Part 44

11. Another the same Author relateth from _Jacobus Martinius in Disp. de Cognitione sui_, _propl._ 8. who saith: “In the year of our Saviour 1503. a certain Inn-keeper, by name _Buggerlinus_, with whom a certain poor Merchant or Pedlar had laid up his money or stock, occasion being taken by the Inn-keeper he kills him in a Wood, and buries him privately; but afterwards when he was found, the suspicion of the murther fell upon the Inn-keeper. For that Pedlar had a bended knife or dagger at his girdle, which they took, and shewed to the Inn-keeper, asking him, if he knew it? But behold assoon as he took it in his hand, it sweat drops of blood, whereby the murtherer being affrighted, confessed the murther, and so was Executed.”

[Sidenote: _Hist. 12._]

[Sidenote: _Vid. Histor. Thuan._ _l._ 32.]

12. We have also a punctual History to this purpose, related by _Hollingshead_, _Stow_, and _Sir Richard Baker_, from _Roger of Winchester_, of King _Henry_ the second, which is this: “This King, when he was carried forth to be buried was first apparelled in his Princely Robes, having his Crown on his Head, Gloves on his Hands, and Shoes on his Feet wrought with Gold, Spurs on his Heels, a Ring of Gold on his Finger, a Scepter in his Hand, a Sword by his Side, and so was laid uncovered having a pleasant countenance: which when it was told to his Son _Richard_, he came with all speed to see him, and as soon as he came near him, the blood gushed out of the nose of the dead Corps in great plenty, even as if the spirit of the dead King had disdained and abhorred the presence of him, who was thought to be the chief cause of his death. Which thing caused the said _Richard_ to weep bitterly, and he caused his Fathers body to be honourably buried at _Fonteverard_.”

[Sidenote: _Hist. 13._]

13. The last story that we shall relate of this nature, is from a Minister that is learned, sincere and of great veracity, who had it from those that were eye-witnesses, and is this: “In the year of our Lord God, 1661. _January_ 30th on _Saturday_ at night about nine of the Clock, did _John How_ of _Bruzlington-Bank_, at the foot of an Hill (which is about two miles distant from _Bishop-Awkland_) murther _Ralph Gawkley_, who was a Glover in _Bishop-Awkland_: This _How_ was the next day apprehended and brought to touch _Gawkleys_ Corps, the lips and nostrils of the dead body wrought and opened as he touched (which made him afraid to touch the second time) then presently the Corps bled abundantly at the nostrils in the sight of Mr. _Robert Harrison_ the Coroner (now Tenant at _Bishop-Awkland_ to Mr. _Franckland_, from whom I had the relation) of _Anthony Cummin_ and his Brother, &c. of the Jury, and of a great many towns people, who were then present. So _How_ was Executed the next Assizes after at _Durham_: Witnesses against him were _Anne Wall_, whom he also wounded, yet she escaped with her life, and _How_’s own Wife, at the motion of her own Father (a very honest Man) who bid her tell the truth, and she should never want help.”

Some may think that I have been too large and tedious in heaping so many stories concerning the bleeding of the bodies of those that have been murthered; but I did it for this reason, because there are many that think it but to be a Fable of the credulous vulgar, and others think that it is but an ordinary matter that happens to any bodies that are dead, and no extraordinary or supernatural thing in it at all. But whosoever shall but use so much patience, as seriously to read and consider these select Histories that we have recited, may easily be satisfied, both that such bleeding is absolutely true _de facto_, and also that there is something more than ordinary in it, and therefore we shall inlarge in these observations.

