DIALOGICALL Discourses of SPIRITS and DEVILS. Declaring their proper essence, natures, dispositions, and operations: their possessions, and dispossessions: with other the appendantes, peculiarly appertaining to those special points. Very conducent, and pertinent to the timely procuring of some Christian conformity in judgement: for the peaceable compounding of the late sprung controversies concerning all such intricate and difficult doubts. By JOHN DEACON. JOHN WALKER. Preachers. If there shall arise among you, a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, & give thee a sign or wonder: and the sign or wonder which he have told thee come to pass, saying: Let us go after other gods which thou knowest not, and let us serve them. Thou shalt not hearken to the words of that prophet, or to that dreamer of dreams: for, the Lord your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul. Deut. 13. 1. 2. 3. If any shall say unto you, Lo here is Christ, or there is Christ; Believe them not therefore, for there shall arise false Christ's, and false Prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders: so that if it were possible, they should deceive the very elect. Matth. 24. 23. 24. Aug. De Trinitate. Quisquis audit, vel legit, ubi pariter certus est, pergat mecum: ubi pariter haesitat, quaerat mecum: ubi errorem suum cognoscit, redeat mecum: ubi meum, revocet me. Ita ingrediamur simul charitatis viam: tendentes ad eum, de quo scriptum est, quaerite faciem eius semper. That is, Whosoever heareth, or readeth, where he is persuaded with me, let him proceed with me: where he is doubtful, let him inquire with me: where he acknowledgeth his error, let him return with me: where he espieth mine, let him recall me. So shall we walk jointly together, in the way of charity: going forward towards him, of whom it is written, Seek ye his face evermore. Propugnaculum vitae patientia. LONDINI, Impensis Geor Bishop. 1601. TO THE RIGHT Honourable and righteous judges, Sir THOMAS EGERTON knight, Lord Keeper of the great Seal of England: Sir JOHN POPHAM knight, Lord chief justice of England: Sir EDMUND ANDERSON knight, Lord chief justice of the common Pleas: and Sir WILLIAM PERIAM knight, Lord chief Baron of the Exchequer, with other the most reverend judges of the common Laws of England: I. D. and I. W. do heartily wish all saving knowledge in jesus Christ. RIGHT Honourable Lords, you may not possibly be ignorant of the late-bred broils not long since brewed & broached at Nottingham, by means of summers his supposed possession and dispossession: especially, those self-same broils being eftsoons revived since, and now also (by what privilege we wot not) so publicly reported in Print, as their flying rumours do mightily overrun the whole Realm, yea, even to the uttermost borders thereof. We two, did undoubtedly assure ourselves that the holy regard of Religion; of loyal obedience to her majesties Princely prerogative: of the public peace of the Church: of due reverence to her majesties positive Laws: of dutiful submission to the definitive sentence of justice: of common humanity towards the persons of men: yea, and of a careful continuance of their honest reputations; would something have restrained, if not utterly inhibited the parties (especially convicted) from the untimely attempting of any such unorderly course, as now (by their newly published Pamphletes) they have most undutifully blazed abroad. And therefore, the Christian care of that their hoped moderate carriage, hath caused us hitherto even purposely to suppress this following Treatise, which (almost three years since) we had even carefully compiled, as a christian countercheck to all such unwonted occurrents: yea, and this our former▪ suppressing thereof, proceeded (we assure you) from a felow-like fear of procuring untimely disgrace, and of adding affliction to the principal parties themselves. Esteeming it much better, to bury our precedent labours in the grave of forgetfulness: then (by any their needless publishing) to procure a present disturbance, or to hatch a subsequent broil in the Church, by pestering the same with such impertinent, obscure and needless paradoxes, as in their books are broached abroad. Howbeit, perceiving the principal parties, with other their underhand favourites (as it were in a settled pertinacy) not only to hold all those their former fantastical toys with tooth and nail, but (which more is) thus preposterously, and (perhaps also with the secret support of their underhand Favourites) thus undutifully to pursue the same with such public disgrace of public persons, notwithstanding any the precedent countermands, or definitive determinations of public authority: we verily thought, and our own conscience did witness against us in the presence of God: that we might justly be deemed too too irreligious towards the Lord: disloyal to her majesties Princely prerogative: overmuch careless of public peace: exceeding remiss concerning the positive Laws of our land: most derogatorious to the definitive sentence of justice: monstrous inhuman towards the persons of men: yea, altogether careless of our honest reputations: if that light, which the Lord in mercy (we hope) hath revealed unto us, Math. 5. 11. should now any longer Lie buried under a bushel, and not rather be set on a candlestick, for the better enlightening of all in the house concerning these intricate and hidden mysteries. More especially now at this present, when the fearful infection of those their factious proceedings, so universally, and so dangerously over spreadeth itself: not unlike to the fretting Gangrena, 2. Tim. 2. 