THE REPLY OF JOHN DARRELL, TO THE ANSWER OF JOHN DEACON, AND john Walker, concerning the doctrine of the Possession and Dispossession of Demoniakes.  Ecclesiastes 4. 1. 
I turned, and considered all the oppressions that are wrought under the sun, and behold, the tears of the oppressed, & none comforteth them: and lo the strength is of the hand of them that oppress them, and none comforteth them.  
Imprinted 1602.   

TO THE RIGHT REVEREND FATHERS AND BRETHREN, the Pastors and Teachers in the Church of England, Grace and peace be multiplied in our Lord jesus Christ.  
IT had been to be wished (right Reverend & beloved in our Lord jesus Christ) that some question arising of late, as you know, concerning Dispossession of devils in these times by fasting and prayer, the same might have been propounded, examined, and decided in your lawful assembly. For your senses being exercised in the knowledge of God his truth, and your minds enlightened with continual practice of the Church, would easily have discerned the stamp of the Sanctuary: and this judicial determination of yours, would (no doubt) either have prevented, or stayed at least much violent proceeding, many impious assertions, and great distractions among the people, which not able to judge of the substance of things, stand amazed at the vain sound and multitude of words. But as this happiness hath been much wished in like case heretofore, so never could it be less hoped for then now, when our sins have breathed new life into the dead carcase of Antichrist, whereby he startles up on his feet afresh, and gins to strut amongst us again in terrible sort. yet notwithstanding your joint consents cannot be had, I thought it meet to offer this Rejoinder to your considerations severally, holding it most requisite that you the same parties should also hear Truth speak in her just defence, before whom, and to whom, she hath been slandered most shamefully. But what Truth is able to plead for herself shall more fully appear in the Treatise following: now only she craveth, that as Gregory Nazianzen judged of julian by the wagging of his head, so by these two Epistles of theirs, one to yourselves, the other to the Reader, it would please you to regard of what disposition these Answerers be.  
In their Epistle to you (reverend brethren) you shall behold them false in pretence, untrue in their words▪ and ridiculously arrogant. For pretence, they make show of great promptness with all humility to submit their opinions to your grave and learned censures. And who would not esteem this lowliness, as if the men were lately descended from heaven? But alas, they know your public censure is not to be feared: more weighty occasions have not hitherto procured it: and what any of you shall pronounce privately, will be but one Doctor's opinion with them. Their practice makes this plain in their Discourses, where testimony as clear as the sun light alleged, how the Church both ancient, and present hath demeaned herself in like actions, they not having one word of probability to reply, would shift off the matter with shameless outfacing. Is it likely now (worthy Fathers and Brethren) these men would reverence your authority, who reject without blushing the authority of them, whom all the learned deservedly reverence? This profession than is but a mere abuse, serving only for a mask to hide the deformity of their natural countenance. And as they would carry a fair colour of that, they never purpose to do, so also they be no less untrue in reporting things already past. They tell you, How insolently we denied the Christian conference they preferred us: whereas they never proffered me any: and as for M. Moor, they coming to him, promising to confer the next morning, never came to him afterwards: thinking it better to crack their credit in breaking that promise, then to stand to their word, & receive a foil in the bickering. So they talk of a new conference with me, offered to my special friends: when neither friend not foe kuew where I was: when also had they known, and signified unto me this proffered conference, I might with small security to my person have conferred with them, notwithstanding their proffered bond. Whereby you may see that occasion was rather sought to blind the world with, then that any conference was sound intended. In like manner they affirming, that dispossession in these times by fasting & prayer be miracles: that they be urged as necessary to support our Relgion: that there is no difference between them wrought in the church of god amongst us, & these done in Antichrists kingdom: that the dealers, in these actions are to be matched with Bròwnists & Hackets: are assertions of such nature as might with good reason, were they true, enrage your meek & patiented spirits with indignation: specially when you hear their principal end in publishing these Counsels of God lately revealed unto them concerning these incricate questions (for so they 
Answer. page 95  speak of these fancies or rather frenzies of theirs in the Treatise following) was forsooth to accomplish the peace of jerusalem. Are novelties peaceable? Innovations fit for quiet? Doctrines never heard of before, procurers of concord? O blessed peacemakers, which would soldier up the breaches and disagreements of jerusalem with lately reucaled counsels. Thus they dare toyour faces pour forth their untruths, not only in matter of faith, wherein none but some special persons could convict them: but also in doctrines, whose falsehood yourselves are best able of all other to descry as soon as you hear them. And is not their arrogancy worthy to be laughed at (but that your manner is rather to bewail men's folly) when they would be Magistri sententiarum, & have their Discourses Dictates for young students in divinity? It were handsome sure to behold a Sow sit with a distaff teaching the fine Ladies to spin: that the Crow should instruct the young Nighttingales to sing▪ and that the Conduits in Cheap should be fed from the public drains & sinks of the city. But could they be content to be directors only to the younger students? These mysteries of theirs are an infallible truth, as they say, & Counsels of god lately revealed unto them, as you heard even now. And therefore yourselves, learned Fathers, though much traveled in the sacred scriptures, greatly read in ancient writers, & acquainted with later monuments of knowledge & experience of all kind, yet hitherto in these points you know nothing: & if you purpose hereafter to understand any thing, you must suck it only from the breasts of these late Revelations. In which regard it may very well be, these Answerers could greatly rejoice (as also they profess) if it might please any of you to confute them, because they think themselves on so sure a ground, & are tickled, as it seemeth with an imagination of that glory, which they suppose they should gain by your foil & discredit. Whether they will accept such a labour in good part or no, you shall have experience by this I have performed. Their former pretences make me to fear this outside of theirs is but overcast with their wont perietting.  
In the Epistle to the Reader they say that I have very uncharitably endeavoured to wound S. H. (whom else where they call S. Harsnet unto death for his dutiful Discovery. I marvel they are not ashamed to call it a dutiful discorerie, seeing the drift of it is, to prove, that I taught summers to counterfeit, whereof themselves acquit me, as ye shall hear forthwith. What duty performed he to God or man, in slandering the rare works of god, & his neightbour? Or do they in commending such a Discovery. It is true that by my Detection I endeavoured to wound S. H. mortally, so as he should never be able to rise up any more for counterfeiting & my teaching to counterfeit: but not with sword, nor spear, only with the dart of Truth. And I think it is as true that I have wounded him to death. Had not his wounds been mortal, or at leastwise incurable, they had been healed by this, and we had seen him the second time in the field. Otherwise we must deem him for a coward, that encountereth not his enemy being often challenged. This is the excellency & power of truth that she subdueth all those that rise up in arms against her, & they that take part with her, do at length triumph gloriously, as being more than conquerors. They blame my pamphlets as full of unsound & absurd positions. I will not confirm in this place, what is else where set down, but refer to your judgement whether by the former Suruery, & the following Reply it doth not appear that many such positions have issued from their own heads, & that this charge may be turned upon their own pates. For matter, they charge my writings with want of Method: to be also schismatical and Enigmatical. Touching the Method, I hope your patience hath been contented with the order of the Doctrine, divided into three several branches & each part prosecuted first with reasons confirming it: & after by removing such doubts as might seem to weaken it. And as for Schism, I teach no Lately revealed counsels, nor my 
Dialog. Discourse. Epist. to the Reader in the beginning.  private opinion concerning the possession & dispossession of devils. Both which these men confess they do, but what hath been revealed and held from the beginning & confirmed ever since by continual consent: whereas if their doctrines be their own private opinions, and Lately revealed, they be New. If New, not established by agreement of Scriptures & the Church▪ & if not established, it is schism at the least, for any thing I can conceive, to publish & maintain them. Concerning Enigmatiall handling, your own profiting by reading may best be judge. It was not my purpose, neither, is it my skill to write riddles: Yet because they complain of darkness I have now so endeavoured myself, that I hope they may spell my meaning, if they put on their spectacles Moreover they accuse the spirit wherewith my pamphlets are indicted, to be sensual & devilish, as given to Railing, Contradiction, & Disobedience. Horrible, indeed is the sin of Railing. But just & plain reproving with these men is railing: Curing is killing, & whatsoever smarteth in the sore, is deadly 
job. 24. 17.  poison. The morning to the adulterer, is as the shadow of death. The ulcerous patient crveth out on every touch of the Chirurgeon, as 
Tit. 1. 12.  at most rough & unadvised handling. It is no marvel if the Cretians can not endure to be told, they are liars, eull beasts & s●●w bellies & that sharp reproof be reviled by such, as altogether in tolerable, barbarous, and inhuman. Yet further behold I beseech you in themselves, how destitute they are of God's fear in this behalf: how void of the common wisdom of men: & how strongly possessed with that self same itching disease they charge me withal. It is great want of reverence towards god to defame others falsely, & that against their own conscience, as they do me most opprobriously throughout their whole treatises. It is exceeding solly to provoke him by forged crimes, which can repay them again with most true crimes, with public crimes, with hainons' crimes. And is it not an incurable itching which must needs be clawing, till their own flesh be rend from their bones? These men's desire of scratching was so hot, that possibly they could not hold their fingers, though they were guilty to themselves, how dear it might cost them: wherein notwithstanding I have spared them, being ashamed in plain terms to utter that which they have not been ashamed to do. Concerning the Contradictions they would thrust upon me, you will easily perceive in the Reply, how partly they spring from their own ignorance, as if I call▪ a▪ thing Ordinary and supernatural, then must there needs be a Contradiction: partly from their adding, detracting, and changing my words at thenir pleasure, which they have done advisedly and purposely, whereby their sin is increased. And as for Disobedience by my striring against the sentence of the High Commission: is it a rebellious and unruly proceeding according to the commandment & example of Christ jesus to justify the works of 
Matt. 12. 25. 30.  god being slandered, or yet for one-to complain of wrong. For mark I beseech you how in this place they affirming, that by due order of law we were convented, convicted, apprehended, imprisoned, by sentence of justice defintively condemned for gross malefactors, & adjudged to prison: yet in their Discourses have given this testimony of me, that they did not so much as suspect any precompacted confederacy 
Diale. Dis. pag. 352.  between me and the boy, that all acquainted with my former sincerity and upright carriage are free from such a persuasions that the graceless boy did gracelesly counterfeit, and myself did only erre● judgement, and not of any purpose in practice at all. By the witness therefore of these men if the high Commission passed any such seutence against us they did us open iniurv: & I trust oppressed invocents may have this liberty at least to bewail their grief. But neither hath the Commission awarded any such sentence, and these men have done a double notable wrong in●slauncering both the Commistion, and us.  
To shut up all, they would boodwink the reader with their godly jealousy over him, pretending they labour to prepare him for one husband, and to present him as a pure virgin to Christ. But this office 
1. Tim. 3.  belongeth to the Bishop that is biameles, and is the husband of one wife, etc. as S. Paul saith. And therefore if the Christian Reader should look for grapes from these thomes, he should be deceived▪ this Epistle then to the Reader is fraught with the same virtues of Cloaking, of forging, of pride (though with some larger addition) wherewith the former, reverend Fathers and brethren, was to you. And therefore howsoever they think, I will answer them as Hildebrand did, Abbas Cassinensis, frater nimtum tardasti: Dear brethren, you have been somewhat too slow in publishing your Dialogicall Discourses: yet I doubt not, but both you, and I, will with one consent, rather return the contrary to them, Et vos Disputatores nimium festinastis: And you, O Discoursers, have made too much haste. For had you traveled as long, as the Elephant in bringing forth her young, yet the birth of such monstrous devices, so ignorant, so erroneous, so slaunderons, so impious, had been abortive, untimely, and too soon. For this cause I have dealt more roundly and freely with them, than otherwise I would have done with ordinary men. They could not possibly be wakened out of so strong an Apoplexy, but by burning feathers and shoe-soles under their noses: neither would the Reader have been sufficiently warned to eschew their fraud, except the trumpet had sounded shrill in his ears.  
And whereas some of you, reverend and beloved brethren, affirming, and very truly, that their books were unworthy the answering, did thereupon earnestly dissuade me from writing: I answer, 
Tit. 1. 10.  So also was the doctrine of those vain talkers, Paul mentioneth to Titus, unworthy to be confuted, yet the Apostle saith, Their mouths must be stopped. And how? by convincing, as there followeth. 
Matt. 12. 24  What could be more palpably false, then that of the Pharisees, He casteth out devils, through Beelzebub the Prince of devils▪ Notwithstansting our Saviour did convince them. Even so did S. Peter those who 
Act. 2. 13  mocked, and said the Apostles were full of new wine, when the holy Ghost in that wonderful manner fell upon them. In private communication, A fool is to be answered according to his folly: but if in pub like among the press, in the highest places of the city, or enterings of the gates, where wisdoms voice should be heard, a fool chance to babble, and utter that is dangerous to the simple, which these Discoursers have done, then is the folly of a fool to be thoroughly discovered, and laid open to the view of all men. The foolish (of 
Pro. 14, 15  which number are the most) will believe every thing, be it never so false, be it never so absurd, never so sottish & ridiculous, specially if it be countenanced with Authority, as are the Dialog call Discourses. For this reason, even to keep the simple from error, who are so easily seduced, notwithstanding the unworthiness of these Discourses, there is cause something should be said in answer unto them, by myself or other. Neither do I doubt but these my rude lines will (by the blessing of God) be effectual to recover those which through their verbal writings be fallen from the truth, to strengthen such as be wavering, and to 'stablish them which more firmly hold the truth. If this success follow, I shall have no cause to repent me of my pains, nor any other to account the same superfluous.  
Now therefore, brethren, I beleech you know these disturbers, be not deceived by their overcasting and smoothing. Examine what they say, before ye believe them. Anb albeit your authority is not able to bridle them (the more is our grief, and the misery of our Church) yet avoid their doctrines in yourselves, and in your people. I beseech you also, as your occasions may serve, admonish them: that yet in want of a public degree, they may gather by you severally what is the judgement of all, and be thereby ashamed and reclaimed, if so the Lord in mercy please. Little needs such conflict in these times wherein that antichrist of Rome extremely rageth, as now entering his last trial. But we must have fightings 
2. Cor. 7. 5.  without and fears within: open wars with the priests and lesuites, the servants of Antichirist, and many private grievances by such as would be counted of the household of faith. It behooves us therefore brethren, to put on the armour of righteousness on the right 
2. Cor. 6. 7  hand, and on the left, that we may manfully defend & maintain the holy truth in all her bounds & limits unviolated sincere where by the purity of Religion may still be continued, and all error abandoned from annoying either us or our posterity after us. The god of mercy, peace and truth confirm and establish our hearts, that we may fight the good fight, like good soldiers of jesus Christ, and quit ourselves like men: holding faith & a good conscience, to the glory of his name, & everlasting comfort of our own souls, through jesus our Lord and only Saviour. Amen.  
Your fellow servant in the work of the Gospel. john Darrell.   

THE REPLY TO THE FIRST DIALOGUE.  

Pag. 3, 9 10.  IT is a cunning sleight to beguile the simple with, in propounding to satisfy the world for any thing that hath been said concerning the points and parties controverted, wholly to omit the books calledthe Trial, the Detection, the Narration of seven possessed in Lancashire, containing in them matters of fact, and only to bend your forces against one Treatise called The Doctrine, etc. The reason of which omission, Christian Reader, is this. To disprove things done, so evidently known to so many eye-witnesses, were all one as to persuade that white is black, that fire is Ice, that it is dark night in the clear sunshine, which whoso should endeavour would rather be esteemed of all a mad man, them gain any credit to his cause. But in points and controversies of doctrine there was more hope to deceive. For here through multitude of words, ambiguous terms, fraudulent courses of reasoning, false coloured sentences, wrested and mistconstrued scriptures, abused authorities of famous men, and such other devices, not only the ignorant & unable to search the truth should be blinded, but also many learned, which before had not welghed these things, neither perhaps would take the pains to sift and try them to the proof, might be stricken with some amaze & doubt. Only they whose judgements are seasoned with sound understanding, which at first sight are able to discern the cro oked writings of peenish and foolish sophisters, and know without book the scope of most men's writings in account amongst the learned, would give true sentence of the cause, and condemn these opinions of ignorance and error. But the number of such is small, and therefore by these Answerers was less regarded. This, whatsoever they pretend, was the true ground of their choice, yet though they will not 
Pag. 3.  meddle with the Trial, and Detection, they must bicker a blow or two with the Epistles of both. To let pass the disgraces, wherewith they lad them: for the Trial I may say (for thereof am not I author) I doubt not but judicial men will acknowledge more sound learning in some few lines of it, then is in the whole bundle of your foolish Discourses. To come to that which is material, you charge the Trial but with two things, & in this charge make four lies, such is your compendious faculty. First, say you, it matcheth your pretended miracle, with the true miracles of Christ. The words of the Epistle speaking to the L. Popham, be these, And concerning 
Epist. pag. 4.  as highly the glory of Christ our Saviour, as it doth the credit of a faithful minister▪ Is here any comparison of miracles? Is here any mention of miracles at all? Doth it say any more, but this cause being about a work done in the name of Christ, doth as highly concern 
Pag. 4. Da●r●ls trial in the Epist. pa. 8  his glory, as my credit? Again, say you, the prelates are charged with the sin against the Holy Ghost. Thus speaketh the Epistle, that the prelate's (which now set themselves against dispossession) be guilty of this unpardo able sin, I will not say. If I will not say, be I do say, then the prelates are charged with this sin. Out of this branch spring two other, That you report the Epistle to labour the L. Chief justice to recover himself with speed from that fearful sin, whereunto it seems he is fearfully falling: and that he would reverse judgement passed against me. He which writ the Epistle did not dote, as you do, to entitle his Honour, an upright, and worthy, and a righteous judge, to desire and urge his Lordship, to releeu● the oppressed innocent, specially, to take to heart the slanders given out of the works of God: and within a few lines after to place him in the very brink of reprobation. Neither doth he persuade to a Reversing of judgement (for there was none passed, as the Author knew well enough) but to a second hearing, as Felix heard Paul the second time. Now then let the Reader tell me, if you be not pithy liars, that can comprehend so many in so little room.  
For my Detection you charge the Title as undutiful against her majesties judicial proceed, for that it is so sharp against M. Harsnets' book. It is more than I know, or can believe, that her Majesty commanded M. Harsnet to write: or that her Right Hono. Counsel enjoined him so much, or that the high Commission laid this upon him. It may be, if his own vainglorious humour, which ever took pleasure to be biting of others, did not prick him forward to this business, yet that the B. his master, of his private authority, did set him his task, tosalue this own credit, and of such as had joined in disgracing the truth. But I hope one may reprehend some private actions of the B. without any undtifulnes to her majesties proceed. You than are malicious pikthanks, which have nothing in your mouths, but Ad leones, ad leones, He is not Caesar's friend.  