[Sidenote: _Observ. 1._]

1. It will not be found to hold touch upon diligent observation and strict inquiry, that all dead bodies do bleed fresh and rosie blood, especially after the third or fourth day, or after some weeks, as divers of the instances above given do manifestly prove; and therefore is an accident incident to some dead bodies and not to all. And it will as far fail, that wounded bodies, that have been slain in the wars, after the natural heat be gone, will upon motion bleed any fresh or crimson blood at all; for we our selves in the late times of Rebellion have seen some thousands of dead bodies, that have had divers wounds, and lying naked and being turned over and over, and by ten or twelve thrown into one pit, and yet not one of them have issued any fresh and pure blood: Only from some of their wounds, some sanious matter would have flowed, putrefaction beginning by reason of the moisture and acidity in the air, but no pure blood, and therefore is not a common accident to all humane bodies that die naturally or violently, but only is peculiar to some, and especially to those that are murthered by prepensed malice, as appeareth in the Histories recited above.

[Sidenote: _Observ. 2._]

2. We shall acknowledge with _Gregorius Horstius_, _Sperlingius_ and _Gothofredus Voigtius_, that sometimes the bodies of those that have been murthered do bleed, when the murtherer is not present, as is manifest from the sixth History recited from _Horstius_ of the young Man of twenty five years old, that bled so long and so often, though the murtherer was not present; from whence they conclude that the presence of the murtherer, is not a necessary cause of the bleeding of the murthered body; and therefore that the bleeding of the body is not always a certain and infallible sign of discovering the murtherer? To which we reply, that the issuing of fresh and crimson blood from the wound or the nostrils of the persons body that hath been murthered, is always a certain sign that the Corps that doth so bleed was murthered, because those that die naturally or violently by chance, man-slaughter or in the war, do not bleed, as hath been proved before. Again, if the murtherer be certainly known, or have confessed the crime, in regard of the final cause which is discovery, there is no reason why the Corps should bleed: And though the presence of the murtherer may not be the efficient cause why the Corps doth bleed, yet is it the occasional, as is manifest undeniably by sundry of the Histories that we have related, where the murtherers had not been certainly known but by the bleeding of the body murthered.

[Sidenote: _Observ. 3._]

3. Whereas the three Authors above named, thinking they have sufficiently confuted those that ascribed this effect of the bleeding of the dead body to Sympathy or Antipathy, or to the moving of the bodies, or heat in the air; have assigned the cause to be the beginning of putrefaction in the bodies murthered, by which a new motion is caused in the humors, and so in the blood, by which means it floweth afresh: against this these two reasons oppose themselves. 1. Must putrefaction needs begin at that very moment, when the murtherer toucheth the body? For in divers of them there was no bleeding until the murtherers were present or did touch the bodies, and their touching could not cause the beginning of putrefaction, and soon after their removing the bleeding hath ceased, so that putrescence _in fieri_ cannot be the cause of the fresh bleeding. 2. Putrefaction beginning could not be the cause why the murthered Shepherds body in the ninth History should with its hands point to the wound, and to the murtherers, nor that the hands of the Wench murthered by the Jews, in the tenth History, should be stretched forth to the Prince of _Baden_, or that the Lips and Nostrils of the Body of _Gawkley_ should work and open at the touch of the murtherer _How_; this must of necessity proceed from some higher cause than putrefaction, or any other they have laid down.

[Sidenote: _Observ. 4._]

[Sidenote: _Append. de Cru. Cadav._ _p._ 154.]

4. But though it should be acknowledged, that in some of these bleedings there were something that were extraordinary or supernatural, yet as learned _Horstius_ tells us: “It is (he saith) an inconvenient Tenent of those that hold, that the Souls of those that are murthered, wandering about the Bodies, by reason of the hatred they bear towards those that were their murtherers, do cause these bleedings: but this in Philosophy cannot stand, because the separate form can by no means operate upon the subject any longer. And (he saith) the same thing in Theologie seems to be very impious; because the Souls of the dead are without mundane conversation, as is sufficiently manifest from the History of the Rich Man and _Lazarus_, _Luke_ 16.”