17. or incurable Canker. Experienced Antiquaries (right honourable Lords) do very well know, to what dangerous heads such si●ly beginnings, have (by careless negligence) grown in continuance of time: and therefore, even the very primary appearances of every such fearful occurrent, would be the more warely and more wisely nipped in the head, yea, and the streaming courses thereof the more heedfully intercepted and stopped in time, for fear of overflowing the young buds of our holy Religion. For these special respects we have now proffered our labours to public view, and do very humbly importune your honours patronage, and favourable protection for them: so far forth especially as they fully accord with the infallible truth of the Scriptures. We protest (right Honourable Lords) that we ourselves (in penning this Treatise) did even purposely resolve with our souls, to banish all partial and private respects from out of our breasts: as may (by the matter and method thereof) very plainly appear to any indifferent Reader. Yea we wholly devoted ourselves, to pen only such special points as other writer's report and record in their several works; and which in our own consciences (before the presence of God) we are hitherto persuaded are undoubtedly true: desiring with all our hearts to be better and more fully informed (wherein we haply may err) by the holy endeavours of such as the Lord hath in mercy enlightened with a more sincere and sanctified knowledge concerning these points. The special motives for our thus dedicating to your good Honours, all jointly together this published Treatise: are these that follow in order. 1 First, your wisdoms having heretofore, very orderly inquired, into, and judicially determined the undoubted truth of those the aforesaid occurrents: we verily persuaded ourselves, that as you are therefore the most able, so would you be also the more willing, to approve, or disprove of our labours herein, according to those your former proceedings, and the holy directions of the eternal God. 2 The adverse parties themselves, having (partly by their published Pamphlets, and partly also, by their private solicitors) very often, and earnestly laboured, either all, or the most of your Honours to some favourable regard of their languishing cause: we in like manner (esteeming your wisdoms the most competent judges herein) do therefore refer the due trial of our travels, much rather to your Honours, then to any her majesties high Commissioners in Ecclesiastical causes: partly, because, they (being themselves esteemed but parties herein, and openly challenged of unequal proceedings) might haply be deemed by the adverse part but incompetent judges: and partly, for that your good Honours especially, being every way free from such exception, may therefore, become the more willing to hear and determine the truth of these matters. 3 Moreover, considering eftsoons with ourselves, that, those often, and earnest solicit of parties on both sides (they arguing especially the controverted causes with such flat oppositions) might haply but breed in your Honourable breasts, some scruple of conscience about the undoubted truth of such intricate questions: we did therefore account it our bounden duty, to yield your good Honours our holiest supplies, for the better enlightening of your present judgements in the hidden mysteries of those cloudy occurrents. 4 Lastly, your good Honours next under her supereminent highness, enjoying a primary subordinate power concerning the authentical hearing and determining of such and so shameful disorders as do daily discover themselves in those disordered persons, who seek (in such a malcontented humour) to uphold, and maintain those acquaint matters in question: we were the rather induced to tender our travels to your Honourable protections. That so, your good Honours (by your approved authority) might, the more authentically command the adverse parties themselves, forthwith to desist from their former factious courses, and humbly submit to the truth of the Treatise, it being substantially sound: or otherwise, in more dutiful sort to address their holiest endeavours to some sounder, and honester manner of answering, then hitherto they have showed to the world. We look every hour (right Honourable Lords to be notoriously branded with the black coal of unchristian reproaches, such and so scandalous are the cankered mouths of some clamorous companions: who (not unlike to the benumbing Torpedo) do purposely endeavour by their intoxicated and most slanderous revilings, to astonish the very hands of so many as presume to put pen to the paper, against any their irregular practices. Seeing therefore it is utterly impossible the Leopard should alter his spots, jer. 13. 23. we do assuredly expect when their Pulpits shall ring out, and their night crowing Pamphlets proclaim to the world, that such two, are quite fallen from the brethren and their cause, they know not well what: that they are become Apostates, revolters, backsliders, formalistes, and such as fawn on the state: and this only, for that we favour not forsooth, these their Cabalistical conceits and fantastical fooleries. Well, whatsoever they prate, we will undergo it with patience, 1. Cor. 4. 3. 4. not passing one pin, to be judged of them, or of any man's judgement else: no, we judge not our own selves. For, we know nothing by our own selves: and yet are we not thereby justified: but he that judgeth us both is the Lord. And as for that their odious name of Formalists: wherewith especially they sport themselves most in branding their brethren, we regard not therein their virulent revilings one rush: having (in a more mature deliberation) experimented long since, the grave council of Drusius to sound very sutablie with the sacred Scriptures, saying thus, Esto potius cauda Leonum, quam caput Vulpium. Hoc est, da operam, ut potius sis postremus inter viros generosos: quam primus inter callidos versipelles. joh. Drusij Adag. 2. Haras in libro Auoth. In Sanhedrin. edit. Basiliens: cap. 10. Be thou rather the very tail of Lions, than the head of Foxes. That is, do thou give thy endeavour, to be rather the last, or the lowest among noble, and gentillike persons: then the first, or the highest, among that base crew of crafty undermining companions, and here we have set down our rest. Having hitherto (right Honourable