Pag. 5.  For the Epistle, you charge me with reviling the B. I answer, It was not any contempt or malice towards his person, or forgetfulness of any duty to authority, that moved me to such severity, as I used, but only fear least otherwise I should have failed in duty towards God. Those which sin, saith the Apostle, reprove openly: And 
1. Tim. 5. 20 Tit. 2. 15. Matth. 3. Matth. 23.  reprove with all authority. And when I hear jobn Baptist calling the Pharisees Deceivers, and Generations of vipers: when I hear our Saviour most sharply reproving them by the names of Persecutors, serpents, generation of vipers, the children of hell, painted sepulchres, and such like: And S. Paul speaking to Elymas, O full of all subtlety, and 
Act. 13. 9 10. Philip. 3. 2. Tit. 1, 12. 1. King. 18 Act. 23. 2. Tim. 4. 17  all mischief, the child of the devil, and enemy of all righteousness: calling also false prophets Dogs, and the Cretians beasts: yea when I hear Eliiah call Ahab, the troubler of Israel: our Saviour term Herod a fox, Paul entituling Ananias a painted wall, and Nero by the name of a Lion: these and many such other places of practice, give me some light for understanding the precept, and teach me, that albeit in my private cause I am to use all mildness and gentleness, yet when the Lords truth is interessed and slandered, his great mercy obscured, and that of purpose and wilfully, neither one Sergius by Elymas hindered, but many thousands turned back from believing his works, from praising him for them, and profiting by them, in this case the man of authority is no less to be stricken with the edge of reproof, than he that is in inferior place. Nay, rather the public person, than the private man, by how much his example is more dangerous, either forcing or alluring great multitudes to embrace his error. And this doth not hinder but with David, 
pag. 6.  & Stephen, and our Saviour himself, and all the holy martyrs of God, we should pray for our persecutors, and bless them which curse us: for reproof and hatred be not necessarily linked together, but Reproof is a notable remedy to preserve from hatred, according to that the Lord saith, Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thy bear't, but 
Lovit. 19 1  thou shalt plainly rebuke thy neighbour, and suffer him not to sin. But this is your manner, to huddle up all things in a confused heap together, and that which is spoken with certain provisoes and limitations, to allege it as a bare and simple command. Thus much for the Epistles.  

pag. 7.  Yet before you come to the Treatise, you will admonish the Reader of two cunning sleights of legerdemainc, practised by me, throughout that my Pamphlet: whereof the first is, That I have slily overslipped what is material in M. Harsnets' Discovery, as, to make good that distinction of Mirandum & Miraculum, which he hath dashed to nothing. I answer, that as becometh true natural Leopards, you cannot change your skin, but you must needs be lying here, as almost every where else: for I have replied to M. Harsnet out of Augustine and Danaeus, 
Detection, pag. 6.  showing an apparent difference between a Wonder, and a Miracle. And further have I answered in survey of your tenth Dialogue: from whence I pray you tell M. Harsnet, that if he remember the difference between Genus and Species, he may feel with his finger that a Wonder and a Miracle be not all one. And if this will not suffice him, demand of him, whether Antichrist by the power of Satan worketh not wonders: and whether he esteem all those wonders to be true miracles. And as touching yourselves who accord with M. Harsnet herein, what say you to these words of your own? The 
Dialog. pag. 209. & 310.  devil may work wonders, as Simon Magus hath done: but he can effect no miracles. And in another place. A thing effected by essential means, howsoever it may be a wonder, yet no miracle in any respect. How can you possibly free yourselves here from a contradiction? And this is my reply to your first instance. Again, say you, M. Harsnet accusing very orderly by summers testimony, mine own answers, and several depositions: this his material proceeding is pretermitted with silence. What? have I written a Detection of his lying Discovery, and have touched nothing concerning summers testimonic, mine own answers, and the several depositions? Then have I written nothing at all: For there be scarce any lines in it, which concern not one of these three. But thereof let the world judge. I can say no more. I hope I have showed how indirect a course it is, that summers by threats, flatter, and promises of maintenance should first he brought to accuse himself, after me, and then to witness against me: that mine own answers should be curtalled, and stretched after the Discoverers pleasures: that the depositions which were against their like should be suppressed, and others published, so far forth, as might give occasion of doubt to the Reader. What dare not you avouch, which are so bold to affrme that, whereof the contrary appears in every man's hand? If your meaning were that in some particular I have pretermitted this, which your words will not bear, than you should have done well to have named that Particular, as the nature of an Instance requireth, which seeing you have not done, it is thereby plain, yourselves be rather guilty of legerdemain, then L Those pages which you quote in the margin, I grant I passed over, for that they concern others, and 
S. Hars. Disc. 28. 29.  not myself, as also because the matter was frivolous and unworthy answer, as may there appear, urging the being of a thing by no other reason, but because such a thing might be. But mark what a fair thread these men have spun, and how seeking to discredit my Detection, they have brought not a little credit unto it. For I will hence prove, that in my Detection I have not let pass one material point of M. Harsnets' Discovery unanswered: and namely thus. If Darrell have in his Detection let go any material point of the Discovery unanswered, then would the Discoursers have given some instances of such omission, where they endeavour to prove the same by instances: But the Discoursers instancing to that end, have given not so much as one instance of such omission: Ergo Darrell in his Detection hath not let go any one material point in the Discovery unanswered.  

pag. 8. 9  My second cunning sleight by your saying is, that I disgrace by all means summers testimony, produced against me but extol it for me, upholding by it the signs of Possession & Dispossession. That no credit is to be given to his lying testimony, I avouch it indeed in the place by you cited: but where do I uphold the signs of possession & dispossession by summers his testimony, wherewith you charge me? why do not you also cite some place for this? You thought if one part of your assertion were true, the Reader would pardon you for the rest. It is such novelty for you to speak truth, that any little is to be accepted at your hands.  
From the Epistle of the Detection you come to the Narration, the proof whereof you will not have to depend upon report of the fact 
pag. 10. 11.  but upon continuance of Essential Possessions and Dispossessions in these times. A ridiculous thing, and to be hissed at. The reason why you eschew to deal against matter of fact, I have sufficiently declared in the beginning. Well I will follow you in your course, & come to your Answer to the Doctrine. Which treatise, to admit such an hodge-podge as you say, (though sober men will judge it, set down in such order as is convenient) it is not for every one to cook his matters so artificially as your Discoursing gallimaufry is: but the more skill it wants, the more credit for truth it ought to have, seeing it tasteth simply as bare nature gives, without commendation of any slibbersauce. First for Essential possession you reprove me or at least Exorcists, for arguing from the word Possession out of the Genevah translation, 
pag. 12. 13.  whereas I no where, nor any man else, infer essential inherency from the word Possession, as I have showed in the Survey of your Dialog. Discourse: yet is the same confuted by the Original, by Erasmus, Beza, Castalio, and Montanus. But this was your voluntary perhaps, before you came to your music, now let us bear your set and meditated song. Whereas I argue a possession thus: The 
pag. 13. 14.  actions or pasrions which the parties endured were supernatural, and therefore proceeded from supernatural causes. You deny the actions were supernatural, and that for three reasons. First, Natural causes have had more wonderful effects: which I think I have sufficiently answered in the beginning of your seventh Dialogue. Now therefore in one word, Is nothing supernatural in any creature, which is exceeded by any other work in nature? Then the foaming, wallowing, the breaking of chains asunder, reported of Demoniakes in the Gospel were not supernatural, because something more wonderful 
Dialog. Dis. 204.  may come from a natural cause: as that mentioned by you of the little fish Echneis, which (being but half a foot long) if she but once cleave to the side of a ship, will compel it perforce to stand still, notwithstanding the violence of the wind or oar. I am ashamed to hear men thus absurd. You might have considered, had your wits been your own, that these actions or passions are not therefore supernatural, and so called, because they are more wonderful than any thing issuing from nature, which a natural would scarce affirm▪ but partly because they are (for the most part) above that, and more wonderful than the nature of man can send forth: and partly in respect of the supernatural cause from which they did proceed, namely, the devil. Secondly, say you, One cause may bring forth sundry effects, and one effect may proceed: from sundry causes. Doubtless happy might that man be, that could apply either this One cause, or these sundry causes, to this cause we have in hand. Is this your proposition, If one cause may bring forth sundry effects, and one effect proceed from sundry causes, than the Actions or Passions reported by me in the Demoniakes were not supernatural? It is wonderful what a man shall gain by disputing with you. For now have I learned by your privileged proposition▪ Not only these actions of our Demoniakes not to be supernatural, but also neither any action of any Demoniake that either the Apostles, or Christ himself delivered. Thirdly, The like effects issue from divers diseases. I answer, If your skill in physic be so great, tell us, I beseech you, from what disease so many & strange effects might arise, as are witnessed to have been in these parties: & what disease it was they had? Whether had they the Lunacy, or the frenzy, or the Epilepsy, or the Mother, or it was some Convulsions, or Cramp that they had? Name the disease. And if so many effects do not proceed from one disease, as it is very likely, declare how many diseases they had, and what they were. And whether they had all the diseases you mention: their swelling arising from the Mother: their foaming from the Epilepsy, their extraordinary strength from mania, etc. and so had a compounded disease, percase of as many several diseases, as they had several effects. Tell us also whether you have seen one party afflicted at the same time with Melancholy, Lunacy, Frenzy, Epilepsy, Mother, Convulsion, and the Cramp? Besides, whether you have known such an one, diseased with all these grievous maladies, restored again naturally to his health in one day? When you have resolved these doubts, we will hold ourselves satisfied for this argument. In the mean season it remains for all your answer, in as full force as ever it did. And here we may observe, how all that they prattle both here and else where of diseases (whereby they would persuade, that the passions of the Demoniaks were not supernatutural, but might well proceed from some natural disease) themselves do overthrow, in affirming they are Counterfeits.  
Again, I showing that The toys and fooleries, and blasphemous speeches uttered by the parties in their supernatural passions, could not come immediately from God, and good Angels, and therefore no doubt from the devil: You answer first, They were not supernatural effects: but this is your Cuckoo song, oft avouched, never proved with any reason that might so much as beseem William summers, one too renowned in his time. Secondly, that this supposed impossibility 
pag. 15.  for either God, or good Angels to effect any such fantastical, vain, and filthy effects, is too gross and absurd. Indeed you are the Masters of absurdities, you may bestow one where you will, as this is a notable one and not to be named, that one should imagine the most Holy Lord, and his holy Angels should immediately by themselves work filthy effects. The blasphemies which arise from hence are not to be remembered. There is never any filthiness committed, but either by the filthiness of our corrupt flesh, or by the working of unclean spirits: far be it from us, we should once let it enter into our thoughts, that it did first issue, either from the fountain, or from the streams of purity. The Lord his judgements are tied to a seemly manner of effecting, rightly understood, which you deny: that is, that all his judgements should be effected by means best beseeming their nature: as judgements of committing sin are wrought by sinful means, the Devil, and wicked men, and such like, and not immediately by holy means: for this was to confound light and darkness, holiness and sin together. It is lamentable that any carrying the name of Ministers amongst us, should be so impiously blind: and yet more lamentable, that they which will sit at the helm, will suffer such impieties to be offered with their authority, to the world. Thirdly you answer, That these unclean effects do no more argue an unclean spirit, than those holy effects, as Confessing of 
Cor. 11. 4.  Christ, and Expounding the Creed argue an holy spirit. As if you had clean forgotten, The devil can transform himself into an Angel of light. If you had remembered this, and your old crosserow, That there is no reasoning from contraries in common attributes, you would never have bewrayed such intolerable babishnesse. Lastly, say you, All this infers noreall inherency, because the devil can work greater matters than these remaining without: concerning which, we 
Pag. 15. 16.  will see (God willing) in that which followeth.  
Again, whereas is urged, the devils entering in, & going out of the party possessed, you answer, All these speeches, and whatsoever text can possibly be alleged throughout the whole Scriptures, concerning either Angels, or Spirits, or Devils are to be taken metaphorically: and for 
●ob. 1. 7. Matt. 12. 43 P●t. 5. 8.  this purpose you bring the devils compassing the earth: his walking through dry places: and his roaring like a Lyon. As if because in these places there is some Metaphor, therefore all other must be metaphorical too. Nay then let us conclude, because these texts of Scripture be metaphorical, therefore all the Scripture is metaphorical, and not only those mentioning Angels and Devils. And so we shall revive the wickedness of the Libertines, of the Family of love, and of the Suenckefeldians, acknowledging no literal sense of the Scripture, but a figurative meaning inspired into themselves, which only with them is the word of God. When you disputed of the Serpent in Euahs' tentation, you contended indeed The Serpent was only meant figuratively, yet seemed after to reject this opinion, and I liked well of it. But I cry you mercy: now I understand you more fully. Well then, the Angel Gabriel came to Marry, and brought tidings of her 
Luc. 1. 30. Luc. 1. 12. etc. Luc. 21. 43.  conceiving the Son of God, was this done Metaphorically? Was there also no such thing literally done, as is reported the same Angel spoke to Zachary, concerning john the Baptist, whom he should beget? Was that in figure too, that the Angels comforted our Saviour 
Mar. 9 22.  before his passion? Belike when the Devil cast the child some time into the fire, sometimes into the water, there was no such matter 
Mar. 5. 7.  indeed, but only by way of Metapher. And when the Devil cried, What have I to do with thee O jesus the Son of the most high God, this voice was Metaphorical. Howsoever these and many like Scriptures are canonised by you to be Metaphorical, yet yourselves Metaphor, are most properly a couple of the absurdest Dunces that ever put pen to paper. You go on, and labour to overthrow the literal entering of the Devil, because in Mark it is said, There was a 
pag. 17. 1 19 Mar. 1. 23.  man in the Synagogue in an unclean spirit. If the words (say you be taken literally, than the man was essentially inherent within the devil. I answer, Neither are these words taken literally, neither for this cause is the entering of Satan, mentioned else where, to be understood figuratively. The same thing may be, and is uttered sometimes by figure, and sometimes by proper speech. One while our Saviour Christ calls himself The way, and a Door: In another place he saith, That they which believe in him shall not perish, expounding in plain terms that which is spoken by similitude else where. As for this Scripture, To be in an unclean spirit, is not, as a thing contained in a thing containing, as water in a vessel, and such like, but to be in the power of an unclean spirit, as our vulgar tongue expresseth fitly, when we say, Such an one is in a Fever. M. Beza, in opening the meaning of this speech, useth this self same example: and you yourselves call it, A very apt resemblance. Seeing therefore it fitteth so well, let me demand of you, when we say, A man is in a Fever, whether you think the fever is within, or without him? You had thought to have played you with this fever, but it shaketh you a little better than you were aware of. For it plainly declareth, that the natural meaning of the words, notwithstanding they be figurative, doth note unto us an inbeing of the spirit. But you add out 
pag. 20. Luc. 4. 33.  of Saint Luke: There was a man in the Synagogues which had a spirit of an unclean devil. This translations say you, is tolerable, if by the word Spirit we understand not the simple essence, but only the impulsion, motion, or inspiration of the spirit. I answer, we may, I grant understand by the word spirits an impulsions motion, or inspiration, so we do not separate this Impulsion and motion from the real presence of the Spirit. As when we talk of the understanding of a man, we know that understanding is one thing, and the Man another, yet do not separate between the real presence of these two, but join them together. And to this effect Caluin writeth on this place: This speech (saith he) is as much as if Luke had said, This man was moved by the inspiration of the devil: for by God his permission Satan had possessed the powers of his soul, that he might enforce him at his pleasure, as well to speak, as to other motions. And therefore when Demomakes speak, those very devils, to whose rule they are permitted, both speak in them, & by them. Caluin then grants an Inspiration, but joined with the devils presence: These men make a divorce between Inspiration and presence, as if these two could not abide within sight one of another. The inspiration of the devil is within, therefore his Essence is not: which is as much to say, Because a man's brains be in his head, therefore his wit is in his heels. But to let this pass, this only I say to you, which by Spirit here understand only the motion, inspiration, or instigation of the spirit, and affirm, it is gross to understand spirit Essentially, that by this your goodly exposition, this man must be dispossessed of a motion, and not of a devil.  

