imployed unto.

5. But to prove the truth of apparitions, or other strange Phenomena’s equivalent unto them, as to have been truly performed as matters of fact is extream difficult and almost impossible, because the Histories and relations of things of this nature are most strangely fabulous, and therefore are by no means to be relied upon, as will most manifestly appear by undeniable reasons, if we examine them in divided members in this order.

1. The Histories and relations that are given either by the Poets, or most of the ancient Philosophers, of these things, are so seemingly impossible, and so extreamly fictitious, as he must of necessity have in a manner totally forsaken his own reason, that can give any credit at all unto them. And especially they are so fraught with the horrible fables of the numerousness of their feigned gods, demigods, spirits, hobgoblins, _Lares_, _Lemures_, Mens shadows and the like, that they would make a man believe that the world was full of nothing else, and this was chiefly done to uphold their Idolatrous and superstitious Religion. And all these kind of authors that have written from the time of _Homer_ until the end of the ages in which the two _Plinies_ and _Plutarch_ lived, have but run the same course, all their relations tasting of the leaven of impossibilities, superstition and fabulousness.

2. And if we look into the Pontificial Writers, especially those that have recorded stories of this nature since the sixth century, we shall find such a Rhapsodie, and heap of Bombast lies and invented fables both of apparitions and Witches, that no rational man can well give assent to one of a thousand of them, they seem so incredible, that they would rather make a wise man diffident of all such matters of fact, than to yield credit to any. And a man might as reasonably believe the forged and lying miracles of _Mahomet_, as those monkish fables. For the extream desire that those Authors had to advance their false and feigned Doctrine of Purgatory, and thereby to uphold the gain and benefit that was gotten by injoining such and such penances and eleemosynary deeds to redeem Souls from thence, did drive them on to invent thousands of false stories of the apparitions of Souls after death, which had not one jot of truth in them at all.

3. Those that are called the Reformed Divines (because they returned to that pure and true Doctrine and Worship, that had been settled and practised in those foregoing ages that were truly Catholick and Apostolick) being altogether intent about the main and principal points of the Faith, and those that concerned the true worship of God, did take little heed to the matters of this nature, as being more circumstantial, and therefore not by them accounted so essential and necessary. From whence it came to pass that _Lambertus Danæus_, _Hemmingius_, _Erastus_ and others, did without due examination and circumspection receive the opinions and stories of the Papists hand over head. From whence (I conceive) it came to pass that _Ludovicus Lavaterus_ a learned Divine of the reformed Religion at _Zurich_ did write a book of apparitions and such matters, but brought no other proofs of the truth of these things _de facto_, but the often repeated stories of Heathenish Authors, and some few from Ecclesiastick Authors, that are of dubious credit, but not any one of his own knowledge.

4. But if we come to consider the Histories of late that are reported of apparitions, and such like things that must of necessity have something in them, that resembles a supernatural cause, we may in part receive more ample satisfaction, which will be manifest in these few following particulars.

1. _Meric Casaubon_ Doctor of Divinity, in his treatise of Credulity and Incredulity (sometimes by us quoted before) hath strongly indeavoured to make good all those impossible and absurd things that are ascribed unto Witches: which though he hath pitifully failed to perform, yet hath he said enough that may serve to prove that there are many strange things that seem to prove the being of Demons or Spirits, though he have not brought any one story of his own knowledge or that was done in his time. And we have shewed before that apparitions are no certain ground for Christians to believe the existence of Demons by, but the word of God. But in his Preface to that piece of the relation concerning Dr. _Dee_, he relateth two stories told by that venerable and learned Prelate Bishop _Andrews_ to his Father _Isaac Casaubon_. “The one (he saith) concerning a noted or at least by many suspected Witch or Sorceress, which the Devil in a strange shape did wait upon (or for rather) at her death. The other concerning a Man, who after his death was restored to life to make confession of a horrible murther committed upon his own Wife, for which he had never been suspected. And both these (he saith) that learned Bishop did believe to be true, but for one of them it seems, he did undertake upon his own knowledge, to wit that of the apparition, and the other he had from an eye-witness.” And considering the condition of Bishop _Andrews_ both for learning and piety, the relations are of much weight, and they may be seen at large in the fore-cited Preface.

[Sidenote: _Antidot._ against _Atheis._ _c._ 8, 9. _p._ 209.]

