Part 9

6. The Scriptures and right reason have declared all things concerning Spirits either good or bad, as also all sorts of Diviners (or Witches, if you will have them called so) and the nature, power, operations, and actions of them, more than any other Book that was written before the time of our Saviours Birth (the dreams and whimsies of the Platonists only excepted) or for the space of three hundred years after, and therefore are the most fit Medium and Authority to determine these things by. 1. For first it is manifest, that all things are ordered by the wisdom of the Almighty, who hath done whatsoever he would both in Heaven, _and he doth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What dost thou?_ And these things God doth not by a naked prescience, but by his divine will, providence, and ordination, as a learned Divine hath taught us in these words: _Est hoc inprimis necessarium & salutare Christiano nôsse, quòd Deus nihil præscit contingenter, sed quòd omnia incommutabili & æternâ, infallibilíq; voluntate & providet, & præponit, & facit_. So it was only his will, decree, and determination, that Christ should not be born, or assume humane nature visibly, but at that precise time that he had appointed, according to the evidence of the Apostle. _But when the fulness of time was come, God sent forth his Son made of a woman, made under the law._ And when that fulness of time was come that he sent him, then did the divine Wisdom and Providence ordain all means, objects and occasions, whereby the fulness of the Godhead that dwelt in him bodily, might be made manifest, by working of miracles, both by himself and his Apostles, therefore were there so many several sorts of Demoniacks, blind, lame, dumb, deaf, and diseased, not by chance, but by the providence of the Father, and only and chiefly that the work of God might be manifest in them, for the Evangelist tells us: _And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth. And his Disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man or his parents, that he was born blind? Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents, but that the works of God should be made manifest in him._ Upon which place Dr. _Hammond_ doth give this clear Paraphrase: “And some of his followers asked him, saying, Sir, was it any sin of his own, when his soul was in another body, or was it some sin of his parents at the time of his conception, which caused this blindness in him? Neither his own, nor his parents sins were the cause of this blindness of his, but Gods secret wisdom, who meant by this means to shew forth in me his miraculous power among you.” And though the Doctor would bring in the opinion of _Pythagoras_ of the Transmigration of Souls (of which vain traditional fancies he is almost every where guilty) as received and imbibed in by some of the Jews that then followed him: yet it appeareth plainly, that it was not interrogated by the Jews, but by his Disciples, ὁι Μαθηλαὶ, and therefore it is a wonder the Doctor should be so grosly mistaken; and _Theophylact_ tells us thus much plainly: _Neq; enim Apostoli Gentiles nugas receperunt, quo anima ante corpus in alio mundo versans peccet, ac deinde pœnam quandam recipiat in corpus descendens. Piscatores cùm essent, neq; audiverant tale quiddam, quia hæc Philosophorum dogmata erant._ And so declareth, that the Disciples having seen Christ heal the man that had thirty eight years been impotent and lame, and had said unto him, _Behold thou art made whole, sin no more lest a worse thing come unto thee_, did conceive, that this man being born blind, it had been a punishment upon him, either for his own sins, or the sins of his parents, and so doubting asked the question. And so also do St. _Austin_ and _Chrysostome_ expound the place, which is both sound and rational. And of our Saviours responsion, _That neither had this man sinned, nor his parents_, the learned Father giveth a satisfactory answer, saying: _Nunquid vel ipse sine originali peccato natus erat, vel vivendo nihil addiderat? Habebant ergo peccatum, & ipse & parentes ejus, sed non ipso peccato factum est ut cæcus nasceretur. Ipse autem causam dicit quare cæcus sit natus, cùm subdit: sed ut manifestentur opera Dei in illo._ And to the same purpose _Gregory_ hath this notable passage: _Alia itaq; est percussio, quâ peccator percutitur, ut sine retractatione puniatur: Alia quâ peccator percutitur, ut corrigatur: Alia quâ quisq; percutitur, non ut præterita corrigat, sed ne ventura committat: Alia per quam nec præterita culpa corrigitur, nec futura prohibetur. Sed dum inopinata salus percussionem sequitur, salvantis virtus cognita ardentiùs amatur._ From whence it is manifest, that as the Father in the fulness of time, by his Decree and Providence sent out the Son, _in whom dwelt the fulness of the Godhead bodily_, with a purpose to manifest the same by his great and wonderful Miracles: so in his divine Wisdom he had ordered fit subjects and objects upon whom that power might be made manifest. And therefore were there such strange diseases offered, especially in Demoniacks, that can hardly be parallel’d in any one Country of that small compass, and in so short a time, and all that the works of God might be manifest by that ever-blessed Saviour of Mankind, Jesus Christ. And though there were so many persons, so many several ways perplexed and afflicted both in their minds and bodies, as some made deaf and dumb, some torn and contorted in their members, some thrown on the ground, some into the fire, some driven to live amongst the graves and monuments, and yet all these cured by our blessed Saviour: Yet is there no mention made of any that had made a visible League with the Devil, nor upon whose bodies he suckt, nor with whom he had carnal Copulation, nor whom he had transubstantiated into Wolves, Dogs, Hares, Cats, or Squirrels; to have cured which would have been as great a miracle as any of the rest, but there were no such matters; and therefore we may safely conclude, there never were, are, or can be any such matters, whatsoever may be said to the contrary.