pag. 21.  Further I alleging, The Devil cannot possibly so move the man bers of a man as he doth commonly of demoniaks being only without him, you oppose the captivating of the wicked, his transporting of Christ, his disposing of the tongues of Shimei & Rabshakeh, his filling of Ananias his heart, and such like. None of all which makes to any purpose. The members of demoniakes are in their supernatural motions moved by the nerves, by the muscles, by the Tendons, the usual movers of the body: and yet without command either of Will, or Imagination, these faculties at that instant being disabled to make choice of things according to their nature: yea sometimes there is a moving in the body, without the service of the moving instruments at all. But in the motions by you alleged, there is no such matter. For in Suggestions the devil by deceiving the fantasy, and blinding the understanding, prevaileth against the will, and this seduced commanundeth all the inferior parts, which he may perform outwardly▪ And as for transporting of bodies, here the whole body is carried violently, not by ordinary stirring of those inward movers appointed to this duty, but at the pleasure of an outward causes as when a man is carried in a ship, in a charet▪ on horseback, or after such other manner. By which it is apparent, the motions which be usually in Demoniakes, cannot be by outward suggestion, but only by inward operation, as disposing of the several members of the body without the Imagination and Will, sometimes by the instruments of motion, and sometimes (which is more 
pag. 22. Matth. 8. 3 & 12. 43. Mar. 5. 12.  strange) without. Moreover, I showing some argument for his inherency, from his earnest desire to enter into the bodies of men, and to dwell there: which appeareth by this, that he is unwilling to be cast out: and being thrown out; findeth no rest till he recover his lost habitation: yea he rather desireth to enter into swine then to want a dwelling. You answer, It is an idle conceit to dream of such a desire: because, The Lord never granted him, nor he ever desired any such thing against job, & yet no doubt he craved as much against him, & had as much yielded, as ever against any. I reply: Whilst we are disputing of the quality of the devils vexation, you tell us a tale of the quantity. We are not now weighing whether job or Demoniaks are more grievously afflicted, but whether they be molested after the same manner. Albeit this is great ignorance in you, to think the torments of the body to proceed from greater tyranny, than his malice that he poureth upon the soul. Was not his power greater in judas, though no Demoniake, them in the man, whom he had possessed a long time? 
Mar. 5. 3. etc.  But to return to job: we never heard till this day that he was a Demoniake: and by your rule, if job was not one (as his book shows he was not) there was never any: because as much power was granted against him, as against any▪ and so all those Demoniakes mentioned in the Gospel▪ by your reckoning shall prove but tales. Let the same answer suffice you for Ahabs' prophets, until we may hear you are either of a better mind, or of more learning. That which you dispute of Saul being possessed, is an idle excursion 
Pag. 29. 30.  of your own▪ I no where maintain it. ●et where you contend that there were no possessions at all in Israel▪ till a little before the coming of Christ, one might ●ustly demand of you, which profess so great insight in this matter, how the jews became so cunning to judge of their possessed? And why Eleazarus in the days of Vespasian & josephus, boasted of salomon's Exorcisms? I doubt not but it was most false to attribute any such wickedness to that wise king: yet these men being but a little after our Saviour Christ, might have been convicted by the testimony of many living, but especially by their own histories, if they should have fathered such practices upon Solomon, which had been evident did begin but yesterday. It seemeth then by opinion of those ancient jews, that Possessions & Dispossessions were before salomon's time, otherwise they would not have made him an author of a thing that sprung up after him. But you will prove by argument, that none were possessed till a little before the coming of Christ. The first of your reasons are contained in these words▪ Thus than it is evident that Saul was never possessed, and so consequently, that (till a little before the coming of Christ) there were no possessions at all in Israel. This argument I answer by the like. It is evident that Saul had not the 
* whiles ●ee was king.  leprosy, Ergo, there were no Lepers in Israel, till a little before the coming of Christ. The other reason you render hereof is, because this judgement is not foretold & threatened the jews by some of the Prophets at least. As though every judgement of God were specified by some of the Prophets. But I 
ag. 31.  will leave you to sport a while with Saul, as also with that of the brasen-Serpent, which is a devise of your own in this matter, nothing pertaining to me.  
Concerning supernatural effects in summers, as that having pins 
ag. 34. etc.  thrust very deep into his legs and other parts of his body without sense, or feeling thereof Physialogus answers, that summers hath since deposed, he felt the ●imes, but dissembled the pa●●es. I answer, his deposition no doubt is a thing much to be regarded, which hath sold himself to be at the Bishop's pleasure, whereby there was nothing so apparently false, which he would not dare to affirm, or deny, as he perceived his liking. But Physialogus tells us further out of Gal●n, that the common sense being earnestly employed in some matter, the outward senses per●●i●● not their own object whereby summers in like manner might be senseless then, as Physialogus is now. But to waken him a little, I would he would try the pings himself. No doubt his own meditations being far more serious and weighty, then could be in that paltry boy, he should receive no pain at all: of which if we were once assured by his experience then were we through for this point. For his foaming, Physialogus answers, that parties affected with 
pag. 36.  the Epile●●sie, foam, and that Scolds do frame: unto which add these two Answerers: That foam out also their own shame. Concerning their violent motions and stir, extraordinary strength, & knowledge, you object nothing, but what M. Harsnet hath done before: unto whom I have answered. It had been more beseeming to have replied to that, than thus to roll over the same stone again. You call for Knapping of iron chains asunder, and then you would believe: as if the Lord must give power to Satan to feed our vain humours. But you remember who promised to believe too, if their curious desires might have been satisfied, who ever scorned the present works they saw, and still desired greater, but obtained not. If there had been chains broken, M. Harsne● would have charged the Smith with confederacy, and would have required they had been 
Discovery pag. 29.  so fastened, as the Keeper of Nemgate could have fastened them. And yet suppose he had fastened them▪ it would have been said he had combined, with us. If this could be cleared, than Darrell should have bewitched him, or summers himself should be a witch. If this would not serve yet some by argument would maintain, that none can be possessed in these days: nay, that there were never any possessed. So be the matter never so true and impossible to be counterfeited some thing would ever be excepted, as long as we have to deal with men Lords over their own tongues, and have no Lord on earth to control them. Considering then I have to meddle with men of this kind, who, so they be saying something, spare not to say any thing be it never so false▪ uncredible, and absurd▪ it shall be folly in me to spend words about them.  

pag. 41.  You affirm: The Deponents themselves have since more advisedly reform their oaths and deposed the contrary. I answer: They have done nothing less. Nay their reexaminations make more for the confirming, then weakening of that they formerly deposed. And this I have made evident in my former answer to the Chapter of Reexaminations: 
Detect lib. 3 cap. 8.  where M. Harsnet objecteth the very same you do here. Whereunto you should have returned a reply, or else for shame never mentioned that, which is already answered. But you may be ashamed (if you be not passed all shame) to say▪ that they reexamined deposed thus: namely, that now by their better enlightened judgements, they plainly perceive all those the former supposed supernatural actions or passions, to be but mere counterfeit toys, and plain cozening practices. O palpable flaunder! What will you stick to affirm, who spare not to publish this for truth? I refer thee good Reader, to my Detection, 
pag. 4●.  the place before quoted, where thou shalt see this to be most untrue Whereas, I say, they would have punished the witnesses, if these things had been found counterfeit: you answer, as if they were dismissed upon compassion, being silly poor persons: and yet of about thirty that have testified the things unpossible to be counterfeited, upon their corporali oaths, seven of them be preachers.  

pag. 43. etc.  After you come to the signs of Possessions which you deny to be▪ set down as rules to discern Essential Possessions by. They be rules of such possessions as were in the Scriptures and we have showed them to be Essential, whatsoever yet you either have, or can prate to the contrary. How foolish and beggarly the words be, you further multiply to this end, I have manifested in your Discourses, I need not repeat them. For the number of signs I stand not strictly upon them. Where they are all▪ I say there is a Possession: I do not say, where there be fewer, or divers others, there is no Possession. For this is free to the Lord to afflict in what measure it pleaseth him. Neither do I cross myself, as you untruly charge me, making 
pag 45.  the Scripture signs the only means to discern of Possessions: and then in the 16. & 17. pag. every way equal my experimented signs with any of them. I only in the pages mentioned name some ●ewe supper natural effects, which in experience I have observed in Domoniakes. But in what place I set them, and how I account of them, is evident in the 37. page, where speaking of experimented signs, I use these words: But the Scripture making no mention of these signs, they are to be regarded accordingly. And ●o likewise in the 22. page. In the applicaion of the signs, you impute unto me divers contrarieties 
●g 46.  after your lying and slanderous manner. As if I should say: Sometimes they have supernatural strength and knowledge, yet sometimes 
●ctr. pag. 6. 17.  again, they only seem to have. Sometime Satan hurts, but hurts not indeed, etc. Touching the first of these, I having spoken of the supernatural strength and knowledge of the parties controverted, in the conclusion thereof show, that I am not so to be understood, as though I meant that they had supernatural strength and knowledge: but therefore is this ascribed unto them by me, because they seem to have such knowledge and strength. And thus oft in scripture is that attributed to Demoniakes, which was indeed performed by the devil, and done only by them in a seeming show. So the Demoniake, Mark 5. is said to break chains and fetters asunder, whereas not he, but the devil broke them. And this is one of your worthy contradictions. Concerning the latter, I say thus, that Howsoever they are so miserably vexed by Satan, as the behold ●s would judge them in most extreme and intolerable pains, yet they feel no pains at all. Yet I doubt not but that Satan can jo order the matter, as that the Possessed shall have pain, when he shall see it serve for his purpose, etc. By which I show there is 
●ag. 48.  not one uniform order to be expected in these cases: which variety of affliction, these men would draw to inconstancy of opinion. You condemn me also for thinking, The Scripture signs are not recorded only as matter of fact, but partly to help us in discorning of possessions. 
Mar. 9 21.  I ground my reason on the question of our Saviour: How long time is it he hath been thus? You answer, Christ respecteth in this question only the first time of that accident. And I reply, you respect in this answer how to trifle off any thing ob●ected against you, with foolish words without any substance at all. Doth not our Saviour loin together with the time, the manner and form of his handling? Doth he not inquire as well of the one, as of the other? We must have a question of time without any subject matter, or reference to any thing. Miraculous Answerers, which can measure time without any standard laid unto it! You charge me with foisting in words into the text for advantage: but it is your own mouths which run 
pag. 49.  over with the word Essentially, and not any addition of mine. I content myself with the phrase of the holy Ghost, rejecting these terms as needless and superfluous. Though wheresoever the devil is, this speech properly understood (as it is usually in the matter of Possession) there must also his spiritual essence be. That which you think is more than the text, is only added to paraphrase it: and though these words In him, be not in this Scripture, yet are they else where used in like case: you are very hungry, which would leap 
Act. 19, 1  at so small a morsel.  
Whether there be a medicine or no for curing Essential possession, you yay, we shall see after in handlng that joint. and I am content to refer 
pag 50. 51 52.  it thither. As for speedy deliver a●●ee of the afflicted, I acknowledge it is no argument of possession: and I thank you for reproving it, though of myself I would be ready to retract any thing dissonant from the truth. It is not my desire, any my stubble should be laid upon the foundation, but I am content the fire of God's word should consume it.  
I alleging those words of the law, That the Lord will bring upon 
Deut. 28. 6 pag. 53. R●uel. 22. 1  transgr●ss●●● eu●ry licknesse, and every plague which is not written in the book of the Law, until they be destroyed. And also that of Saint john: He that shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book, to prove that men may now be possessed: you answer, I abuse the Scripture, making Possession sametimes written, sometimes unwritten. But you abuse yourselves, and your Reader to jangle about that, which every child might teach you. For who knows not that some things might be unwritten in the Law, that be very frequent in the Gospel, as indeed Possession is? But to answer my argument out of these places, you deny 
pag. 53.  Essential possession to be decrced in God his eternal counsel for a judgement. That Possession is essential, we have sufficiently proved in survey of your Discourses. That it is decreed for a judgement, may appear to any not wilfully blind, by those manifold examples of men possessed in the Scriptures: Except those things happened beside the decree of God, or else those possessions were rewards and benefits, not judgements and afflictions It may be your impudent vain will not stick to admit either▪ though none can avouch the first but Atheists, nor the second but only men that are mad. I have showed in your Discourses, how the Lords judgements are perpetual, though not inflicted every moment, but after such intermission as pleaseth him. Is it not then excellent stuff you bring, That the judgements of this life (for we speak only of them) cannot perpetually 
pag. 54.  be inflicted, but salvation must needs be barred from all in Christ? In like manner, because I say, Possession is but a conditional and temporal judgement, you therefore inter, It is not perpetual. W●ere you play with the word● meaning perpetual, a continued connexion, such as nothing may be put between, when as that is usually said to be perpetual, which is common to all ages, though it appear but now 
●ag. 55.  and then. You charge me with disputing from May be, to a being in deed. May not I well dispute, It may be, when you would every where maintain It cannot be? How can a being indeed be concluded, before it be manifest the same thing May be? If the heavens therefore fall, we shall not only catch Larks, as you say, but by catching also of you two, we shall catch something that wants brains.  
I affirming, There is as great cause of this judgement now, as at any time heretofore: you answer, It is utterly untrue: The manifestation of Christ's Deity, and the confirmation of his glorious Gospel being the main causes of possession in Christ's time. My meaning is as appeareth by my words, there is as great cause in respect of sin, as much abounding now as ever. For I do not compare this cause of punishment, with the manifestation of Christ his Deity. And therefore besides the ceasing of the two main causes, you should also have showed that sin was ceased, or else sin to be no cause: which you purpose to do in the 
pag. 56.  pages following. But in the mean season, how do you flourish it, as if I should proudly limit the Lord his times and seasons for inflicting his judgements? I limit no times, but leave it free to the Lord: yet knowing the reward of sin, and the ample kingdom it now hath, according to the manner of all the Prophets, I can do no less than expect his fearful judgements of what kind so ever. But you will 
pag. 57 58.  prove Possession is no punishment for sin, and that out of the Depth of Divinity. Your reason is, Afflictions of this life, laid upon the Elect, be not properly punishments. It is true▪ but what do you lay to this? possession of Devils is an affliction of this life. We grant this too: yet so, that not only Possession is an affliction of this life, but that there be infinite other miseries and calamities beside. What then? Shall we now conclude, That no misery or calamity whatsoever, as well as this of Possession, is any punishment for sin? O deep Divinity, and such as hath not been raised from the bottomless pit till now! I deny not but the Lord may impose it upon a man for trial, and for other ends, as he knows best, but may he not also therefore inflict it as a chastisement for sin, or castigatorie punishment? But your assumption containeth more in it, uz. that Possession is an affliction of this life laid upon the elect. This also I confess is true: but it will not advantage you, except ye add, that it is laid only upon the elect, and then shall we have Possession a note of our election, and so a blessed thing to be possessed with devils, which is such divinity, as never Divine, deep or shallow, once dreamt of. It is a shame to rehearse your fooleries. Then you will urge it more strongly, for that our Saviour curing the possessed hath given them no watchword of 
joh. 5. 14.  sinning no more. I his watchword was given but in one cure, as I remember Was all other diseases therefore no chastisements for sin? Whether our Saviour speak, or whether be silent, you are men that can take occasion for your absurdities upon either. I will not waste paper with rehearsing more of this stuff. Consider with yourselves 
Levit. 26. 1▪ 18. Deut. 28. 2●. Rom. 6. 23 Ephes. 2, 12 1. Cor. 5. 5.  that lesser afflictions be punishments for sin, as we speak vulgarly, if your profundity will give us leave: That all death is the stipend of sin, and that Possession is a kind of death. Besides, Offenders are delivered to Satan by the Church, not for reward, but for Chastisement. And if to be in the power of Satan howsoever, be a chastisement, what is it to be in his possession? Is not he the Executioner appointed over the wicked? Hath not he the 
Heb. 2. 14 1. 2. 44  power of death? How can any one be in his hands, and be not in death? Or how in death, and not in punishment? Our Saviour teacheth that Repossession happeneth upon negligence and security, whereby it may be apparent, that the first possession is not for a man's virtues. It it needless to use many proofs in a plain case, if I had not to deal with men to whom Sunshine is darkness.  
The testimonies of the Doctors, which I allege in the Margin, you 
pag. 59  blame, for that they be not ●ully set down. You have examined them in your Discourses, and confess they speak as I report them. I omitted 
Dialog. Disc. pag. 171.  in this place to put down their words, being after to use them in proof of Dispossession by prayer and fasting since miracles ceased. Which position you see includes the former, and to what purpose should I clog the Reader with unnecessary repetition? Nay what should I be burdensome to you? For in that place where they do speak, they speak so plainly, as you could wish their tongues were out, as we shall see in the next dialogue. If you would discredit Wierus, reporting seventy damsels in Rome possessed with spirits in one night, it had been meet you should have done it with some probability: It is not enough, for that it was at Rome. Will you credit nothing done in that kingdom? No marvel, you will not credit things done at home, though never so substantially certain, It is likely, if it had been but a practice of Roman Exorcists, they would have dispatched it in less than two years. None of them was recovered within this time. To have so many possessed, and for so long time, and not one of them to be dispossessed, made little for the credit of the Exorcists, and of the Popish Church, if Dispossession be a mark of the true Church, as the Papists teach. And so of 
Anno 1566  the thirty children possessed at Amsterdam, the same year they broke down their images, and reform the Religion, as if the Devil them more raged, considering his short time there, as he usually doth at his farewell. Thyreus' his report may be allowed at least, in things 
age 60.  that are witnessed by others. Neither did D. Fulke not inveigh against Possessi n, because it had no maintainers to his time, but because it was gainsaid by none. M. F●x●, M La●e, M. Robinson, with sundry other Divines living in D. Fulk● his time were of opinion there were possessions, as appeared by their pra 'tice, and some of their writings. But what needed any should with earnestness defend that, which no man of any reckoning oppagned? This controversy is new sprung up, first hatched, and brought into light by envy, and still nourished by flattery and Ambition, and expertation to get something from his good Lordship. For your argument from Micacles, I hope I have quashed it in your tenth Dialogue. Is it not wonderful that you acknowledging Pass●ssion to be azure natural dis●as●●an l a thing 
pag. 62.  hidden in the secret counsel of G●●●, to execute and effect when and where he will, and therefore may new r by any man living be avouched for certain, that you dare so presumptuously conclude, that now there can be nop ss ssion? If it be so secret as you say, it is no less danger for you to deny it▪ then for me to affirm it. But you are like the prudent topper of trees, that strikes in sunder the very bough he stands on.  
For prayer and fasting how it is a means to expel Sa●an, we shall 
pag. 62. 63.  see more, God willing in the next Dialogue, if any thing be needful to be added to that already spoken. Whereas I put a difference between the curing of possessions now, & those done by the Apostles for that now it is done by an entreating word▪ then by a base commanding word. you answer as beseemeth your absurd fashion, that Miraculous curing of possessions in Christ's time was at n● hand effected by a bare c mmaunding word, but by a supernatural power concurring therewith. O deep Clerks, and men that have dived to the very bottom of Divinity! When we make comparison of means used by men, what have we to do with supernatural power? Doth either the entreating word or Commanding word exclude that? Would any men in their wits deny the work of the instrument, because it is moved by the principal cause? Meat doth not nourish, because the Lord giveth strength, & the staff to bread: Faith is not by hearing, because it is the giftof God. Such are the demonstrations wherewith these Discoursers think they have put all the world to silence: which happily they have done, except it be for laughing. I do no where affirm that Possession is a natural disease, and therefore 
pag. 64. Matt. 8. 16. 17. Luc. 8. 21.  do not go about by Matth. 4. 24. and Luke 8. 21. to prove it, because in those places it is jointly recorded with natural diseases, wherewith you charge me, and by diverse arguments very soberly confute me: but saying that Possession with Devils is in the Gospel oft brought in among other plagues of God, for proof thereof, I do produce the aforesaid Scriptures. Indeed I say, that Possossion is a disease, but add, to wit, supernatural: and a little after call it an unnatural disease: Whereby I make it plain, what manner of disease I account it to be. If you would now have confuted me, you should have bend your force against these things I say, and not against that I no where do affirm. But this is with you an usual thing. You add, that I deeming possession to be but a mere natural malady, do directly cross my former speech, where I make it a supernatural malady. And this forsooth is one of your Contradictions. But you must first prove better than you have done yet, that I do not only deem, but say, that Possession is a natural malady, before it be so indeed that I cross mine own speech. If I were given as much to cross my body▪ as you say I am to cross myself in my speech, I were a very fit man to make a Papist, who love of life to cross themselves. To make up your sum, you foist us in a counterfeit, That all supernatural 
pag. 65.  works are miracles, as if faith, hope, and charity, peace of conscience and such like were all miracles: which if it be true, we must needs still have miracles, or else have no Church. The Papists would be glad to hear of these tidings, but no body else, except such as would reio●ce at your folly. For your second, third, fourth, and fist Dialogues, wherein, you think, you have overthrown Essential possession, by that time you have weighed in a just balance, what hath been answered thereunto, you shall perceive to have prevailed as much, as if you had laboured to overthrow your Peake hills. You 
pag. 66. 67.  say, You have showed Passession is not inflicted for sin, but I say, you must show it better, before any man of wisdom can believe you. I have branded your absurdity in your Discourses, for that you conclude, 
job. 12. 31.  a final end of possession from the casting forth of the prince of this world. Here you increase it a thousand fold in making your own singular, foolish, and impious wresting of this Scripture, to contain a matter of no less certainty, then is the express word of God, 
Genes. 9 14. 15.  for an utter end of any the like flood to that, which was in Noabs' time. I do not tie the Lord to the punishment of Gomorrah, or of the children deriding the prophet, or of Cehazi, and such others: but where the like sins reign, there may be the like punishment, which you will not grant in actual Possession, having put a necessary end unto it▪ But you will not be pressed with May be. Much a do you keep with this 
pag▪ 68  Sophism, a posse ad esse. Wherfoever you meet with may or can in the conclusion, than eftsoons you tell us of this fallacy. ●s in your Discourses your skill in Rhetoric, & in discerning of Tropes did fail you: so here it doth in Logic, & in discerning Elenches. To avouch Poss ssion of d vels to b●e inflicted also for sin is Cuckoo-like melody in your ears, but you have sung us a jacke Dawes song in limiting it with 
* pag. 67.  two only ends, that is, of confirmation of Chaists Deity, and of the Gospel, as I have abundantly proved.  
Whereas I affirm the judgement of our senses for the truth of summers vexation by Satan, you reply, Our senses could not comprehend 
pag. 69.  such supernatural matters: beside, they might be deluded, and devils can do things in show. For comprehension, seeing you deprive us of all judgement of sense, blame us not if we be something dull in conce●uing this, How that seeing, we do not see: feeling, we do not feel: smelling, we do not smell: and hearing, we do not hear: and that we require you would make it plain unto us. Which when you have once done, and beaten into our heads, I will never trust mine eyes again, though I should see M. Deacon in form of an Angel of light. But if our senses were deluded, & things done in show, that were not in deed, surely it was Satan that deluded us and no counterfeiting in summers, as you would feign have it. This is the sum of your first dialogue against me, to which Lycanthropus subscribeth as able to suffice any reasonable man: but this, is but a small thing, saith Pueumatomachus, and therefore he stretcheth the matter to an higher pitch, That neither any unreasonable man (which is much more) shall be ever able to answer it. So that now we are much beholding to M. Deacon, and M. Walker, that have put all fools and mad men to a perpetual non plus, whose tongues would otherwise continually be tampering.  
Concerning the strange and present affliction of the boy of Northwitch, I will say nothing: I never saw him: howsoever you descant on the matter after your lying & paltry manner. Yet I think 
pag. 71.  it not amiss to offer to thy view (good Reader) the judgement of the Bishop of Chester in his direction to his parents, and of three other Commissioners for causes Ecclesiaflicall, according with him therein.  
FIrst we think it fit, and do require the parents of the said child, that they suffer not any to repair to their house to visit him▪ saving such as are in authority, and other persons of special regard and known discretion, and to have special care that the number always be very small. Further having seen the bodily affliction of the said child, and observed in sundry fits very strange effects and operations, either proceeding of natural unknown causes, or of some diabolical practice: we think it convenient and fit for the ease and deliverance of the said child from his grievous afflictions, that prayer be made for him publicly by the minister of the parish, or any other preacher repairing thither, before the congregation so oft as the same assembleth. And that certain preachers, namely, M. Garrad, M. Massey, M. collar, M. Harvey, M. Eton, M. Pierson and M. Brownhill▪ these only and none other to repair unto the said child by turns, as their leisures will serve, and to use their discretions by private prayer and fasting, for the ease and comfort of the afflicted▪ with all requiring them to abstain from all solemn meetings, because the calamity is particular, and the authority of the allowing and prescribing such meetings resteth neither in them nor in us, but in our Superiors, whose pleasure it is fit we should expect. Moreover, because it is by some held that the child is really possessed of an unclean spirit, for that there appeareth to us no certainty, nor yet any great probability thereof, we think it also convenient, and require the preachers aforesaid to forbear all forms of Exorcism, which always imply and presuppose a real and actual possession.  