[Sidenote: _Observ. 5._]

“5. And if some should refer these effects immediately unto God, as many learned Authors have done; as though God by this means would sometimes make known those that are guilty: or to refer this unto the Devil, as though he would sometimes elude the Judges, and to do this that so the innocent might be punished with the wicked; We answer (he saith) to this briefly, by adding this only, that a supernatural cause is not rashly to be feigned where a natural one is ready at hand. And if there be such examples, which cannot be reduced to these aforesaid natural causes, of which sort many are related by _Libanius_ _part_ 2. _fol._ 172. then we can by no reason be repugnant, but that they are preternaturally brought to pass.” And of this opinion are most of the Pontificial Writers, that thereby they might the better maintain their Tenent, that miracles are not ceased; though we do not understand that if we should grant, that in these things there should be some concurrence of Divine Power more than ordinary, that therefore it must be a miracle, for it is yet not infallibly concluded what a miracle is, and every wonderful thing is not therefore concluded to be a miracle, and a miracle being not absolutely defined, what is not one cannot be certainly resolved.

[Sidenote: _Observ. 6._]

6. Some there are that ascribe these strange bleedings of murthered bodies, and of their strange motions, with the sweating of blood, as upon the Pedlars bended dagger or knife, mentioned in the eleventh History, unto the Astral or Sydereal spirit (and that not improbably;) that being a middle substance, betwixt the Soul and the Body doth, when separated from the Body, wander or hover near about it, bearing with it the irascible and concupiscible faculties, wherewith being stirred up to hatred and revenge, it causeth that ebullition and motion in the blood, that exudation of blood upon the weapon, and those other wonderful motions of the Body, Hands, Nostrils and Lips, thereby to discover the murtherer, and bring him to condign punishment. Neither is any Tenent yet brought by any, that is more rationally probable to solve these and many other wonderful Phenomena’s than this of the Astral Spirit, if it can be but fully proved that there is such a part of Man that doth separately exist, which we shall endeavour to prove ere we end this Chapter.

[Sidenote: _Observ. 7._]

7. But it is granted upon all sides, that if the murtherer be brought to the presence, or touch of the person murthered, and not quite dead, that then the wounds though closed and staid from bleeding, or the nostrils, will freshly break forth and bleed plentifully. The reason is obvious, because the Soul being yet in the Body, retaining its power of sensation, fancy and understanding, will easily have a presension of the murderer, and then no marvail that through the vehement desire of revenge, the irascible and concupiscible faculties do strongly move the blood, that before was beginning to be stagnant, to motion and ebullition, and may exert so much force upon the organs as for some small time to move the whole body, the hands, or the lips and nostrils. So that all that is to be done, is but to prove, that the person murthered is not absolutely dead, and that the Soul is not totally separated or departed forth of the Body, and this we shall do by undeniable proofs, as are these that follow in this order.

1. Though we generally take death to be a perfect separation of the Soul from the Body, which is most certainly a great truth, yet when this is certainly brought to pass, is a most difficult point to ascertain, because that when the Soul ceases to operate in the Body so as to be perceived by our Senses, it will not follow, that therefore the Soul is absolutely departed and separated.

[Sidenote: _Observ. Medic._ _p._ 617, 618.]

2. It is manifest that many persons through this mistake have in the times of the Plague been buried quick, and so have some Women been dealt withal that lay but in fits of the suffocation of the Womb, and yet were taken to be dead. So that from the judgment of our Senses, no certain conclusion can be made that the Soul is totally departed, because it goeth away invisibly; for many that not only to the judgment of the vulgar, but even in the opinion of learned Physicians, have been accounted dead, yet have revived, as learned _Schenckius_ hath furnished us with this story from _Georgius Pictorius_, “that a certain Woman lay in a fit of the Strangulation of the Womb, for six continual days without sense or motion, the arteries being grown hard, ready to be buried, and yet revived again, and from _Paræus_ of some that have lain three days in Hysterical suffocations, and yet have recovered, and of divers others that may be seen in the place quoted in the Margent.