[Sidenote: Act. 8. 9, 10, 11.]

[Sidenote: Act. 13. 8.]

[Sidenote: _Ibid._ 16. 16, 18.]

[Sidenote: Act. 19. 13, 16.]

[Sidenote: 2 Thess. 2. 9.]

[Sidenote: _Chrysost. in loc._]

2. In the New Testament there is mention made of several sorts of deceiving Impostors, Diviners, or Witches, who were all discovered and conquered by that power that Christ had given unto the Apostles; as for instance: _Simon, which before-time in the same city used sorcery, and bewitched_ μαγεύων κὶ ἐξισῶν _the people of Samaria, giving out that himself was some great one. To whom they gave heed from the least to the greatest, saying, This man is the great power of God. And to him they had regard, because that of long time he had bewitched them with sorceries_; τῶς μαγείαις ἐξεσακέναι αὐτὺς, _seducebat populum suis magicis præstigiis_, saith _Tremellius_; and _Beza_, _Exercuerat artem magicam, & gentem Samariæ obstupefecerat_; who when he would have bought the gift of the Holy Ghost with money, was rejected by _Peter_ as an Impostor and Counterfeit, and declared, _that he was in the gall of bitterness_. Such another was _Elymas_ the Sorcerer (for so is his name by interpretation) ὁ μάγος who was stricken blind by St. _Paul_. Such an one was the Damsel that was possessed with a Spirit of Divination, which St. _Paul_ cast forth. And such were the Jewish Exorcists, that took upon them to call over them which had evil Spirits, the Name of the Lord Jesus, saying, _We adjure you by Jesus whom Paul preacheth. But the man in whom the evil spirit was, leapt on them, and overcame them, and prevailed against them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded._ But amongst these several sorts of Diviners, Impostors, or Witches, there were none that had made a visible League with the Devil, nor upon whose bodies he suckt, nor that had carnal Copulation with him, nor were changed into Cats, Dogs, or Wolves: but if the Devil had had any such power, or had there been any such sort of Witches, the divine Wisdom and Providence would have ordained some of them then to have been made apparent, that his power by Christ and the Apostles, might have been shewed as well in the greater as in the less: and that for the more full manifestation of the Works of God, as for a more triumphant declaration of the power of Christ in conquering him and his Kingdom, and for a more ample warning and instruction to the Children of God to avoid the snares and wiles of the Devil; but there being no such, then we must rationally conclude, that there now is not, nor ever was, or can be any such matter, but the vain believing of such figments and forgeries, is only the cunning and delusion of Satan, who works by lying and deceiving wonders τέρασι ψεύδοις, of which St. _Chrysostome_ saith thus: _Hoc est, omnem ostentabit potentiam, sed nihil veri, verùm omnia ad seductionem. Et prodigiis, inquit, mendacii. Aut ementitis ac ludificantibus, aut ad mendacium inducentibus._

[Sidenote: _Pag._ 9.]