Rich. Cestriensis.  
David Yale. Chancel.  
Griff. Vaughan.  
Hugh Burghes.    
Hereunto I will add a few lines, which M. Harvey aforesaid, a man of great learning and godliness, writ in his life time to a friend of his.  
Grace & mercy from our only Saviour. There is such a boy as your report signifieth, whose estate from the beginning of February till this present, hath been so strange and extraordinary, in regard of his passions, behaviour, and speeches, as I for my part never heard, no● read of the like. Few that have seen the variety of his fits, but they think the devil hath the disposing of his body. Myself have divers times seen him, and such things in him as are impossible to proceed from any human creature. The matter hath affected our whole country. The Divines with us generally hold, that the child is really possessed. And so much for him.  
We see what the Bishop and Preachers of Chesse-shire their judgement is touching this child. What say now the Discoursers concerning him? They after they have for three leaves together scofted at his grievous affliction (for so the Bishop before termeth it) in most profane, childish, and scurrilous manner, do in the end 
pag. 76.  affirm, that he counterfeiteth, and that this would soon appear, if be were well conjured a while with a three corded whip. Is this the fruit of your visiting the child? you had better have kept you at home. Was this all the comfort the distressed boy and parents received from you? Miserable comforters than are you. Is this the mercy, and all the bowels of compassion that is in you, towards him that is 
Rom. 12. 15.  in misery? O merciless men, and void of all pi●ie! It appeareth you have not learned to weep, with them that weep. Well, I can tell you of a couple of such merry or merciless companions as yourselves, that coming of late to one M. tames Charles of Wolroych in Kent, to see his daughter Clemens Charles, who is reputed to be possessed with the devil, & not without cause, they scarce went so merrily home, as they were at M. Charles, and yet but a small thing befell them by the way. Returning home, they went by one M. Hooke his house of Darlton, master not long before to this maid, at whose house she began to be afflicted. Now as they were on horseback before M. Hooke his door, and sporting themselves with him about the counterfeiting of this new upstart counterfeit. behold, one of their horses staled blood, and as they were talking thereof, lo. the other did the like: whereat they were somewhat appaulled. How it fared with their horses after I know not, but the day following they carried themselves at M. Charles more soberly, whether they went on other horses. But hereof enough: I will now proceed to your second Dialogue.   

A REPLY TO THE SECOND DIALOGUE.  
THe second part of my Doctrine treateth, That those eight before mentioned were verily dispossessed, & that by fasting and prayer, the means appointed by God. For confirmation whereof, I knew no better rule than the example of men dispossessed in holy Scripture, which is the only true and unsallible touchstone to examine both this, and all other actions by. These Answerers scorn these notes, calling 
pag. 8●.  them falsely pretended signs of dispossession from sacred Scripture, and therefore pretermitting them, require my arguments, as if the Signs from Scripture were no arguments at all. It seemeth you have found a vein of better metal than the Scriptures, from whence your whole book is so full stuffed with your own shining dross, and is so utterly destitute of this purified gold. Yet you cannot beat me from them, but I urge them thus: There were in our Demoniakes the self same signs or notes of dispossession, precedent and subsequent, which we rea●e of in the Scripture Demoniakes, and therefore the same dispossession▪ you answer, There were not the same signs in our demoniakes: and first, because they were mere cosonages, as is confessed freely by the parties themselves upon their own oaths. I reply, the parties we speak of, be eight in number, whereof only summers hath made this cursed confession: which was not free and voluntaries, 
Detect. pag. 127.  as you untruly affirm, but extorted by Satan, and his instruments, as in my Detection I have made manifest. But what say you to the seven in Lancashire? It may be summers hath sworn for them all: for they as yet, were never examined: yet because we doubt of Summer's general oath, I pray you prove unto us, who taught the children to counterfeit? when, and where, and by what means they were taught? what end might induce them to embrace such teaching? whether the parents were privy to it? and what they propounded in practising such wickedness? Yea, put summers too into the roll, & show us what man is able by practice to do the things that either Summers or they did? And one would think a man of mean agility might quickly perform that, which cofoning young boys and girls could. Show us, I beseech you, these and such like things, or otherwise if you cannot show them, & yet tell us of cos●nage, you show us nothing but your long ears, & brazen faces. Secondly, 
●g. 83.  say you, The signs in the Scripture Demoniakes were sensibly perceived by the beholders: but these in your pretended Demoniakes were not so, by your own confession. Belike all we that were spectators of our Demoniakes, being (at sundry times) a great multitude, were all stricken with blindness, with deafness, and with a benumbedness, and yet we all thought we used our senses, and I am sure, we were no sooner out of the place, but we were able, the Lord be thanked, to see, hear and feel. But you confirm this by mine own confession, 
●ct. pag. 37  which saith, that the spirit could not possibly be felt or seen. I said so, & say so again, that Spirits cannot be felt or seen in their own bare essence, but as they make themselves known unto us by their effects. I angling Sophisters will dispute, That the nose of a man's face cannot be seen, because that which we see is but colour or form, and the nose itself is neither of both. Your ears ring it may be with their noise, which hath made you borrow an argument from them. Thirdly, you say, The Signs we report are false: which I would grant you if yourselves had learned to speak truth. We must remember there are above two hundred witnesses hereof living at this day, of which some have deposed the same we report of summers. Fourthly, say you, Scripture Signs can argue no Dispossession now, because like effects may arise from natural causes, and coporall diseases. By this your good help Atheists might overthrow all Possessions and Dispossessions in the scripture. But howsoever you may be friendly to such vile wretches, yet have they no foothold from hence. For neither those effects in those ancient Demoniakes, nor in these of our time jointly & wholly considered can proceed from natural disease. Natural causes can bring forth no supernatural effects, as we have demonstrated these to be in spite of your seventh Dialogue, and what other treaty so ever you oppose against it. Lastly, say you, A dispossession may be without such apparent signs, and therefore your signs precedent and subsequent do not necessarily conclude a dispossession. What? Because it is sometimes without these signs, therefore where these signs are, shall it not be? It is sometime day light without the clear sunshine, therefore when the Sun shines clear shall it not be day? Sometimes the murderer slays a man and is not taken with the manner, therefore if he be taken with the manner, shall he not necessarily be concluded a murderer? These are good rules to make a man impudent in sin: for by them the bold offender shall speed better, than he that doth it minchingly▪ You have spoken then prettily against these signs, but without any sign of truth or wit.  
From Scripture signs I descend to some experimented by myself in dealing with Demoniakes, which have reported certain visible shapes, in which the devils seemed to departed from them. But here I am taken up for halting, in that I call it My experience, which was proved in the persons of other. I confess I spoke rudely, as all other men do, which call a physician a man of good experience, though he hath not proved all the diseases, he hath dealt with, in his own body. 
pag. 84.  As for visible shapes, you utterly deny, that Spirits could procure them: yet they did before Pharaoh, and infinite others since, as we have showed by better arguments in my survey of your fourth and fift Dialogues, than you ever have, or can for the contrary. Some also I show did vomit, or strain to vomit when the devil departed. With 
pag. 85.  this you make good sport, perhaps ticled with remembrance, that you have returned to your own vomit.  
Further, I concluding a dispossession, from the present effect of our prayers (whereof the like is not in natural diseases.) You charge me with proper terms, as with certain charming words to conjure the Lord with, for so it pleaseth your profane mouths to speak. And yet I do not use the word proper. Only I say, And God heard our prayer vit●red in such terms▪ that is, made to that effect, as before I have showed in brief. I never dreamt that such▪ Argeese would come after me with so many eyes, to find an hole in my coat for these words more than in all other men's. But to let words pass, you would disprove the effect of our prayers, for that we could not 
pag. 86.  make the parties the Temples of the holy Ghost, as we had prayed. We challenge no such power, but we might well hope of the mercy of the Lord to sanctify them, which did plainly behold his great goodness in delivering them from Satan's great rage. Howsoever me thinks you should not be offended with us for putting up this request to God. And what if the Lord doth not always yield present success to the prayers of his servants? Can we not therefore be assured he had now heard us, when we saw the thing performed before our eyes▪ It is true the Devil sometime seemeth to departed, when he doth not but when it is at the requests of God's people▪ when it is after such grievous vexation as was in the Demoniakes in the Gospel, when it is with the health of the parties, and present freedom from all former vexations die Satan, we need not doubt of it in any sort. For the visible departure of Satan, I answered you even very now.  