3. So that though the organs of the Body may by divers means, either natural or violent, be rendered so unfit, that the Soul cannot perform its accustomed functions in them, or by them, so as they may be perceptible to our senses, or judgments; yet will not that at all conclude, that the Soul is separated, and departed quite from the Body, much less can we be able to define or set down the precise time of the Souls aboad in the Body, nor the ultimate period when it must depart, for the union may be (and doubtless is) more strong in some than in others, and the Lamp of life far sooner and more easily to be quenched in some than in others. And the Soul may have a far greater amorosity to stay in some Body that is lively, sweet, and young, than in others that are already decaying and beginning to putrifie, and it may in all probability both have power and desire to stay longer in that lovesome habitation, from whence it is driven away by force, especially that it may satisfie it self in discovering of the murderer, the most cruel and inhumane disjoyner of that loving pair that God had divinely coupled together, and to see it self, before its final departure, in a hopeful way to be revenged.

4. If we physically consider the union of the Soul with the Body by the mediation of the Spirit, then we cannot rationally conceive that the Soul doth utterly forsake that union, untill by putrefaction, tending to an absolute mutation, it be forced to bid farewel to its beloved Tabernacle; for its not operating _ad extra_ to our senses, doth not necessarily inferr its total absence. And it may be that there is more in that of _Abels blood crying unto the Lord_ from the ground, in a Physical sense, than is commonly conceived, and God may in his just judgment suffer the Soul to stay longer in the murthered Body, that the cry of blood may make known the murtherer, or may not so soon, for the same reason, call it totally away.

[Sidenote: _Explic. Astro._ _p._ 654.]

There is another kind of supposed Apparitions, that are believed to be done in Beryls, and clear Crystals, and therefore called by _Paracelsus_ _Ars Beryllistica_, and which he also calls Nigromancy, because it is practised in the dark by the inspection of a Boy or a Maid that are Virgins, and this he strongly affirmeth to be natural and lawful, and only brought to pass by the Sydereal influence, and not at all Diabolical, nor stands in need of any Conjuration, Invocations or Ceremonies, but is performed by a strong faith or imagination. And of this he saith thus: _Sed ante omnia (ait) notate proprietatem Beryllorum. Hisunt, in quibus spectantur præterita, præsentia, & futura. Quod nemini admirationi esse debet, ideò, quia sydus influentiæ imaginem, & similitudinem in Crystallum imprimit, similem ei, de quo quæritur._ And a little after he saith: _Præterea sideribus nota sunt omnia, quæ in natura existunt. Cumq; Astra homini subjecta sint: potest is utiq; illa in subjectum ita cogere, ut voluntati ejus ipsa obsecundent._ What truth there may be in this his assertion, I have yet met with no reasons or experiments that can give me satisfaction, and therefore I leave it to every Man to censure as he pleaseth.

[Sidenote: _Hist._]

The only story that seems to carry any credit with it, touching the truth of Apparitions in Crystals, is that which is related of that great and learned Physician _Joachimus Camerarius_ in his Preface before _Plutarchs_ Book _De Defectu Oraculorum_, from the mouth of _Lassarus Spenglerus_, a person excellent both for Piety and Prudence, and is, in effect this: “_Spengler_ said, that there was one person of a chief family in _Norimberge_, an honest and grave Man, whom he thought not fit to name. That one time he came unto him, and brought, wrapt in a piece of Silk, a Crystalline Gemm of a round figure, and said that it was given unto him of a certain stranger, whom many years before, having desired of him entertainment, meeting him in the Market, he took home, and kept him three days with him. And that this gift when he departed, was left him as a sign of a grateful mind, having taught such an use of the Crystal as this. If he desired to be made more certain of any thing, that he should draw forth the glass, and will a male chast Boy to look in it, and should ask of him what he did see? For it should come to pass, that all things that he required, should be shewed to the Boy, and seen in the Apparition. And this Man did affirm, that he was never deceived in any one thing, and that he had understood wonderful things by the boys indication, when none of all the rest did by looking into it, see it to be any thing else but a neat and pure Gemm. He tells a great deal more of it, and that doubtful questions being asked, an answer would appear to be read in the Crystal: but the Man being weary of the use of it, did give it to _Spengler_, who being a great hater of superstition, did cause it to be broken into small pieces, and so with the Silk in which it was wrapped, threw it into the sink of the House.”