Having now sufficiently proved, that the Scriptures and sound Reason are the proper Mediums to decide these difficulties by, we shall in the next place shew the invalidity of some ways used by the most Authors, to prove and defend these Tenents, and _ab uno disce omnes_, take Mr. _Glanvil_ for all, in his own words: “That this being matter of fact, is only capable of the evidence of authority and sense: and by both these, the being of Witches and Diabolical Contracts, is most abundantly confirmed.” To which we shall give this smart Reply. Not to make the Proposition universal, generally to deny the evidence of authority and sense; no, far be it from me to run into that wild and senseless absurdity, which were in a manner to destroy the credibility of all humane testimony: But we shall here speak of the evidence of authority and sense with this restriction and limitation, to these Particulars. 1. Those Authors that write of Apparitions and Spirits. 2. Those that treat of Diabolical Leagues and Contracts. 3. Those that mention the Devil sucking of the Witches body, carnal Copulation with them, their being changed into Hares, Dogs, Cats, and Wolves, and the like. These Authors we say are to be read with caution, and their relations not to be credited, except better proof be given to evidence the matters of fact, than hitherto hath been brought by any, and that for these especial reasons and necessary cautions.

[Sidenote: _Epist._ _lib._ 7. _pag._ 252.]

[Sidenote: _De defect. oracul._ _p. mihi_ 700.]

[Sidenote: _Plutarch. in vit. Marc. Brut._ _pag._ 361.]

1. The Authors that have recorded stories of this nature, are to be seriously considered, whether they have related the matter of fact by their own proper knowledge, as eye and ear-witnesses of it, or have taken it up by hear-say, common fame, or the relation of others: and if what they relate, were not of their own certain knowledge or αὐτοψία, then is it of little or no credit at all; for the other that relates it, might be guilty either of active or passive deception and delusion, or might have heard it from another, or by common report: of all which there is no certainty, but leaveth sufficient grounds for dubitation, and is sufficient to caution a prudent person altogether to suspend his assent, until better proof can be brought. There is a story related by _Plinius Cæcilius_ to his friend _Sura_, of a House in _Athens_ that was haunted by a Spirit in so terrible and frightful a manner, that it was left utterly forsaken, and none would inhabit in it, until that _Athenodorus_ the Philosopher adventured upon it, and abode the coming of the Apparition or Phantasm, and upon its signs followed it to a place below, and then it vanished: he marked the place, and went to the Magistrate, and caused the place to be digged up, and found the bones of a person inchained or fettered, and caused the bones to be buried, and so the House remained free afterwards. It is a wonder to think how many Authors have swallowed this relation (nay even _Philip Camerarius_ himself, who though a very Learned man, yet in things of this nature too extremely credulous) and urged it for proof, as a matter of great credit and authority, when we cannot discern that it affords any credible ground to a rational man to believe it, not only because the very matter it self, and the circumstances of it, do yield sufficient grounds of the suspicion of its verity; but chiefly because _Pliny_ doth but relate it by hear-say, _exponam ut accepi_, and of it and the rest he desires the opinion of his Friend _Sura_, from whom we do not find any answer. The story taken from _Plutarch_ (a grave Author, if he be considered as an Heathen and a Moralist) yet of no authority to decide such points as these are of the voice that called upon _Thamus_, and commanded him to declare when he came at _Palodes_, that the great God _Pan_ was dead, which he performed, and that thereupon followed a great lamentation of many: the story at large is related by many, and urged as a matter of great weight and credibility, when indeed there is no ground sufficient to perswade any that it was true. For if it had been related by _Plutarch_ as an ear-witness of it, yet was he but an Heathen, that we know believed many fond, lying, and impossible things, especially of their Gods; and therefore in this case to a considerate Christian could be of no great authority. And if his authority had been great, or of weight in such matters as these, yet was he but _singularis testis_, which is not sufficient in these things to be relied upon. And lastly (to our present purpose here) he doth not record it as a thing of his own certain knowledge, but of hear-say from _Epitherses_, who was but a single Relator, and a man of no certain veracity; and therefore we can have no rational ground to believe the truth of the story, but it may be rejected with more reason, than it can be affirmed by. Of no greater credit can his story be of _Brutus_ his _malus Genius_ appearing unto him, because he received this by meer Tradition and hear-say, neither could it have any other rise, but from the relation of _Brutus_ himself, whose guilty confidence, and troubled brain, fancied such vain things; for those that were near _Brutus_ neither saw nor heard any such matter, and therefore must have been a deception of Phansie, and no real Apparition _ad extra_.