2. I cannot but much wonder that Dr. _Henry Moore_, a grave person, and one that for many years hath resided in a most learned and flourishing Academy, whose name is much taken notice of both at home and abroad, having published so many books, should make such bad choice of the Authors from whom he takes his stories, or that he should pitch upon those that seem so fabulous, impossible and incredible. And that I may not seem to tax him without cause, I desire the Reader to peruse his two relations, the one of the Shoomaker of _Breslaw_ in _Silesia_, _Anno_ 1591. the other of _Johannes Cuntius_ a Citizen of _Pentsh_ in _Silesia_, and to tell whether he can rationally believe those things either to have been true or possible. And as for the Author _Martinus Weinrichius_ a Silesian Physician, I cannot find any thing either of his fame or writings, and it is most strange that he should be omitted by that diligent and unpartial Author _Melchior Adams_; And there had been far better Authors and of more credit to have pitcht upon for such like stories, than either _Bodinus_ or _Remigius_; neither can there be much credit given to any of the stories that he relates, except it be that of the Pied-Piper, which some do interpret far otherwise.

3. “There was a Treatise called, the Devil of _Mascon_, or a true relation of the chief things which an unclean spirit did and said at _Mascon_ in _Burgundy_, in the House of M^r _Francis Perreaud_ Minister of the reformed Church in the same Town, written by the said _Perreaud_ soon after the Apparition which was in the year 1612. but was not published until the year 1653. which was 41. years after the thing was said to be acted. It seems it was translated by D^r _Peter Du Moulin_, the Son of the learned and reverend _Peter Du Moulin_, at the request of the honourable and learned person M^r _Boyle_. The most of the things had been known unto M^r _Du Moulin_ the Father, when he was President of a National Synod in those parts, to whom also the said _Perreaud_ was well known, who was a religious, well poised, venerable Divine. And M^r _Boyle_ saith, that he had had converse with this pious Author at _Geneva_, and had inquired after the Writer, and some passages of the Book, which overcame all his setled indisposedness to believe strange things. The Character given of this Author, and the assent of such learned persons to the things related, have gained an ample suffrage to give credit to them also. But notwithstanding all this, there are many passages in the relation that a quick-sighted Critick would find to be either contradictory or inconsistent, and it cannot rationally be thought that he was a Cacodemon, his actions were so harmless, civil, and ludicrous; and if he were to be believed (and in some things he did speak truth, and the Minister himself M^r _Perreaud_ did in some things give credit to him) he was no Devil, but hoped to be saved by Jesus Christ. But whether a Devil or not, yet the story for substance doth sufficiently prove the existence of such kind of Demons, that can work strange and odd feats.”

[Sidenote: _The Saints Everlasting rest._ _c._ 7. _p._ 255.]

4. M^r _Baxter_ a person of great learning and piety, whose judgment bears great sway with me, speaking of Apparitions saith thus: “I know many are very incredulous herein, and will hardly believe that there have been such Apparitions. For my own part (he saith) though I am as suspicious as most in such reports, and do believe that most of them are conceits or delusions, yet having been very diligently inquisitive in such Cases, I have received undoubted testimony of the truth of such Apparitions, some from the mouths of men of undoubted honesty and godliness, and some from the report of multitudes of persons, who heard or saw. Were it fit here to name the persons, I could send you to them yet living, by whom you would be as fully satisfied as I: Houses that have been so frequently haunted with such terrors, that the inhabitants successively have been witnesses of it.”

7. Though some of these last recited testimonies might sufficiently convince the most obstinate and incredulous, that there are Apparitions and some other such strange accidents that cannot be solved by the supposed principles of matter and motion, but that do necessarily require some other causes, that are above or different from the visible and ordinary course of nature; yet because it is a point dark and mystical, and of great concern and weight, we shall add some unquestionable testimonies, either from our own Annals, or matters of fact that we know to be true of our own certain knowledge, that thereby it may undoubtedly appear, that there are effects that exceed the ordinary power of natural causes, and may for ever convince all Atheistical minds, of which in this order.

[Sidenote: _Stow._ _p._ 605.]