I confess I have heard strange stories of things that have been revealed by these supposed apparitions, from persons both of great worth and learning; but seeking more narrowly into the matter I found them all to be superstitious delusions, fancies, mistakes, cheats and impostures. For the most part the child tells any thing that comes into his fancy, or doth frame and invent things upon purpose, that he never seeth at all, and the inquirers do presently assimilate them to their own thoughts and suspicions. Some that pretended to shew and foretel strange things thereby to get money, have been discovered to have had confederates, that conveied away mens goods into secret places, and gave the cunning Man notice where they were hid, and then was the child taught a straight framed tale, to describe what a like Man took them away, and where they were, which being found brought credit enough to the couzeners, and this I knew was practised by one _Brooke_ and _Bolton_. Some have had artificial glasses, whereinto they would convey little pictures, as Dr. _Lambe_ had.

It being manifest by what we have laid down that there are apparitions and some such other strange effects, whereby murthers are often made known and discovered, and also having mentioned that it may be most rationally probable that they are caused by the Astral or Sydereal Spirit, it will be necessary to open and explain that point, and to shew what grounds it hath, upon which it may be settled, which we shall do in this order.

[Sidenote: Immort. of the Soul. _c._ 16. _sect._ 8. _p._ 296.]

[Sidenote: _De verb. Apost._ _lib. Serm._ 18.]

[Sidenote: _Idem contr. Pelag._]

_c._ 28. _Tom._ 7.

1. There are many (especially Popish Authors thereby to uphold their Doctrine of Purgatory) that maintain that they are the Souls of the persons murthered and deceased, and this opinion, though unanswerably confuted by the whole company of reformed Divines, is notwithstanding revived by Dr. _Henry Moore_, but by no arguments either brought from Scripture, or grounded upon any solid reasons, but only some weak conjectures, seeming absurdities, and Platonick whimsies, which (indeed) merit no responsion. And we have by positive and unwrested Scriptures, in this Treatise afore proved, that the Souls of the righteous are in _Abrahams_ bosom with Christ at peace and rest, and that the Souls of the wicked are in Hell in torments, so that neither of them do wander here, or make any apparitions; for as S. _Augustine_ taught us: _Duo sunt habitacula, unum in igne æterno, alterum in regno æterno_. And in another place: _Nec est ulli ullus medius locus, ut possit esse nisi cum Diabolo, qui non est cum Christo_. And _Tertullian_ and _Justin Martyr_, two most ancient writers do tell us: “That Souls being separated from their Bodies, do not stay or linger upon the earth: And after they be descended into the infernal pit, they do neither wander here upon their own accord, nor by the power and command of others; But that wicked spirits may counterfeit by craft that they are the Souls of the dead, _Vid. Lavaterum de Spectris secunda parte_ _c._ 5.”

2. We have also shewed that these apparitions that discover murther and murtherers and brings them to condign punishment, cannot be the evil Angels, because they are only Ministers of torture, sin, horror and punishment, but are not Authors of any good either Corporeal or Spiritual, apparent or real. So that it must of necessity be left either to be acted by a Divine Power, and that either by the immediate power of the Almighty, for which we have no proof, but only may acknowledge the possibility of it; or mediate by the ministery of good Angels, which is hard to prove, there being no one instance, or the least intimation of any such matter in all the Scriptures, and therefore in most rational probability, either relations of matters of fact of this nature are utterly false, or they are effected by the Astral spirit.

[Sidenote: _Vid. lib. Sagac. Philos. passim._]