[Sidenote: The invisible World, p. 245, 246, 247.]

[Sidenote: _Jo. à Jesu Mar._ _lib._ 5. _de Vit. Theres._ _cap._ 3.]

[Sidenote: The invisible World, p. 305.]

[Sidenote: _Ibid._ _p._ 284.]

2. And as evidence of the matter of fact recorded from the relation of others, is of no validity to a judicious person: so if the matter of fact be witnessed but by one single testimony (though an eye or an ear-witness) it is not sufficient, because one single person may be imperfect in some senses, or under some distemper, and so be no proper Judge of what it sees or hears; and the Word of Truth tells us, _That in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word shall be established_; and therefore we are not (especially in such abstruse matters as these) to trust the evidence of one single testimony. To make clear this Particular, we shall relate a story or two from the credit of the Reverend and Learned Bishop _Hall_, joyned with his judgment of such weak and feigned Tales, one of which runs thus: “_Johannes à Jesu Maria_, a modern Carmelite, writing the Life of _Theresia_ (Sainted lately by _Gregory_ XV.) tells us, that as she was a vigilant Overseer of her Votaries in her life, so in and after death she would not be drawn away from her care and attendance: For (saith he) if any of her Sisters did but talk in the set hours of their silence, she was wont by three knocks at the door of the Cell, to put them in mind of their enjoyned taciturnity. And on a time appearing (as she did often) in a lightsome brightness to a certain Carmelite, is said thus to bespeak him; _Nos cœlestes, ac vos exules amore ac puritate fœderati esse debemus, &c._ We Citizens of Heaven, and ye exiled Pilgrims on earth, ought to be linked in a League of love and purity, &c. Methinks the Reporter (saith the Bishop) should fear this to be too much good fellowship for a Saint; I am sure neither Divine nor Ancient story had wont to afford such familiarity: and many have misdoubted the agency of worse, where have appeared less causes of suspicion. That this was (if any thing) an ill Spirit under that face, I am justly confident; neither can any man doubt, that looking further into the relation, finds him to come with a lye in his mouth. For thus he goes on; [We Celestial ones behold the Deity, ye banished ones worship the Eucharist, which ye ought to worship with the same affection wherewith we adore the Deity] such perfume doth this holy Devil leave behind him. The like might be instanced in a thousand Apparitions of this kind, all worthy of the same entertainment.” This is a story from one single person, a lying Carmelite, one that for interest, and upholding of Superstition and Idolatry, had feigned and forged it; for in it self it appeareth to be a meer falsity and figment, as any rational man may easily discern, and so are a thousand stories of this kind worthy of the like entertainment, that is, to be condemned for most horrid lyes. Another he tells us: “Amongst such fastidious choice of whole dry-fats of voluminous relations, I cannot forbear to single out that one famous of _Magdalen de la Croix_, in the year of our Lord Christ 1545, &c.” The third from the mouth of another lying Fryar named _Jacobus de Pozali_, in his Sermon, “That St. _Macarius_ once went about to make peace betwixt God and Satan, &c.” Now whatsoever credit this Learned man (who in things of this kind appeareth to be as vainly credulous as any) doth seem to give unto these, or what use soever he would make of them, it is undeniably manifest to all impartial judgments, that they were but absolute forgeries and knacks of Imposture and Knavery, and (according to his own opinion) may justly be ranked amongst those thousand Apparitions of this kind, all worthy of the same entertainment, that is, to be rejected for abominable lyes or forgeries, and that for these reasons. 1. Because they are not attested by any sincere and uncorrupt ear and eye-witnesses, but by reports and relations, and that of those that were corrupt and partial, or Accomplices to bring to pass the fraud and imposture. 2. If they be run up to their first Author or Venter of the Tale, he will but be found a single Witness, which is utterly insufficient in evidencing truly a matter of fact. 3. The Relaters of them did publish them for interest sake, and upon design to advance false Doctrine, Worship, Superstition, and Idolatry, and therefore are not of validity and credit. 4. In themselves (if strictly considered) they will appear to be lying, ridiculous, contradictory in themselves, and contrary to the authority of Divine Writ, and dissonant to sound and right reason, and therefore ought to have no other entertainment, but as abominable lyes and forgeries.