[Sidenote: _Hist. 1._]

1. “In the first year of _Edward_ the Sixth. _Anno Domini_ 1551. on St. _Valentines_ day, at _Feversham_ in _Kent_, one _Arden_ a Gentleman was murthered by procurement of his own Wife; for the which fact she was the fourteenth of _March_ burnt at _Canterbury_: _Michael_ M^r _Arden_’s Man was hang’d in Chains at _Feversham_, and a Maiden burnt: _Mosbie_ and his Sister were hanged in _Smithfield_ at _London_: _Greene_ which had fled, came again certain years after, and was hanged in Chains in the High-way against _Feversham_, and black _Will_ the Ruffian, that was hired to do that act, after his first escape was apprehended, and burnt on a Scaffold at _Flushing_ in _Zealand_.”

[Sidenote: _P._ 1708.]

The same horrid murther is more at large related by _Hollingshead_, who lived at that time, and had information of all the particulars, who saith thus much more. “This one thing (he saith) seemeth very strange and notable touching M^r _Arden_, that in the place he was laid, being dead, all the proportion of his body might be seen two years after and more, so plain as could be, for the grass did not grow where his body had touched, but between his legs, between his arms and about the hollowness of his neck, and round about his body: And where his legs, arms, head, or any part of his body had touched, no grass growed at all of all that time. So that many strangers came in that mean time, beside the Townsmen, to see the print of his body there on the ground in that Field, which Field he had (as some have reported) cruelly taken from a Woman, that had been a Widdow to one _Cooke_, and after Married to one _Richard Read_ a Marriner, to the great hinderance of her and her Husband the said _Read_, for they had long enjoyed it by a Lease which they had of it for many years not then expired. Nevertheless he got it from them, for the which, the said _Reads_ Wife not only exclaimed against him in shedding many a salt tear, but also cursed him most bitterly even to his face, wishing many a vengeance to light upon him, and that all the World might wonder on him, which was thought then to come to pass, when he was thus murthered and lay in that Field, from midnight till the morning, and so all that day, being the Fair-day, till night, all the which day there were many hundreds of people came wondring about him.” From whence we may take this Observation.

[Sidenote: _Observ._]

As it is most certain that this is a true and punctual relation given us by _Hollingshead_, as being a publick thing done in the face of a Nation, the print of his body remaining so long after, and viewed and wondered at by so many; so that it hath not left the least starting hole for the most incredulous Atheist to get out at. So likewise it may dare the most deep-sighted Naturalist, or unbelieving Atheist, that would exalt and so far deifie Nature, as to deny and take away the existence of the God of Nature, to shew a reason of the long remaining of the print of his body, or the not growing of the grass in those places where his body had touched for two years and more after? Could it be the steams or Atoms that flowed from his body? then are why not such prints left by other murthered bodies? which we are sure by sight and experience not to be so. And therefore we can attribute it justly to no other cause but only to the power of God and divine vengeance, who is a righter of the oppressed, fatherless and Widdows, and hears their cries and regardeth their tears.

[Sidenote: _Hist. 2._]

[Sidenote: _Sir Rich. Bakers_ Chron. _fol._ 448.]

2. “In the second year of the Reign of King _James_ of famous memory, a strange accident happened, to the terror of all bloody murtherers, which was this; One _Anne Waters_ enticed by a lover of hers, consented to have her Husband strangled, and then buried him secretly under the Dunghil in a Cow-house. Whereupon the man being missing by his Neighbours, and the Wife making shew of a wondering what was become of him, it pleased God that one of the inhabitants of the Town dreamed one night that his Neighbour _Waters_ was strangled, and buried under the Dunghill in a Cow-house, and upon declaring his dream, search being made by the Constable, the dead body was found as he had dreamed, and thereupon the Wife was apprehended, and upon examination confessing the fact was burned.” But we shall give it more at large as it was taken from the mouths of _Thomas Haworths_ Wife, her Husband being the dreamer and discoverer, and from his Son, who together with many more, who both remember and can affirm every particular thereof, the Narrative was taken _April_ the _17th 1663_, and is this,