●ag. 87. 88▪ ●9. Matt. 12. 43  Besides, I allege for Dispossession, Satan's desire of repossession, which is never but after he is thrown out. You return a double answer, first, that these words, I will return to the house from whence I came, etc. be metaphorical. We remember indeed your monstrous absurdity in making all things whatsoever, spoken of Angels, and devils in the scripture▪ to be meaphorical. But as I have showed you, many are not Metaphorical, so neither is this repecting the sentence of 
Matt. 12. 45  it. The words be part of a similitude, as is plain by the reddition, So shall it be to this wicked generation. The whole standeth thus. As when an unclean spirit goeth forth of a man, passeth through dry places seeking rest, and findeth none: then faith, I will return to my house, etc. entering again in, the last estate of that man is worse than the first▪ so shall it be to this wicked generation. Now to find what passed of this sentence is Metaphorical, we are to know that a similitude is twofold. One which is contracted & shut up in one word, properly called a Metaphor▪ the other displayed & spread open, consisting of all the parts at large, and is termed by the name of the general, a Similitude. For the figurative part in either, the reason is one in both. Therefore as in a contracted similitude, the Metaphor lieth in the word that is borrowed, and not in that from▪ whence it is borrowed, so in the larger similitude, the metaphorical part of it resteth in the Reddition, not in the Proposition. For example▪ Honour nourisheth Arts: the word Nourisheth being borrowed from meats nourishing the body, is a Metaphor as it is applied to Honour, and Arts, but attributed to his proper terms, it is no Metaphor, as to say thus, Meat nourisheth the body. In like manner (to make a full Similitude of it, in this sort) As meat nourisheth the body, so Honour nourisheth Arts, the Metaphorical part of the whole, lieth in the latter member, not in the first. So likewise when our Saviour saith, As a man delivered from the possession of Satan, and receiving him in again, is in worse case after, than before: So the nation of the jews, once delivered from the kingdom of Satan, so long as the church of God was amongst them, and coming into his subjection again by refusing Christ, should be in more miserable condition then in any former time: the Metaphorical sentence of this Similitude, is in the last branch of it, not in the first. Not because there be no Metaphorical words in the first, as Dry places, house empty, swept, garnished. etc. but for that we now speak of Metaphorical sentences, not of words. I frame my argument from the Proposition of the Similitude, the sentence whereof is literal and historical, not from the Reddition, whose sense is allegorical. Now then i● a man should reason thus: The Reddition of the Similitude is Metaphorical, therefore the whole is metaphocall, it is all one as if one should say, The black Moor bathe white teeth, therefore he is all white. Which kind of argument every chimney-sweeper would deride: and yet thus you reason from this place, and make it one of your chiefest props to uphold your absurd conclusions with. But unto this place I added another, where our Saviour saith to the unclean spirit, Come out of him, and enter 
Mat. 9 25.  no more into him. Was our saviours prohibition here in vain? was this caution altogether needless and supers●uo us? How chance you pass over this place, withoutanswering one word unto it▪ It was too plain: and you two could not agree where the Metaphor should lie, & therefore thought better to slip it over, then by handling it, and bewraying your own absurdities to mar all. The re-entry therefore of Satan is plain by the Scriptures: so that we need not the testimony of any experience: yet I have adjoined in the Doctrine the report of the children dispossessed, and the evidence of many godly then present, which perceived by their agony, and the words of their resistance, what Satan attempted. You trifle over this with greater childishness than appeared in the children, though but nine or ten years old, and therefore I disdain to answer it▪ Again for proof of dispossession, I allege then continuance of the party's health since: you answer: Their former fits were but counterterfeit, 
pag. 90.  a● themselves have confessed. A stolen proof of their counterfeiting, and answered before. The seven in Lancashire never confessed any counterfeiting.  

pag. 91. 92. 93.  Thus having confirmed Dispossession, I remove that usual objection, showing it is now no miracle, for that it is not done by absolute power of Christ in bodily presence, as he sometimes did it when he was here conversant on earth▪ nor by any committed extraordinary power to men but by ●asting an● pra●er as the means▪ you answer first: as if I affirmed Christ's absolute power to be ceased: which I affirm not, but account such affirmation blasphemy▪ He is not now present in body on earth, but worketh by his absolute authority still. Secondly, If Christ's absolute authority be th●o●ly efficient▪ than the work is a● miraculous, as ever. Which is a flat untruth, as I ha●e proved at large in ●our tenth Dialogue. For works done by men as instruments are distinguished by the manner of working, and not by the principal cause. you say my Similitude from the Queen, and Lord chancellor is too absurd: for first, it is a case which never shall be, and so cannot illustrate. I had thought that fictasimilitudo might have had some force. But surely as you are full of new Divinity, so I think you have swallowed Margaritam Philosophiae, you break out on every occasion with such wonderful new axioms of Logic. I intended that Similitude to the manner only of Christ's working, and you would extend it to the like glory of his works now, clean beyond my purpose, and any good probability. For are not Christ's works more glorious, when together with himself his servants work extraordinarily, as they did in the time of miracles, than now, when his servants working is only ordinary. But you will make the same similitude overthrow all miracles now, which I will yield for any, but for yourselves: for you have a privilege to do miracles, as is apparent in your tenth Dialogue.  

●ag. 94.  Hitherto for Dispossession, now for the means: which I affirm with many godly and learned of ancient and our own times, 
Matt. 17. 21  to be fasting and prayer, out of the words of our Saviour, This kind goeth not out but by fasting and prayer. Where I calling it a Secret ordinance, oppose it to more evident places: you catch at the word, and 
Deut. 29, 29  come upon me with Secret things belong only to God. He that should deal with you had need, as the Lawyers in writing their instruments, rather have twenty words to spare, then to want one. You would prove, these words did only belong to the Disciples, because the 
●ag. 95. 96.  question was made by them, and the answer to them. The jailer in the 16. of the Acts said to Paul and Silas, What must I do to be saved? They answer him: Believe in the Lord jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved, etc. Doth this Scripture now only belong to the jailor, because this question was made by him, & the answer unto him? Of 
Matt. 17. 21  this kind be infinite other places. For interpretation of these words of Saint Matthew, I have showed you how I conceive of them in your ninth Dialogue. Which exposition varieth somewhat from my former, not because I cannot maintain it against any thing you object, but because I seek after truth, and not after vain jangling. If you can show me any better, I will be ready also to change this. In mean season understand how I reason from hence for the perpetual means of Fasting and prayer, which are mentioned by our Saviour in this place, either as helps to the extraordinary and miraculous faith of the Apostles, or else of the ordinary. But they are not 
Math. 7. 17.  mentioned as helps to the extraordinary: for miraculous faith in the least quantity, though no more than a grain of mustard seed was able without these helps to expel any devil. Besides they could not be helps to that, which in itself had no being. For the Disciples had utterly lost their miraculous faith, else they had elected the spirit. This also the word Apistia, incrdulity doth note un to us. And an help is a conjoined force, which conjunction cannot be, where there is nothing to join withal▪ and therefore they be propo unded in this place as helps to the ordinary faith, and so to have a perpetual ordinary use, when like occasion is ministered to us. Again, every Exception is a compendious speech, comprehending in it two propositions, as, Except a man be borne again, he cannot 
joh. 33. joh. 6. 44. Act. ●7. 31  see the kingdom of God▪ wherein is concluded also this, If f a man be borne again he can see the kingdom of God. So, None can come unto me except the Father draw him. Every one can come unto me, whom my Father draweth. Again, Except these abide in the ship, you cannot be saved. If these abide in the ship, you can be saved. And so in all other. In like manner, This kind doth not go forth, but by prayer and fasting. This kind doth go forth by prayer and fasting. Now then let men o● judgement determine whether here be not an evident confirmation of the ordinary course of the Church in dealing after this manner▪ and whether it be not exceeding boldness, our Saviour affirming in such sort as is declared▪ That this kind doth go forth by prayer and fasting, for any to open his mouth licentiously against it, and to disgrace it by all opprobrious terms he can. From hence too you may see, the similitude drawn from the Physician saying to his patient, dangerously sick of the Pleurisy, You cannot live, except you bleed, was to good purpose, if you could judge what is to purpose.  
It is too tedious to repeat all your untruths, your absurd Non sequiturs, and idle profess. As if I thought it unreasonable for Christ to 
pag. 99  reprove his Disciples negligence: if Christ's answer were not proper to the Disciples, it was no answer: if he directed not his speech to the Disciples only, he spoke to no body present. This metal craves no touchstonne, it shows itself by the eye what it is: therefore a knock with an hammer is sufficient So, If this answer of Christ propounded an ordinance for all ages to come, there is an ordinance without an appointed subject to undergo the same. Indeed this would be strange for Accidents to walk alone without subjects. It is a difficult matter to find who should be the subject of fasting and praver: so likewise too of the 
Matt. 6.  kingdom of God, which our Saviour ordaineth to be sought in the first place, and food and raiment in the second, if we could tell who 
g. 100  〈◊〉 do it▪ ●esides succeeding ages that could expel this cumbersome 〈◊〉 should have more power the ever the Apostles bad, which is false: for the Apostles, their▪ saith not failing, could expel any devil. Further, The Apostles should ●aile in not declaring this ordinance unto us: concerning which enough hath been sai●e in the ninth Dialogue. I ast●y, it 〈◊〉 established ordinance in this place, because M Darr●ll af●●●●th it hath b●ene a ● ordinance fr●m the beginning. I answer, I do not refe●●e the original to this place, but only the Confirmation, 
jath. 19 99 〈◊〉 12. 27 Act. 16. 13.  no otherwise then I make Matrimony an established ordinance by our Saviour Christ, he renewing the institution of it.  
Again▪ I argue the means of fasting and prayer from the example of the jews Church in our saviours time: wherein some did cast forth devils▪ and yet were not in the number of our saviours Disciples, neither did it in his name. You answer, I contrary my sel●e, affirming ●l●e where, they did it by the ●inger of God: I reply, ●ou 
 do not contrary yourself▪ but are ever li●e yourselves, most absurdly concluding the self same working of the instrument, from the same manner of the principal agent: whereas the chief doer being the same, may and doth work by the instrument diversly. Again, say you by mine own confession, this ordinance as then was not established▪ I answer, is was not so plainly, as when our ●auiour confirmed it by these words, yet in general it was, and practised in the Church before. Moreover, say you, Those in our saviours time besides 
●th. 7▪ 22  his Disciples▪ cast out devils by miraculous faith only, for which you allege the seventh of Matth●w I reply, this scripture speaketh only of the e●ection of Satan but showeth not in what manner the same was performed, nor when▪ We do not lean upon any doubtful uncertainties, as you would Rhetorically declare, if ye knew how▪ neither do we take the Lords holy name in vain, nor pray without faith▪ as you prate both without wit and conscience. I pass over your fooleries concerning K. Wright, & your six lies at one clap▪ contained 
〈◊〉 103. 〈◊〉 104.  in seven lines, as I can prove to your shame. But what speak I of six, when I dare say there be six hundred leasings in ●our two volumes? We need not take things of whole sal● men by retale: it ●s ●n ea●y matter to know badour l●ing whose children ve are  
That Christ's speech ought not t● be appropriated to the Disciples, hath bee●e declared. Neither ●o I say and unsay as ●ou falsely charge me. 
pag. 105. 106.  The communication was between our Saviour and his Disciples, b●t the ordinance there mentioned is common to all▪ ●et Phys●alogus sit these variable answers, as he miscalls them, doth tell us a tale of an Hermit▪ which coming to a Farmer's house, and blowing his fingers to warm them, and his ●ottage to cool them, was s●nt packing by the Farmer▪ as a dissembling companion. But, to requite you tale, what if the like Hermit had come to some good man's house, and having on his face a fair shining visarce with A. W. written upon it, should upon occasion have his vizard shaken off, and under it show another face, signed with I. De. Might not the good man justly abhor this double fa●ed guest, ●nd admonish all honest company to beware of him? I will pard●n you your sport at fast and 
pag. 107.  lose for a shilling, though I might justly make it s●t ●aster unto you, than you would unloose again in haste. Put where is the contrariety, I pray you, in making th●se words to ●ee spoken to the Disciples, and yet not only to be understood of them? You would collect it after this manner, Because that weakness of faith, and the kind of 〈◊〉 w●re the two in 〈◊〉 wherefore the child was not delivered. And that which is an impediment to any, is also proper to the same party, if we will believe your Metaphysics. For you must needs derive your Assumption 
H●b 3. 1● & 4. 1. 2.  f●●m hence. As if the Israelites being shut ●ut of the land of promise for their unbelief, this impediment should be so proper to them, that n●re but themselves should be excluded for the same: which absurdity is of that nature, that if your stick of fast and lose were ● good sound cudgel, you deserve to be well laboured about the shoulders with it▪ ●ut what should I pursue your several absurdities? To ●ake after such scatterers were to fill a cart, rather than ones lap. In brief for your whole dispute, to prove these words only to belong to the Disciples: I● incredulity and ●mission of 
Matt. 17.  prayer and fasting were impediments only to the nine Disciples, (for Peter, james and john were not of this number) than they can be impediments to no body else. And so Peter, james & john should cast out any kind of spirit notwithstanding the like incredulity, and omission of ●asting and prayer. Yea all other Christians whatsoever should also in like manner. For what should hinder them, if they have no impediment? And what impediment can they have, these two being only proper to the nine Disciples? See now how providently you tie these words to the Disciples only, permitting larger power to all other Christians then to them. The contradiction you here charge me with is lame. It is palpably false, that 1 pag. 49. of the Doctrine avouch, there are some kind of spirits, which the Apostles (with all their power) could not possibly expel, but by prayer and fasting. Of this very error I do by sundry reasons from pag. 44. of the Doctrine▪ unto page 48. confute Stapleton and Thyrcus, which notwithstanding you charge upon me, & again stick not to say, that Stapleton, Thyrcus, and myself agree herein, so shameless are you. But specially you make yourselves merry with a contradiction, pag. 111. 112. I answer, The Disciples their not expelling the devil out of the Lunatic, when they were destitute of miraculous faith, letteth not but that by miraculous faith they could expel any devil. These I trust may agree together, without cutting the throat one of another.  
That which you talk of helping their weak miraculous faith by 
pa. 113, etc.  fasting and prayer, is already answered. Further, I showing that fasting and prayer were not required as helps in this place to miraculous fa●th, say, that Miraculous faith is of that kind, which is given without means to certain men: whereupon it must needs follow, that there being an Apistia, an utter defect of miraculous faith in these Disciples, it was not to be recovered by fasting and prayer. You answer, It was not 
1. Cor. 12, 9  begotton without means, because it was given by inspiration of God. By which you make the holy Spirit to be a means: whereas a means is but an instrument: And the holy Ghost together with the other two persons of holy Trinity is always a principal efficient. Thus you confound heaven and earth together, & make nothing in the world to be done without means: neither any thing in the world to be more than ordinary: for whatsoever is done by the same usual and never ceasing means, must needs be reputed ordinary. There be few places in the field more replenished in the spring with stinking nettles and weeds, than your whole book with such poison full hemlocks as these. But with all we have a Discourse of an Habitual & Actual miraculous faith: 
pag. 114.  whereof the habitual is begotten by the Spirit and the word. Seeing therefore these causes cannot always be effectless, and that they be ever working in the Church till the end of the world, it cannot be avoided but that Miraculous faith should be in the Church for ever: And the rather if we consider, what by your saying miraculous faith is: which you define to be nothing else, but an vnd●uted persuasion, by which we firmly believe, that there is nothing impossible to God: But all the faithful do undoubtly believe this, and therefore we have still Miraculous faith remaining amongst us, and shall have so long as the Church soiornes on earth: yea the very devils believe this and so having miraculous faith, by your leaden rule shall be workers of true miracles▪ I add, they which were endued with the miraculous faith, had beside the persuasion of God's omnipotency, an undoubted persuasion of the will of God, for the effecting of the wonderful matters, which beside or contrary to nature they attempted for the good of the Church. Now for as much as the knowledge and assurance of the said will of God is not to be had from the word, therefore the written word is not the only ground▪ work of miraculous faith, neither doth it come by the hearing thereof, as you affirm. For Actual faith, you will have it a special motion from the spirit of God, raised up extraordinarily, whereby the action of faith shall not proceed from the Habit as from the next cause, as the action of justice cometh from the habit of justice, and so in all other qualities of that kind, but there shall be something in Actual faith extraordinarily more than was in the Habitual. If a man had your sharpness he might quickly go beyond Actius▪ Navius, that cut the whetstone in pieces with his razor. For the increase of miraculous faith by means, it is but needles to stand upon it, considering we affirm an utter defect thereof at this time in the disciples, not some covered sparks remaining in them, to be raised into flames by fasting and prayer. For true miraculous faith how little soever, is able with out these helps, to achieve her defined work. But than you will say, yea in effect do say, that the Apostles did superfluously join prayer 
pag. 116.  with it. I answer, no more superfluously, than the Church doth join Sacraments with the word. Faith of itself is sufficient, to apprehend Christ unto salvation, and this faith is begotten by the word: Yet Sacraments have their necessary use, not to enable faith to that, which it could not with out them, but to confirm and strengthen it to do her work more cheerfully, and with fuller assurance. Prayer is the general instrument to be used in all holy works what soever: and therefore the Apostles had warrant for their prayer, & were free from all will-worship therein. I omit here 
pag. 117. 118  for brevity five of your slanders, and two contradictions wherewith you charge me, myself being not author of any one of the contradictory proposions.  
I proving that these words in S. Mathewe (this kind goeth not 
Matt. 17. 21  out, etc. belong not peculiarly to the Disciples, say, that if our Saviour had rebuked them for not fasting & praying, they might have excused 
pag. 119 120. 121.  their want of time, you trifle exceedingly about this: at last you afford us this worthy answer, that considering our saviours staying in the mount (which for all the circumstances you can allege can not be long) they had time enough to pray. Antiquum obtinct Crito, you must run your old bias, & impudently flap us in the mouth with time for prayer, when the question is of time for fasting and prayer. Again, you will have these words, This kind goeth not forth but by fasting and prayer, to be no sever all reason rendered by our Saviour, why his Disciples failed in their purpose: whereas we have showed, it is a distinct thing from Miraculous faith, and not necessarily joined with it: and therefore not to concur in making one reason with the 
●ag. 122. ●g. 123. 124  same▪ Moreover say I, ●f the Apostles in each weakness of this faith, must of necessity have betaken themselves to fasting and prayer, they should have been a whole day about a miracles the exercise of fasting requiring this space, which would have been great hindrance to their speedy travel over the whole earth. You answer, This is judaisme. Belike also it is judaisme for Christians to pray▪ because the jews did so. But understand, good Reader, that the practice only of such cereremonies as the Lord appointed to be a difference between the jews, and other people, is judaisme, not the exercise of such duties, as be common to both. That which you doubt what should become of the other part of the day, if the devil should be cast forth before noon, beseemeth men which acknowledge no other service of God, but for their own turns. Is there no duty of thanksgiving? no request for strength to the party dispossessed? no desire that the eye-witnesses might profit by it? you would have Christians serve God, as the dog his master for a bone. The rest is unworthy to be repeated, & so was this, but that I would give the Reader a taste. But what say you, that will not have a fast to continue for a day▪ to A Walker, alias 
●●g. 5.  Io. Deacon? who in a book of his called the Foot-path to fasting, saith▪ that in the day of our fast, we must be exercised in hearing, applying, and praying for the removing of God his judgements, even from morning to night? Do I (you false tongues) in pag. 48. and 49. of the Doctrine 
pag. 125.  say, that the Apostles should have stirred up their weak faith by fasting and prayer, when I spend those whole pages to prove the contrary▪ O palpable slander, and extreme impudency! Likewise you say, I affirm else where, The Apostles faith was so strong as it needed no means to stir up the same. And I would tell you, you say untruly, but that your score is so full that now you be desperate. Of these two bastardly propositions, conceived and brought forth by yourselves, and not by me, you frame a Contradiction: saying thereupon, that I will turn, ●re I burn, yea with the turning of an hand, turn the cat in the pan: and then you tell my pupils, they may be pestilent proud of such a turne-about tutor. Here we may behold, as your honest dealing with me, so your eloquence and modesty.  
Besides, I avouching the Apostles strong faith after Pentecost, able for miracles whatsoever, and therefore unlikely the Lord should appoint a peculiar course for them, for so short a time as from his transfiguration till then: you collect from hence the weakness of their faith till Penticost: which I grant you, and more than that, namely, that their miraculous faith was utterly extinct at this time▪ And therefore no use of fasting and prayer for the extraordinary work, but only as it served to the usual manner of the Church in this case. But you will prove the apostles miraculous faith might fail a●ter Pentecost, because their faith failed sometimes in doctrine and 〈◊〉 That we may understand your meaning, what do y● 〈◊〉 by Doctrine? what by judgement? Doctrine usual▪ is public teaching and instruction▪ judgement private thinking and opinion. Did the Apostles err in public teaching? You say, The Apostles and brethren which were in Iud●a, thought the word of God was not to be preached to the Gentiles. 
Act. 11. 2.  You ground this ou● of these words▪ And when Peter was ascended to H●erusalem, they of the circumcision contended against him. Who contended with him? The Apostles, say you, but without any warrant from the text. It seemeth S. Luke having mentioned the Apostles in the first verse, doth of purpose in the second use these general terms, They of the circumcision, to distinguish these contenders with Peter, from the Apostles. It may be the Apostles did not yet ●o clearly understand this mystery, yet it is not likely they were in this ca●e no more but equal to the weak brethren, whereby the● should join in contention with them. Grant we also an error here, it was only in judgement, not in doctrine. And as for Peter's not going rightly to the truth of the Gospel, it was not error 
Gat. 2. 13. 14  either in doctrine or judgement, but a timorous dissimulation for the time. john his falling down before an Angel, was error through 
R●ue. 19 10  sudden passion, not proceeding from settled judgement, much less avouched in public teaching. Considering therefore these places prove not that the Apostles erred in doctrine and judgement, and that the Lord doth principally promise that the Spirit of truth should l●ad 
joh. 16. 13 & 14. 26. 1. Cor. 3. 10. Ephes. 2. ●0.  them into all truth: and bring all things to their remembrance which Christ had told them, whereupon they be called Skilful Maister-builders, and the Church is said to be built upon the foundation of the prophets and apostles. It is admirable you dare so confidently avouch such an assertion, upon so little or rather no warrant▪ and of so dangerous consequence. You childishly cavil at my speech, where I say, Their faith did not fail them, after they received the holy Ghost in 
●ag. 127. etc.  That f●●nesse: as if I had attributed such a fullness to them, as is not incident to a creature: and yet I expressly distinguish it by note of restraint 
Act. 7. 55. & 13. 9 Luc. 1. 41. Act. 2. 2. 4  That fullness, that is, such a plentiful measure as I had spoken of before. Such an one, as was said of Stephen, ●hat he was full of the holy Ghost: and of Paul: and of Elizabeth, when she broke forth into that heavenly salutation of the blessed virgin, that she was filled with the holy ghost. The same is said of Zacha●y when he prophesied, and of the Apostles, that they were filled▪ with the holy ghost. And all these in the Concrete▪ but in the Abstract without all limitation to have the fullness ●f the Spirit, belongeth only to a divine person, the Father▪ the Son, and the holy Ghost▪ So that whatsoever person hath the simple fullness of the Spirit, the same is God, as well as he who hath the fullness of the Godhead. Of Christ his fullness (to whom the Father hath not given his Spirit by measure) do all the elect receive, not the fullness itself, but grace for grace, that is, graces or gifts of the Spirit heaped upon graces: every one according to the measure of the gift of Christ, some even until their cup run over. All which discourse when at last you 
pag. 133.  conclude, that howsoever the Apostles were subject to error, yet they could not possibly err s● long as they heard the voice of Christ▪ and but followed the only directions of the spirit of truth: And that they did never universally err: Moreover, that they did never ●●cline from the foundation itself: & lastly, that they w●re recalled from their e●r●urs● what singular thing do you ascribe to the Apostles, that is not common to all believers? Are not the Apostles to be preferred above all other Ministers of the Gospel, and believers since their days? Yet you seem to put them in the very same ra●ke▪ Nay, you say in the top of the same page, that there ●e some F●st●noni●s of the Apostles, which only but slipped from human infirmities, and that these (●ow glorious soever in show) are not the testimony of jesus, & therefore not the spirit of prophesy. you speak here very dangerously, that I say no worse.  
You argue the defect of the Apostles miraculous ●aith, from their 
pag. 135. Act. 4. 29 30. & 9 40 & 〈◊〉 8. 8  praying in working miracles, which rather is an argument for the continuance of it. For if it had ●in utterly extine it had not been to ●e obtained by prayer▪ but if you say Prayer declareth the weakness of it, and that you mean such weakness, as without prayer ha● not been able to effect the work, it is false 〈◊〉 hath been oft ●emembred unto you▪ but if you take weakness for some less measure of 
Matt. 17.  cheerfulness, which had need be stirred by invocation of God's holy name, I grant you such a weakness, but this is too weak to strengthen any whit your cause. you charge me falsely in saying, I deny that the apostles faith might & did fail before they were filled with 
Doct. pag. 46, 48 Doct. 49 pag. 136  the holy Spirit. I know not how oft I affirm this, which you say is the very point I deny▪ Neither do I say▪ it was but forty days between Christ his transfigi●ation, and Pentecost. I do writtingly let pass many of your lies▪ it is a trouble to repeat them. you see no inconvenience to approper these words, This kind goeth not forth but by fasting & prayer, to the Disciples themselves: whereas if fasting and prayer had been necessary as helps to their weak faith, that could not stand which our Saviour hath immediately before affirmed, that so much ●aith as a grain of Mustard seed should be able to do the greatest miracles. How this distinction of devils is to be understood, we have sufficiently declared in the Doctrine. you make a wonderful 
Doct. p. 51▪  partition, when you interpret This kind, only to distinguish divets from other creatures. The nature of a partition is, that the thing which is parted should be common to all the members. as in this place, creatures going out is the General agreeing to both the Specials, in this sort. Of creatures that go out of man some are devils, and they go not out but by fasting and prayer: some are of other kind, and these of what nature soever go out of a man without fasting and prayer Wha●▪ is man now become a cage for all creatures▪ Indeed the old Philosophers had wont to say, that Man is a little world: but ●ou will give us a sensible understanding o● it, if horses, be ar●● and lions, fowls, and creeping things of all kind, may have an habitation in him. You have been so careful all this while to free man from possession of devils, that in the mean season you have made ●im a fo●●est to contain all savage beasts in. I pray you what kind of creature doth lodge in your own breasts? But you say▪ 
pag. 137.  Th● kind cannot be referred to the diu●ls amongst themselves, because they be▪ all of one kind as angels be▪ and also men. Profoundly sure▪ as if kind did only note essence, an● not sometimes quality and condition▪ you brought us even now an example of threwes, The best of this kind is sh●●mish enough whereby you said, wom●n were severed from men by therefore or kind▪ Is difference of sex difference of Essenced So 〈◊〉 speak of doceitfull men, This kind of men is not to be trusted▪ of flatterer's and ambitious persons This kind of men speak● all to please those in authority▪ of such as have made ship wrack o● a good conscience, This kind of men groweth worse & worse. Now tell me, you Answerers, whether Kind will carry no other sense but that, wherewith you cavil as beseemeth fresh Sophisters. Again, it is admirable, you could find no other similitude to declare the distinction 
●ag. 138.  of devils by, but only the whole state of this kingdom of England, comparing our most gracious Sovereign, God's Lieutenant amongst us (I tremble to speak it) to the Prince of darkness, and all the inferior honourable orders of Dukes, Earls, Lords, judges, justices, Knights, Gentlemen, yeomen, etc. to the lower sort of devils. Can any men forget themselves so much, as that against all good manners, against honesty, against Christianity, yea, against nature itself, which hath printed in the minds of subjects all loyal and reverent respect towards their most worthy Sovereign, and in the hearts of inferiors all dutiful regard of their honourable Superiors, that you should utter such blasphemy against God's sacred Ministers, and so noble and so flourishing estate as this is? He that privileged this, deserves he should privilege no more. You thought to lad your Exorcist with the envy of so odious a comparison: but all wise men will see, yourselves are the Exorcist, and all the rest of the persons in your books, whom ye make to speak what and how ye please: and therefore whatsoever they offend, they ought to be whipped on your backs. I take not upon me to define of the several orders of devils farther than the sacred word of truth 
pag. 140. etc.  is my guide. You contrariwise, that you might oppose yourselves against me, stick not to bend your forces against the very Scriptures. For you will have nothing now amongst them, but a mere confusion, and a state without all order: notwithstanding our Saviour 
Matt. 12. 25 etc. & 25 41.  teacheth, that the power of darkness is a kingdom: that there is a Prince of this kingdom called Beelzebub, and inferior degrees called his angels (which whether they be all of them equal, or no with out distinction or difference in any respect whatsoever, you should have considered from these words, He taketh unto him seven other spirits worse than himself, & not vainly to have trifled about the word Exusia) that there is a kind of policy of concord maintained amongst them, whereby this kingdom is upholden. These things are plainly taught, and are such as no Christian may gainsay, yet you would overthrow all this, striving for such a blended mingle amongst them, as is utterly void of any the least distinction. But it is a true saying, Fools whilst they labour one evil to shun, into the contrary presently run. Whereas in these words, This kind goeth, not forth but by prayer & fasting, I have observed four things: That there are two kinds of devils: That one is more difficultly expelled then the other: that the child was possessed with one of the worse kind: that thence partly it was wherefore the Disciples cast him not forth: you return, 
pag. 154.  They which want art to analyze the Scriptures, may here learn to bebutcher a text, with Rhetoric ill beseeming unmannerly clowns. But tell me, is there no difference between Analyzing, and making 
pag. 155  collections from a text? Prate no more of the extraordinary faith of the Disciples, except you can make it good by sound reason they were endued with such kind of faith at that time. Our Saviour faith there was an Apistia in them, a thorough defect, whereby only they failed in that extraordinary course they attempted. 
pag. 157. 158.   
But now you will show the impieties, absurdities and dangers which follow of this doctrine. I ●●st, it is impiety to avouch any thing for truth that is not. I acknowledge it is a great impiety: but this doctrine doth not so. Secondly, Lying wonders are the marks of Antichrist. I answer, you lie falsely, when you make the casting forth of Satan by payer and fasting to be a living wonder. Thirdly, it is impiety to affirm fasting and prayer (ex operato) may effect such a work. It is impiety indeed, but you may as truly charge me with this affirmation, as you might charge any▪ sound hearted Christian that knows M. Deacon, with affirming▪ that he is an honest man. Fourthly, it is impiety to profane prayer and fasting without warrant from the word. We grant also this, but withal join unto it, That it is no less impiety to call that profaning of prayer and fasting, which is warranted by the word, as in this case it is. ●astly, it is impiety (say you) to make prayer and fasting which of God are apprinted to be helps unto saith, a sole means without faith for expelling of devils. I subscribe unto it and wish with all my heart, that he which saith so▪ may receive the reward of a deceiver: but if such cogitation was ever far from my breast, that such impudent slanderers might be branded in their forehads with this mark: False accusers of their brethren. I doubt not but you have read these words of the Discoverer▪ (who never speaketh untruly for me, whatsoever he doth against 
Diseo. p●. 45.  me) M. Darrell confesses the necessity ●f faith in the ordinary means. Your absurdities (for so they are indeed) with the dangers partly foolishly, & partly falsely imagined, what should I vouchsafe to repeat them? I will leave these and such like to the Reader, able now by that which ha●● been said, for all your mask to discern you.  