[Sidenote: Of Credul. and Incredul. pag. 159.]

[Sidenote: A serious Disswasive from Popery, pag. 38, 39.]

3. But if matters of fact be witnessed and attested by many or divers persons that were ear and eye-witnesses, yet may their testimony bear no weight in the balance of Justice or right Reason, because they may be corrupt in point of interest, and so have their judgments mis-guided and biassed by the corruption of their desires and affections, or relate things out of spleen, envy, and malice; and so may not in these mysterious matters be fit authority to rely upon, nor competent evidence in these particulars, as Dr. _Casaubon_ is forced to confess in these words: “In the relation of strange things, whether natural or supernatural, to know the temper of the Relator, if it can be known: and what interest he had, or might probably be supposed to have had, in the relation, to have it believed. And again, whether he profess to have seen it himself, or taken it upon the credit of others. And whether a man by his profession in a capacity probable to judge of the truth of those things, to which he doth bear witness.” Every one of these particulars would require a particular consideration. For if there be interest in point of Religion, then all authorities, all colour of reason is drawn in to make good this interest, and verity is commonly stifled in this contest for selfness and interest, and the adverse parties stigmatized with all the filthy lyes and enormous crimes that can be invented, as is most manifest in these instances. The Popish party finding themselves hindred and opposed in point of the highest interest, have forged a thousand false stories and tales to make good the interest of their Party, and have left no dirt and dung unscraped up to throw in the faces of their Opponents; and so have each Party done against other, where religious interest was the quarrel, as Bishop _Hall_ hath truly observed in this passage, where he is shewing the abominable corruptions of the Church of _Rome_: “A Religion that cares not by what wilful falshoods it maintains a part; as _Wickliffs_ blasphemy, _Luthers_ advice from the Devil, _Tindals_ Community, _Calvins_ feigned Miracle, and blasphemous death, _Bucers_ neck broken, _Beza_’s Revolt, the blasting of Huguenots, _Englands_ want of Churches, and Christendom, Queen _Elizabeths_ unwomanliness, her Episcopal Jurisdiction, her secret fruitfulness, English Catholicks cast in Bears skins to Dogs, _Plesses_ shameful overthrow, _Garnats_ straw, the _Lutherans_ obscene Night-Revels, _Scories_ drunken Ordination in a Tavern, the Edict of our gracious King _James_ (_An._ 87.) for the establishment of Popery, our casting the crusts of our Sacrament to Dogs, and ten thousand of this nature, maliciously raised against knowledge and conscience, for the disgrace of those whom they would have hated, e’re known.”