“In the year abovesaid, _John Waters_ of _Lower Darwen_ in the County of _Lancaster_ Gardiner, by reason of his calling was much absent from his Family: In which his absence, his Wife (not without cause) was suspected of incontinency with one _Gyles Haworth_ of the same Town; this _Gyles Haworth_ and _Waters_ Wife conspired and contrived the death of _Waters_ in this manner. They contracted with one _Ribchester_ a poor man to kill this _Waters_. As soon as _Waters_ came home and went to bed, _Gyles Haworth_ and _Waters_ Wife conducted the hired Executioner to the said _Waters_. Who seeing him so innocently laid betwixt his two small Children in Bed, repented of his enterprize, and totally refused to kill him. _Gyles Haworth_ displeased with the faint-heartedness of _Ribchester_, takes the Axe into his own hand, and dashed out his brains: The Murderers buried him in a Cow-house, _Waters_ being long missing the Neighbourhood asked his Wife for him; she denied that she knew where he was. Thereupon publick search was made for him in all pits round about, lest he should have casually fallen into any of them. One _Thomas Haworth_ of the said Town Yeoman, was for many nights together, much troubled with broken sleeps and dreams of the murder; he revealed his dreams to his Wife, but she laboured the concealment of them a long time: This _Thomas Haworth_ had occasion to pass by the House every day where the murder was done, and did call and inquire for _Waters_, as often as he went near the House. One day he went into the House to ask for him, and there was a Neighbour who said to _Thomas Haworth_, It’s said that _Waters_ lies under this stone, (pointing to the Hearth-stone) to which _Thomas Haworth_ replied, And I have dreamed that he is under a stone not far distant. The Constable of the said Town being accidentally in the said House (his name _Myles Aspinall_) urged _Thomas Haworth_ to make known more at large what he had dreamed, which he relateth thus. I have (quoth he) many a time within this eight weeks (for so long it was since the murder) dreamed very restlessly, that _Waters_ was murdered and buried under a broad stone in the Cow-house; I have told my troubled dreams to my Wife alone, but she refuses to let me make it known: But I am not able to conceal my dreams any longer, my sleep departs from me, I am pressed and troubled with fearful dreams which I cannot bear any longer, and they increase upon me. The Constable hearing this made search immediately upon it, and found as he had dreamed the murdered body eight weeks buried under a flat stone in the Cow-house; _Ribchester_ and _Gyles Haworth_ fled and never came again. _Anne Waters_ (for so was _Waters_ Wifes name) being apprehended, confessed the murder, and was burned.” From whence we may observe this.

[Sidenote: _Observ._]

1. That this is the full and punctual relation of this bloody and execrable murder from _Haworths_ Wife (who then was a very old Woman) and the Son, and differs not a jot from what Sir _Richard Baker_ writes, but only they say his brains were dashed out with an Axe, and he saith he was strangled, which is only a circumstance of the manner, but in the matter they both agree, that it was a certain truth that _Waters_ was murdered, and Sir _Richard Bakers_ information might fail in that particular of the manner of it. And if it be thought strange that the two little Children did know nothing of it, it is certain that they were much too young, and said that they were twins, not above half a year old. But the only matter that we have brought it for, is the extraordinary way of its discovery by _Thomas Haworths_ dreaming, in which point both the relations closely agree, and was the chief and only reason why Sir _Richard Baker_ put it in his Chronicle. And the same also more at large _Stow_ hath recorded in his Chronicle. Now what should the cause be that _Thomas Haworth_ should be hindred of his sleep, and have restless dreams, and that his dream should hit so punctually of the place where he was buried, more than any other person in the same Town? certainly it cannot be referred to fortune and chance, for they have no causality at all, and are but only names that we impose upon certain effects and accidents: _Te facimus fortuna Deum, cœloq; locamus_, as said the Poet. Neither can it rationally be thought to be melancholy, because that though it be a subtil humour, and render those that are affected therewith very imaginative and thoughtful, yet supposing _Thomas Haworth_ to be of that temperament and disposition, it might make him more deeply to think and meditate upon the rumour of _Waters_ being awanting or upon suspicion of his murder, but could not in dreams inform him to know precisely the place where he was buried. And if some should imagine it to be the Soul of the murthered person _Waters_, as doubtless a Papist would be ready to affirm, yet is that opinion directly contrary to the Scriptures, and sufficiently confuted by the reformed Divines. And if it should be referred to the operation of the Astral or Sydereal spirit, that is an opinion but imbraced by few, and is hard to prove to be a certain verity, of which we shall speak largely anon. Neither can it by any sound reason be thought to be the Devil, because it is manifest that God doth not use the ministry of evil Angels for any good end, as for the discovery of murther, and the bringing of the guilty persons to condign punishment; but on the contrary he useth their service for to tempt, seduce, deceive, punish and torment. Therefore we conceive that it was brought to pass by the finger of God, who either immediately by himself, or by the ministry of a good Angel, did represent those dreams to _Thomas Haworth_, and revealed the precise place of _Waters_ burial.

[Sidenote: _Hist. 3._]