159,  You upbraid me with hiding myself for fear of peril. I have learned by the commandment and example of Christ jesus himself, his Apostles, and of the Martyrs in all ages, that I may, nay, aught to give place to the rage of man, especially not forsaking in the mean season any duty that concerns me. Yet that you may know I am not clean run away, by that time you have read my Survey and this Reply, tell me whether you have not met with some body to cope with in the field. You will not allow Christians, if they 
●. 160  perceive not their first endeavours to prevail, to betake themselves to further humiliation. whereas this is the practice of the Saints, as to continue their supplications till the Lord have granted, so to increase their exercise, the more difficult they prove the Lord to be. First, 
●am. 12. ●, 17.  David besought the Lord for his child, & as it may seem without fasting: than not obtaining, he joined fasting and watching withal: thirdly, he continued the like till the seventh day. Did he in 
●. 161. etc.,  intend a seven days fa●t in the beginning? Concerning the efficacy of prayer and fasting, we have the same Coleworts sod again. You talk, as if I made prayer and fasting for dispossession, an unwritten ordinance: whereas I only suppose, that if it were not expressly set down, yet for that it is to be collected out of the general places of 
a. 22. 12.  Scripture, as where the Lord doth summon us, in the day of our affliction unto weeping and mourning, to baldness and girding with sackcloth: and to call upon him in the time of our ad●ersitie, and such like: and because also by experience we prove it to be effectual, this were sufficient warrant to us for the ordinance of God in this behalf. You might therefore have spared your pains in proving the sufficiency of the word of God, till you met with some Papist, in which number I tkanke the Lord▪ I am not.  

●ag. 167  For your demands, If dispossession be now ordinary, what be the things ordinary in it. To satisfy you (though you little deserve it) for the medicine, I answer it is fasting and prayer: the operation, is the mighty power and will of God, apprehended instrumentally by our faith: the ministerial hand to apply this medicine, is the assembly of Christians gathered for this purpose▪ The theory or skill to direct this hand, is the knowledge that they be warranted in so doing from the word of God▪ the means to imprint this skill in those physicians breasts, are the▪ means of knowledge▪ hearing, reading, meditating,: the habit ●f this skill is their faith, which is more confirmed by the often practise of the Church in all times. Now then, if you cannot see what is ordinary in this work, bewail your ordinary blindensse which will not suffer you to behold the truth. That which followeth is no less foolish than false, which you taike of faiths working ex opere operato: as also that fasting and prayer cure by way of 
pag. 168 Matt. 6.  miracle: that fasting and prayer is no supernatural manner of cure: & that if it be supernatural, than it is extraordinary▪ Is it possible for men to dote in this manner? But if the light that is in men be darkness, how great is their 〈◊〉?  
To the testimonies of ancient & later writers alleged by me, you answer first, that I wrist open their mouths, and make them speak what I please. It is true, they speak what I please, because in this matter I speak nothing but what pleaseth the▪ but you insinuat that I pervert them. If you could have showed one syllable this way, all the world should have heard of it. Besides, you have already testified in your former Discourses, that they spoke, as I report them. Secondly, you say, they speak nothing at all to my purpose in hand. My purpose in alleging them was to show, first, that men in these days may be dispossessed of devils. Secondly, that fasting & prayer have been used by the most learned and godly in the Church from time to time, since miracles ceased, for expelling of Satan out of the possessed. Now whether they spoke to these purposes or no, because yourselves have lost your eyesight, let others that can judge of colours say what they think. Your third answer is, that I have not their own examples or practses, but only their bare reports concerning the practice of some others conversing among them. This likewise is untrue▪ Tertullian and Cyprian reckon themselves in the number of them which did expel devils. And chrysostom was present in the congregation, and preached two several days at least, when public prayers were made for expelling of Satan out of persons possessed, brought to that end into the Church at the commandment of the Deacon. And thereforè we have these three men's practice. But admit that none of them had made mention of their own practice, might not their judgement & coun●el● that withdraw prayers a●e to be used for the healing of the possessed su●●ic●? specially seeing divers of them add, that they have known 
D●ct. ●8  some that have been healed by the prayers of the godly. Fourthly, say you, they give their advise for the ex●rcise of prayer alone. And this is your fourth l●e, for some of them mention prayer & fasting. Thus much for reply to ●our general answers, let us now hear those which be particular. To Origen you answer, that ●e insinuateth ●●mply 
pag. 169.  the supposed efficacy of fasting and prayer, but putteth down no practice of it as of a perpetual ordinance. Mark how false liars saulter in their speech. Did Origen suppose such an efficacy of fasting and prayer & yet not think it was Christ's ordinance, and to be used? Whence could it have efficacy, but from Christ? Or to what purpose was efficacy, if to no use? He therefore that acknowledgeth the lawful efficacy of fasting and prayer, doth also acknowledge, that there is an ordinance of fasting & prayer to such an end. Tertullian you say, Speaks of many pretended deliverances from Satan, but showeth not the manner how they were fried from them. What? doth Tertullian in his Apology of Christianity against the Gentiles, to the whole state of Rome, allege certain counterfeit deliverances from Satan, to countenance Christian religion with? Doth he use such policy in writing to the Governor Scapula, to gain credit to the profession of the Gospel? Surely you are either not well in your wits▪ or which is worse, you have for filthy sucres sake conspired to make but mere fables of the great works of God. But he showeth not, say you, the manner how they were delivered▪ Do you stick at this matter? you will not have it by miracle in any sort: ●●d therefore, say we, by fasting and prayer. Nay but, will you say, if it were at all, it was by Miracle, and Miracles were ceased before his days. Therefore speak plainly, and tell Tertullian to his face that he lies, that he deluded the world with his pretended deliverances. This is your meaning: and this answer would be short. How Cyprian is to be understood, we shall know (say you) by james Pammelius, who telleth v●, That the Fxorcists office was not then in an●e use of the church, because that office being joined with the gift of Miracles, did continue but for a time. I do not allege Cyprian for the office of Exorcists, but for the casting forth of devils in those days, which he testifieth plainly, saying, And the devils by torments of w●rds are cast out of▪ bodies possessed. To this add, if you will Pammelius his testimony, that miracles were then ceased, and so we conclude, That there were casting forth of devils in Cyprians time, & yet not miraculous. But yet for james Pammelius let me tell you thus much▪ whereas you allege his words for the ceasing of Exorcists before that time, and also that a little after he should say, That the crafts and juggling sleights of counterfeit Exorcists 
●yp. Epist, 55 & 76▪ edit. ●ammel. Antuerp. ●n ad. b. Petr●●elleri 1589  & conjuring priests, they are long since apparently evident: yea even to the very eyes of the blind: I marveled greatly to hear these words of james Pammelius: I knew he affirms the clean contrary, maintaining strongly by testimony of Antiquity that office of exorcizing both of Spirits possessing▪ and in Baptism. I turned my Cybrian, but I could find no such words of his. And therefore either you have met with an edition later than the last, or else you are as notable in belying men's writings as the most shameless Papist of them all. To the rest, as chrysostom, Peter Marty●, Kemnitius, Phil. Melancthon, Beza, Vogellius, Danaeu●, Chassanius, all of them most plainly testifying dispossession, and that by means of fasting and prayer, you answer not one word, but for the length of their footinge, refer us to that which hath been spoken of the former. Indeed these tread in the steps of the former, and of all the godly ●earned that went before them & therefore by them we may guess their footings▪ and so likewise by your three wills answers to the three former we may easily guess what would be your answer to these, namely all the absurd shifts you could devise to elude their testimonies, as not having in purpose to find out the truth, or to yield to it being found, but by hook and by crook to maintain your own giddy fancies, whatsoever either Scripture, or any other shall say against it. What do I therefore disputing with such companions, which make not truth their end, but some other perverse respect, I know not well, what? Surely Christian Reader, that which I do is for thy good, to lay open unto thee their unconscionable jugglings, lest by any coloured pretences thou shouldst be beguiled by them Did not I well to bind them to their good behaviour by a public Instrument in their Discourses▪ Thou seest they have not one word of truth to say against the practice of the Church of God from the Apostles time till now. But you are weary of these authentical witnesses and therefore betake yourselves again to your wont reasonings, where you may have more scope of words, and more hope to darken the truth.  

pag. 170.  If, say you, prayer and fasting be an established ordinance, than it should be always effectual. I answer, you seldom bring an If but there is a lie in the end of it. The prophet complaineth, How 
2. Sam. 12. 18  long Lord? wilt thou hide thy face for ever? Because David obtained not by his suit his sons life, he might by this rule have bid prayer and fasting adieu. Infinite are the instances: it is marvel you could meet with none of them, to cause you to hold in so gross an untruth. But I cry you mercy, you mean effectual in regard of 
pag, 171, 172, 173.  uttermost issue, not of the present time. Now then frame your reason. The ordinance of god is always effectual, prayer & fasting is not always effectual, & so not god his ordinance in this case. I answer. if you take ●ffectual for the last issue and such help as is expedient, you say untruly of prayer and fasting: If you mean Effectual for ●ensible, imagined and present help, then is it as false, you say of god's ordinance. And this i● you mark it, will suffice for all you prattle 
pa. 174. 175  about this matter. So likewise, how Dispossession now is no miracle enough hath been spoken, except you can bring us something of more weight, than hitherto ●ou have done. Further observe that here they spare not to deny (though in as covert terms as they can) the witness of Tertullian, Cyprian, chrysostom, ●nd of all the rest before alleged, or that can be. Moreover, it this will not serve, for compendiousness sake, and more security of their cause, they deny the conclusion. I he argument is, If dispossession by prayer and fasting 
pag. 176.  be miraculous, then Tertullian, Cyprian, Chysostome, and others wrought miracles, when they expelled devils after this sort: but this is false: and therefore the first. To this you answere● Secondly, if it be true that here tofore or now spirits be expelled by sole prayer and ●asting, th●n is the work a miracle: which is the contrary affirmation to the conclusion. 
pag. 177  When you ta●ke of sole prayer and fasting, you have a secret meaning of your own of sole prayer without faith. Concerning which I tell you again, that if M. Walker & you have such a kind of prayer and such a kind of faith, as usually are separated one from another, you may do well to dispute of such matters between yourselves, for my part I allow no such prayer, neither doth the Church of God.  
You argue, that dispossession is not by historical or temporary faith, 
pag. 179.  because God hath appointed it to miraculous faith: which thing if it had been proved in the beginning, we had done long ●ince. Further, you see not wherein i●sti●ying faith should be ●ar better than Temporary, if this doth ●ast out devils, as if to cast out devils out of the bo●ies of men▪ were all in all Besides, if historical ●a●th be sufficient, devils might cast out devils. But what if they will not? you a●e never a whit the nearer. Such trumpery sha' l have no other answer▪ ●or answer to your fourth reason I say, a reprobate may app●●l end the mercies of God the Creator▪ but not of God the Redeemer, And such apprehension for the e●ecting of Satan ●ay ● ffice.  
You slander me▪ when ●ou say, that in dispossession of summers 
pag. 182  we purposely prayed to teach the beholder's, that the w●rk ●as ●ff●cted by the only ●ower of him t● whom w● put up ou● prayer. ●u● what is 
pag. 183. 184. 185  it to say you slander me? You make no more account to slander me, then to fillip me. Again I do not say, that parties bewitched have no warrant from the Scripture t● fast & pray●, (as is apparent in the place by you quoted, where I counsel them to this hol● exercise) but only, that there is not such express mention in the word for the curing o● the●, as for parties possessed. And therefore all that is an idle dispute which you purpose for divers pages together in this matter▪ ●ou would ●a●● have me a companion in this wicked 
pag. 186  assertion, which yourselves maintain as is apparent afterwards. But note (good reade●) fo● an egregious blasphemy, that these Answerers make t●e Lor● guilty of the horrible sins committed by the wicked in s●●king to the reueil for help in their miseries. For how do they prove it to be an absurdity to condemns people's going to the devil for help? Surely thus, 〈◊〉 ●t be a sin to s●eke help of the devil, we shall make the Lord ginit●● of this sin w●th u● whom it cannot be done. Thou ●eest what blasphemy this proposition containeth▪ for it plainly affor death that which before I ●ay▪ And the Conclusion, to wit, it is no ●●nr e to ●●eke ●elpe of the devil, is a conclusion of monstrous impiet●e. ●o where they would prove, There is no warrant from the worae for prayer and ●asting to be used in behalf of parties bewitched, 
pag. 188.  there argument is of this ●orte. ●f there be no warrant from the word tha● sole prayer & ●asting have any power of themselves ex opere ●perato, to r●●o ●e supernatural ●udgem●●ts of God, then there is no warrant for party's b● witched to use fasting and prayer as h●l●efull in this ●ase▪ But the first, say they, is true, & therefore the sec●nd. ●ut what do you stick at parties bewitched? You should have inferred generally, there is no warrant nor use o● fasting and prayer at all for any thing ex opere o●erato. O men str●●ken with the blindness of Sodo●e ●●ich before the d●re, seek the ●●●e, and cannot ●ind it. Is it your foolishness, th●t you cannot tell what you avouch? Or your shamlesnes, that you ●as●e not t●oug● you● names should be deservedly odious to all? Or is it, t●at you do so far despise all the learned of this land, that you think there ●s not one man able to discern such prod gious falsehood ●uch wretched persons would rat●er be confuted with a three cor●ed whip, the● by the writings, or words of any. An● if that will not serve, it were ●eete such order might be taken with you t●at the Church of God sustain no damge by you.  

pag. 19●  Whether I have so fond traversed this question of ●oss ss●o● as you sa●, I lea●● it to the godly learned to determine, to whose cen●ure I willingly submit my sel●e bot● in this & in all other m● writings But as for your judgements I pass ●ot. First make it appea●e▪ you have eyes in your own heads▪ before ●ou take upon you to tel● what is strait, or crooked in ●e then sanctify ●our mouths b● confessing, your lies, your slanders▪ your blasphemies, before you give sentence of any my doings. In the mean season, if you will needs be bar king, I will find such a bone for you to gnaw on, as shall be fit for your chaps,  

●. 191, 192 ●93.  Concerning the counsel I gave for fasting and prayer, it was grounded from hence: that in all judgements (of which kind possession is) we are called to humiliation, for which I cite in the margin an induction of divers examples. To which you answer first, that with out particular knowledge of the judgement, prayers could not be made in faith to remove it: which is one o● those Axioms that never fails you, such an one as Ahabs prophets were inspired with, when they counsel led him to war against Ramoth. Shall not the poor country sick man pray to God for some comfort in his distress, because he doth not know particularly the nature of his disease? Secondly, that the quoted Scriptures only testify the people's humiliation by prayer and fasting, so oft as any strange judgement was inflicted, but prove not essential p●ssessions and disposs●ssions by those means. yet they prove the counsel I gave was warrantable, and this I content myself with. It is enough if my poor premises afford me one natural and orderly conclusion at one time. Every man's Cow can not bring forth colts▪ as yours do.  

ag. 194. 95, 196.  To conclude, you tell us your great confidence in the cause, which no man needs to doubt of, if he consider your former arrogant boldness: nor much marvel at as strange, if he call to mind your uncredible blindness. But if your learning and conscience were more, your confidence would be a great deal less. Then you in●erre of the premises, That if there be no possession, nor dispossession now by fasting and prayer, how greatly they have erred that have avouched it, and how much they are to be blamed which cannot endure it should be impugned: But contrariwise say I, if all these things be true, which you deny, as hath been proved by stronger reason, than you possibly withstand, what do ●ou deserve which have troubled the Church with new and singular opinions in these points, and in broaching them, have offered to the world to choke them withal other very many gross, fantastical and impious absurdities? and yet you dare entitle your fooleries, The infallible truth, and such, as Glory & praise is to be given to toe Lord for these his lately revealed counsels by you concerning these intricate questions. O intolerable proud ignorance! Have you by late revelation cleared these intricate questions? Indeed your assertions be late▪ for they were never heard of in the Church before: but they were never revealed unto you by the Spirit of truth, but by that lying spirit, whose image doth lively appear almost in every argument you handle. And yet that myself be not only judge, let any man of understanding weigh with equal balance that little that hath been replied, & compare it with yours, & then give sentence: whether any since the time of our peace by our gracious Queen, professing the gospel, hath published any writing of divinity that doth come near these your treatises in number of unsound potions, in misconstructions & wrest of Scriptures, in absured collections, in impudent rejecting the authority of the ancient, in shameless pretending the names of good authors against their own meanings, in childish stumbling in the first rudiments of Arts, in most frequent lying and slandering, and which is greatest of all, in dangerous and scandalous assertions mixed with some notorious blasphemies: and then it may be you shall carry the bell of all that have written in our times. Great cause there is we should all make bonfires for the publishing of your books, or rather of your published books: but especially M. Bishop, who got the privilege ad imprimendum solum, I believe he beshrewes your fingers for it.   

A REPLY TO THE THIRD DIALOGUE.  
YOur Uses are suitable to your doctrine. For what other thing can proceed from a Cockatrice's egg, than a serpent? Yet Lycanthropus admires and applauds them: and so perhaps may some 
1. joh. 2. 27  do, that be not well in their wits. But they which have received the anointing, that teacheth us concerning all things, will abhor your prodigious dotage, and the more when they consider your uses, which manifest plainly that your errors be not about straws and rushes, such as without danger might be contemned and neglected, but which draw after them most perilous consequences, mightily shaking the very foundation, and chiefest pillars of our faith. You pretend that this your doctrine of final determination of possessions & dispossessions of Spirits and Devils, affordeth first, an holy meditation concerning the undoubted faithfulness and truth of our eternal God, in that he promising four thousand years fully before, to send the seed of a woman, which should bruise the serpent's head, hath in his own determined time fulfilled the same, by sending his son. We believe and know it, that not one jot of the lords promise hath failed, but doth your doctrine yield any confirmation of it? Nay verily, but doth utterly overthrow it, and make the Lord of truth to have falsified his word. The Lord hath promised by sending his son fully to subdue and vanquish Satan: your doctrine doth teach us, that Christ by his death hath only made an end of possessions and dispossessions of devils, that is, that he hath only delivered Demoniaks such as were actually tormented in their bodies by the Devils. What? Are all the Elect Demoniakes? Have you not taught us. that Possessions were very rare before Christ's time, and that it was very probable there were none at all in Israel, till a little before his coming, and none after the Apostles? Are only then these men delivered by Christ's death? You have quit the Lord indeed well of his promise. He promised the breaking of Satan's head, you make that Christ hath scarce pulled one lock of hair from his head. He promised deliverance for all his elect, you restrain this deliverance only to m enactually possessed with devils. He promised us a gifts as i● were of an hundredth thousand talents: you make him to have satisfied his promise in bestowing upon us an hundredth pence. Do men satisfy bonds in such manner▪ Doth a Creditor▪ to whom is owing a thousand pound, hold himself contented in receiving two or three shillings. ●ye upon your comfort: you are miserable comforters: But this determination▪ you say, of Satan's Actual possession may confirm faith and hope for the utter subversion of the whole kingdom of darkness. I answer, you lie falsely, if your doctrine be true. For hope can expect no more than faith doth presently embrace, but by your teaching, faith doth not embrace a full vanguishing of satins kingdom by Christ's death▪ but only an end of Actual possessions (which neither was accomplished, as hath been showed) and therefore hope cannot look for any further subversion of Satan's kingdom than is already. Now let the godly judge what lieth hiden in your doctrine, whether they be things to be tolerated, and coolly dealt in or no: or rather of such nature, that if you will not reclaim them, all lovers of the truth ought to spit in your faces in detestation of your errors. So likewise when you speak of God his all sufficiency, of Christ's triumph, and of the devils captivity, who so ever trusts to your doctrine in these points, shall perceive he leans upon a staff of reed, which when he shall stand in need of it will brea●e a sunder▪ and run through his body, as may sufficiently be seen by this little, that I have now remembered, as also by that hath been more fully declared, in Survey of your sixth Dialogue. your uses then are wretched, and therefore I leave them.  
The proper use that can be made of your doctrine is, that Christians should now show their wisdom in practising that rule our Saviour Christ hath taught them, namely this, beware of  prophets which come to you in sheeps clothing, but inwardly they are ravening 
Math. 7. 15  wolves. Thou hast seen in this book of theirs, good Reader, these men professing themselves, The Lord his unworthiest on earth: 
In the subscription to three of thei● Epistles.  when they begin their disputations, to begin the same with prayer, recreating themselves with singing of psalms: to wish the Reverend brethren if they have faulted either in matter or mannerto confute them and spare not, withal desiring the blessing of God to light on their hearts for their labour that way: to have used many words of 
Dial. Discou pag. 7●. 262. Epist. Dedi. Ans.  goodly pretence, of great obedience to the magistrate, of great care of their brethren's good, of great sincerity in calling every thing to the trial of the Scripture, and many such other fair shows. On the other side thou mayst see by▪ this Survey and Reply what abundance of vile and gross errors is packed up in these their treatises, What little conscience they make of god his truth▪ Of lying & slandering, how exceedingly they have trifled in each several point, and now by these uses how all tends to this, to descredit God his truth in fulfilling his promise, to impeach his sufficiency for vanquishing of fatan, to restrain Christ's triumph to a thing of nothing, to limit Satan's captivity with losing of a sconce, and such like: which things being thus, now it will shortly and easily more appear, whither these men be false prophets, or no▪ Fo● if they shall recant themselves of their errors, and as they have given public scandal to the Church, in labouring to draw men after their fancies, so again in submission to the truth, disclaim all such opinio n dissonant from the sacred word, throwing the first s●one at themselves, to the end all other may beware of them, than they shall be manif ested to have shipped but of infirmity, and to be such indeed, as they would seem. Otherwise if they will still maintain & defend them, than thou ●eest good reader, these men's sheeps clothing, and how for thy sake I have pulled it over their ears, whenby thou ma●est behold them to be inwardly ravening woules: if they be to be judged wolves, not only which rend the members of our bodies in sunder, but also & much more they, which by infecting men with pestiferous opinions, deliver them to saran to be torn in pieces both bodies and souls▪ In this case it will behove the Christian Magistrate, both Civil & Ecclesiastical▪ to take order, that such cruel deucuring beasts may be driven from Christ's fold: & that they would consider, that they make not dissensions & scandals contrary to the doctrine we have learned, which stand for the truth, but they which oppugn the truth. It is the rebel that makes civil war: the faithful subjects weapons are not against the peace but for the peace, neither is it the dog barking in the night, that disquiets the shepherds, but the Wolves approaching: the keepers stirring is to be commended, & the thieves assaulting he is to be defended. This use then the Magistrate is to make of your doctrine: generally all the Christians of this land, are to take it as a watchword to avoid you as Scorpions, that they may know you to be men▪ 
●hil. 3. 19 ●. Tim. 3. 5. ●ud. 16.  which have made your bellies your god, & to glory in your shame: which have a form of godliness & have denied the power of it, whose mouths speak proud things, having the persons of men in admiration for advantage sake. These manner of men are foretold should come in these last days, & our Church doth already feel it by lamentable experience. If thou shalt make this use, Christian reader 
●. Cor. 11. 19  of their book it shall not be altogether unprofitable for thee. For It must needs be that heresies should come, that they which are approved amongst us may be known. The Lord therefore strengthen us▪ so many as be of this number, to stand for his truth, and give, us wise doom to discern those which would craftily undermine it, that all such wicked workers being defeated, we may constantly walk in the purity of it, till the day of our Lord jesus Christ, to whom, with the father and the holy Spirit be all honour and praise for ever.  
Amen.  
FINIS   

Here followeth my answer to the Contradictions they charge me with.  

contradicti● 13.  The Discoursers charging me with a shameful company of Contradictions, no less than fifty, I first framed an answer to them, with full purpose to publish it, & therein have made it plain there is not a contradiction. But this my Treatise proving much larger than I intended, & the answer to them being of little or no use, save only to clear myself of this slander, and to discover their filthiness, which needeth not, I thought good rather to suppress, then publish it: yet so as I will give thee, good Reader, a taste thereof, and of their upright dealing herein, assuring, thee of my credit, that even such be the rest of their contradictions.  

Answer.  Darell, say they, in his Doctrine pag. 54. saith, that prayer and fasting being used aright, will certainly prosper either to the removing or sanctifying of the judgement. But pag. 56. he saith, their is no assurance to prevail.  

contrad. 23.  I answer. There is no assurance to prevail, that is, we can not be sure the party shall be delivered, the means being used, for so are my words. Had then I said pag. 54. fasting will certainly prosper to the removing of the judgement, and no more, I had contradicted that I say, pag, 59 but adding or sanctifying, a child may see here is no contradiction. Such a contradiction is this: Certainly the Discoursers will either be ashamed of their contradictions, or their sin is the greater: Assuredly they will not be ashamed of their contradictions. And this: The sun is either under a cloud, or set. It is not under a cloud.  
In his Detection 163. Darrell saith, fire hath powe●r to burn, & in the same pag. hath no power to burn.  

Ans.  All that we read Detection 163. is that Summer's hand being in the fire was not burnt. Would ever any man, these two excepted, hence collect a contradiction? How many thousands in this land have said the same, and among them not a few that be learned, & yet I dare say neither learned, nor unlearned ever feared they spoke contraries. Shadrach, Meshech, & Abednego being in the fire were not burned, and yet they that cast them into the fire were burnt. I trust you will not say here is a contradiction. But confess both these to be true. Fire naturally burneth, but restrained by God the over-ruler o nature, it doth not burn. Secondly, you should first have showed where I say, Fire hath power to burn, before you told us that I speak contraries.  

●ntrad. 24.  In his Dotrine pag. 2. he saith, that it suiteth altogether with Satan's ●ature to be filthy or wicked in speech. But Detection 175. he saith, that it sutethe as well with his nature to use good and holy speeches.  
My words Detection 175. be, Holy words have been uttered by satan. Tell me is this a false proposition? Or yet this: unclean and 
Ans.  blasphemous speeches suit excellently with the nature of the unclean spirit. If both these be true, which none will deny, with what truth do you say that I speak contraries, whereof the one must needs be false? These men sure had forgot when they doted of this contradiction, that the devil is as well by nature subtle, (and in his subtlety ready to transform himself into Angel of light) as unclean and wicked. Of this stamp they have 18 contradictions more.  
In his Doctrine 47. He saith the disciples by virtue of their so large 
●ontrad: 11,  a commission could cast out a devil of any kind. But pag. 50. the Lunatic child was possessed with one of the worst kind of spirits, and that thence it came the disciples could not cast him out.  
To make this contradiction they have detracted part of my words 
Ans,  in either proposition. In the former these, if their faith failed not: which words, or words to the same effect in the aforesaid pag. 47. & the two pages precedent I use no less than twelve times. In the latter proposition where I say, thence partly it came, they detract this word partly: whereby I intimate the Disciples faith did at that time fail them, when they could not cast the devil out of the lunatic child, so that their incredulity was one let, which oft else where I express. And this you well knew, as appeareth by your next contradiction, the twelft I mean. What meant you then thus to separate and rend asunder those words which of purpose I had coupled together? And by detracting that which in either of the propositions i● so material, and in the one I inculcate so often, to pretend a contradiction where you knew none was? Who hath bewitched you to use such curled devices, for the compassing of your contradictions? A cursed pretence must this needs be, seeing it can not be done in ignorance: For you cannot be ignorant hereof, that the words detracted by you I used, spcially those so oft iterated, and that in those pages from whence ye have the sa de contradictory proposition: considering also that to make another contradiction you aleag the very same words you omit here, & that from the same page, as witnesseth the contradiction here following. Neither can you be ignorant of this, that these words being used and added by me, I am not contrary to myself, yea hence it is that you did omit them. It must needs therefore be that you knowing here was no contradiction, have against that knowledge of yours (by this devise of detracting these words) made yet a fair show to the world of a contradiction. Here is no contrariety except these be propositions contradictory: The Disciples could cast out a devil of any kind, if their faith failed not: The Disciples their faith failing could not cast the devil out.  

contrad, 31  In his Doctrine 47. he saith the Apostles faith failed not: But pag. 48 he saith it failed at this time when Christ spoke to them and in this very work.  

Ans,  These words, the Apostles saith failed not, you could omit, when such omission serveth for your purpose, as appears by the former contradiction. But now when they must stand you in some stead, they are not to seek. He wanteth the use of one of his senses, that smelleth not here your stinking breath. My words be these. They were able to cast out all devils, if their faith failed not: which imply not that the Apostles faith never failed them, as you would have it, for otherwise here is no contradiction, but rather the contrary, that their faith did at some times fail them. Again, though these words The Apostles faith failed not, with the former are mine, yet thus rend and separated from their fellows, I may truly say they are not mine. In your Discourses you say, if the skies fall we shall have larks, By your wise rule you there affirm, that the skies do fall & in the sane book pag. 24. where you have these words: If Angels be uncreated then are they eternal: you affirm, that Angels be uncreated: yet pag. 28. you say Angels be created. These propositions be contradictory, and the former of them absurd, and so here is a contradiction (forsooth) and an absurdity, when indeed there is neither. Here is paltry and childish stuff. If I would walk but in this one crooked step of yours, how easily could I make a book of your contradictions, and another of your absurdities. But suppose I had said no more than you produce. uz. The Apostles faith sailed not from thence ye could not infer a contradiction, except I had spoken of the same time mentioned in the latter contradictory proposition. Their, faith might not fall them at one time, and yet sail them at another time.  

contrad, 15,  In Doctrine 52 Abraham's prayer is made a sole means of conception and procreation of childs: But pag. 60 another means is found appointed of God for that purpose, or else it would prove a miracle.  

Ans,  As before by detracting so here by adding you abuse both me, and the Reader: The words I use be these Who will deny but that as the sin of Abimilech (in taking Sarah, Abraham's wife unto him) had shut up every womb of the house of Abimelech, so the prayer of Abraham was the mean whereby they were opened. & that judgement taken away? Do I here make Abraham's prayer a sole means of procreation? That I mean & affirm is, that by Abraham's prayer as a means Abimelech his wife & women servants, were made able to conceive, which before they could not, not excluding, but including the knowledge and seed of man: which no man in his right mind would hence gather, this couple excepted.  

murad, 46,  In his Doctrine pag. 2. he saith, it is absurd to affirm that the devil▪ being without a man) can dispose of the whole or any part of man's body: but Detection, page 11. he saith that thedivel (in all probability) did use summers his tongue, notwithstanding he was essentially and sensiblic playing boe peep under the coverleed.  

Ans,  The former proposition is not mine, I say every part, you save, any part. And so by altering a word you have made a contradiction where none is: except there be no other part of summers his body, besides his tongue.  
And thus to thee Reader, but for brevity, I would make it evident, that of the discoursers fifty contradictions, being examined one by one, there is not so much as one to be found. The greater is their sin and shame who charged me with so many.  
And here we are to obseruefirst, that of these contradictions there are above 20. wherein there is no contradiction at all, taking them at the huckster's hand, even as themselves have quoted them. And namely these: contradiction 4. 6. 7. 8. 13. 14. 17. 18. 19 21. 23. 24. 26. 28. 31. 35. 38. 36. 37. 41, & 45  
Secondly, to mark the several devices or sleights whereby they make semblance of contradictions when there are indeed none if you take the words as they be set down in my treatises. I his semblance they make.  
1 By forging that I never affirmed (but often the contrary) as in contradiction 1. 9 17. 19 20, 23, 25, 26, 27, 35, & 46.  
2 By omitting or detracting some word or words material, as in contradiction 3, 11, 12, 25, 27, 30, 31, 33, 36, 39, & 40  
3 By adding, and thus have they done in contradiction 15. 43. & 47.  
4 By altering, as appeareth by contradiction 6, 17, 27, 29, 49  
5 To this said end also, when both their contradictory propositions are in the same page, and sometimes in the very same sentence, they run notwithstanding for the one of them to a page far off, or happily to another book: Hereby (I mean by alleging two distinct pages of mine, somewhat also asunder) pretending, that what I say n one place, forgetting forsooth myself, I gainsay in another. As appeareth by contradiction 1. 3▪ 5. 22▪ 26. 36. 42. & 47.  
Thus have these men so accustomed and taught themselves to falsife my writings in whole or in part: by forging, detracting, adding, & altering, as they have alleged very little of mine truly: & no marce: because truly alleged they would not make for their purpose Yet notwithstanding they have by these cursed means compassed their contradictions, I doubt not but that they please themselves greatly, and glory in them, specially in the great number of them, and do think therein they have showed not a little wit. But I will tell you, a very fool that will give liberty to himself to add, detract and alter but here & there a letter, may easily make, a thousand contradictions, where none are: much more he that will do thus by words & sometimes by sentences, as you have done.  

Ans. Epist, to the Reader fol, 4  Whether now you have pretermited any thing material, and by such omitting, and taking what part of my writings might make most for your purpose, even purposely maimed my writings, which you deny and I affirm, judge thou indissirently between us good reader. And whether you will acknowledge and redress the offered wrong, whereof I complain, and which I trust to be a wrong I have made manifest by this my Reply, unto all men, & to your own consciences, as you pretend you will, nay, seem to abhor not to do it, if once the wrong shall be made to appear, saying: God forbidden that we should not do it very willingly: in time both thou and I shall know. And thus much for answer to their supposed contradictions. For brevity sake I omit my reply to the Absurdities wherewith you charge me, and your slanders contained in them.  
Here not unfitly may I charge you with the contradictions & Absurdities I find in your writings: and if it fall out so that yourselves be found faulty in that, whereof unjustly you accuse another, than thereby learn henceforward to pluck rather the beam out of your own eyes, then busy yourselves so much about less than a mote in your brother's eye.  
In their Answer page 55 and page 179 of their Discourses, they say, that the manifestation of Christ his deity, and declaration of his glorious & spell, were the main ends of possession: and a little after, that the possession of devils were especially for these two ends: thereby in sinuating that there were some other ends or end. Yet page 67 of the same book they say, that these were the two only ends of this vonderfull judgement.  
2 In their Dial. dis. page 58 they say, angels do evermore work after an invisible, insensible, and spiritual manner. And the next leaf, page 60 they say, that angels in all their ambassages they do other manifest themselves by seeing and hearing, or assist us eftsoons by some other sensible means. And they bring Augustine flatly affirming that the angels do outwardly help us by certain visible apparitions or sights, which they propose and offer before our eyes.  
3 In their Discourses pa. 42 they say, the mind itself, and it only is that wherein motion consisteth: and the body is but the minds organon or instrument, having naturally in itself no motion at all, or no further motion at the most, then for those only actions wherein the said mind (whose organon it is) employeth the same. But in pag. 74 of the same book they affirm, that the body itself hath, and may accomplish or effect corporal operations and motions by itself alone, without any the direction, moderation, guidance, or 〈◊〉 of the soul.  
4 In their Discourses pag. 116 they say, the devil did so bewitch and charm the Serpent, as that (through his crafty suggestion) she was very well able to propound such a divination or sooths●…ing, as d●d presently cirumvent or deceive Fuah. And in the same book page 1 9 they say, that a reasonable speech cannot possibly be framed or understood of any but of a mind having understanding and reason.  
5 In their Answer pa 50 they say. These eight d●moniakes might be possessed, though the devil was not essentially inherent in any one of their bodies: But page 43 of the same book they say, The possession of devils whatsoever is ceased long since.  
6 In their Discourses 173 they say. The Apostles might authentically avouch for infallible truth whatsoever they preached. But in their. Answer page 126 128 129 130 they say, that the apostles sometime failed in doctrine. And a little after: all these were their errors in doctrine and judgement. And again. It was expedient for the apostles to err in some things, that is, some points of doctrine. And this they understand after the holy Ghost fell upon them, as is plain by the aforesaid pages.  
7 In their Answer pag. 7, they say, that wonders and miracles are flatly confounded: but in their Dialogicall discourses 209, they say, the devil may work wonders, but can effect no miracles. And pag, 310, thus, A thing effected by essential means, howsoever it may be a wonder, yet no miracle in any respect.  
8 In your Discourses pag. 352. for your parts you assure me, that you are very far from all suspicion of a precompacted confederacy between summers and me. Yet in page 42. of your Answer you say, why should we wonder at all, that two ●unning companions (Meaning Sonnners and myself) confederate together before should conclude such a course between themselves, as the one (by the help of the other) should progms●icate strange and mered●ble events.  
9 In pag. 39 of their Discourses, they tell us, There is not any one sound Divine that dothan t understand Possession as they do, and none as I fond imagine and yet in the epistle to the Reader prefixed before that book, that which they deliver concerning possession and d sposs ssion of devils, they call, th●t private opinion: and in page 195 of their Answer, The Lord his lately revealed counsels.  

Part of their absurd and unsound Positions  
1 Godby good Angels may effect fantastical, vain, and filthy effects Answers 15.  
2 Good ●ngels may effect vain and filthy effects▪ ibid.  
3 Wheresoever the Scriptures speak of Angels or devils, they speak only by metaphor▪ ibid.  
4 The Devil hath no desire to be in any man's body. Ans. 22  
5 The jews in Christ's time did (partly) know the parties which were possessed, from the often revelation of the parties themselves. answ. 32  
6 Godby his Spirit instructed the Cananitish woman (mentioned Matth. 15, 22) of her daughter's malacie. answ▪ 33  
7 The manifestation of Christ's deity, and the confirmation of the Gospel, the only ends of Possession. answ. 67  
8 Christ hath put a final end to the possession of devils by his death and resurrection. answ. 66  
9 The supernatural actions or effects of the Devil in Demoniaks, cannot possibly be comprehended by human senses. Ans. 69  
10 The working of miracles was only in Christ and his Apostles days, answ. 90  
11 God hath appointed ploughing and sowing for a means of abundance or barrenness upon the ground, answ 172  
12 Good angels do evormore work after an invisible, insensible and spiritual manner, Dialogical discourses 58. This is to be refuted by all those places where angels are said to have appeared and spoken in visible forms unto men.  
13 The body hath, and may accomplish by herself alone, corporal actions and motions, without any her soul's direction, moderation, guidance, or consent, Dial. disc. 74  
14 The dead carcase of a man, or the body being separate from the soul, may and doth also effect corporal actions and motions. ibid.  
15 The Devil did so bewitch and so charm the Serpent, as that (through his crafty suggestion) she was very well able to propound such a divination or soothsaying, as did presently cirumvent and deceive Eva. Dial. disc. 16. Absurd, that the Devil should not only thus make the Serpent itself to speak, but also argue the matter like a reasonable creature  
16 The apostles erred in some points of doctrine, after the holy Ghost fell upon them: Yea, it was expedient for them so to err answ. 126, 128, 129, 130  
17 It is very erroneous for able to imagine, that the eyes may possibly be deceived, in discerning between spirits (that is, bodies assumed by spirits) and true natural bodies. Dial. disc. 157. You forget that Abraham and Lot were deceived, as appeareth by Gen. 18. and 19  
FINIS    

I am to crave thy patience good Reader, specially the authors, for the late coming forth of this book: for I confess it hath lain in my hands almost this half year.