Lords) very briefly displayed our main purpose concerning the first penning and publishing of this following Treatise: we do now (in all humble submission) refer our selves and our suits to your approved considerations, and your good Honours to the almighty his holy directions, in this one and all other your judicial proceedings. So be it. Your good Honours very humbly a● command in the Lord: and the Lord his unwoorthiest on earth, JOHN DEACON. JOHN WALKER. To the godly affected Reader, I. D. and I. W. do heartily wish the hourly increase of a true saving knowledge, by the revelation of jesus Christ. So be it. GOod Christian Reader, we do (in this following treatise) present to thy public consideration, our private opinion concerning the undoubted possession and dispossession of Devils. Assuring ourselves to gain forthwith thy holy approbation herein: so far forth especially, as thou perceivest the same to fall forth pat in every point with the infallible truth of the Lord. The original occasion of this our lately attempted enterprise: did primarily proceed from those late unwonted occurrents which accidentally fell forth in our country, about the supposed possession and dispossession of summers. An accident (we do freely confess) no less notoriously known throughout the whole land then diversly entertained, according to the variable & divers affections of men. The main argument of the treatise itself, is a matter (we assure thee) not rashly resolved upon, but seriously held and maintained (by the one of us especially) for many years past: as five hundred yet living are able to witness, and the other of us also (in an experimented knowledge) both can and doth testify the same by these presents. For the very first news of this newly supposed rare accident, recalling us both afresh to some serious consideration of our former set studies: did so diversly affect our minds with a diverse and contrary judgement (the one very constantly avouching, the other no less confidently impugning that falsely pretended action) as we both became resolute (with tooth and nail) to try forth the certain truth or untruth at the least, of our sundry conceits concerning the matter in question. Yea, and (which more is) we so deeply devoted ourselves to the timely support of those our several opinions: as no one labour (how loathsome soever) was irksome unto us, which tended that way, but in the least show of appearance. For what one Library was unransackt, or learned brother unconferred withal wheresoever we came: to further us both in those several points we severally held? What one journey was refused, or present toil unattempted, to try forth the sound truth of such flying reports as ran all abroad: and all this for the more enabling, and the better furnishing of us to that our former determined skirmish? What sundry and often recourses the one to the other? What intercourse of writings? What mutual conferences? What hot disputes? What arguings? What answerings? What replies, and rejoinders: or ever we could fitly accord about the several questions propounded between us? And (which is more to be considered) the contention itself concerning these matters, Act. 15. 37. 38. it became no less violent than that between Paul and Barnabas, about the having of john Mark in their company: in so much as we eftsoons departed asunder the one from the other. Howbeit that only wise God, who turneth the infirmities of his servants to the furtherance of his glory, he did so moderate our minds concerning the action in hand, as we both of us fully resolved to stand fast to our tackle: and thereupon also (by an interchangeable covenant) did forthwith conclude to continue this newly attempted controversy, Cicero. until (by the very sway of truth) the one be enforced, dare manus, to hold forth the hand, and submit to the other. And herein also we found every hour, the favourable assistance of God's holy spirit for the timely suggesting of many strange and unwonted matters, which have not hitherto been usually heard of concerning the question itself. With these many meditations and several conferences we were wholly taken up, till the very truth itself (as we verily believe) began (after many debatings and bicker) to break forth like the sun in his strength, 1. Cor. 1. 10. 11. Whereupon also, we eftsoons began to speak both of us but one and the self-same things: and (which more is) being now knit together in one mind and one judgement concerning these several matters, we determined forthwith to put down in writing, whatsoever had deliberately passed between us. Purposing withal to use the private contemplation of these our primary labours; as a provoking sharp spur to prick us eftsoons an end unto the timely undertaking of the like private conference, in some other matters else of like weighty importance. That (being by this means sequestered quite from all secular cares) we might the more freely employ our whole minds to such secret meditations as should further the timely discharge of our several duties. Perceiving moreover by the timely dispatch of this one intricate matter: that two conscionable ministers conjoining their studies (being both of them industrious & bend wholly in heart, Eccles. 1. 12. 13. to search and to find forth wisdom by allthings that are done under heaven) might (by such mutual endeavours) very easily accomplish many profitable works for themselves and some others. Howbeit, for the putting over of these our private labours to the public view of the world, Reasons for the hitherto suppressing of this present treatise. that (we assure thee) was never in our thoughts at the first: no, we did fully resolve to keep these our conferences, from the sight of all others, save only ourselves, for these following reasons. First, we were greatly discouraged from the publication hereof in an only regard of our proper imperfections, for the skilful determining of such intricate doubts: acknowledging our manifold wants to be such & so great, as we were mightily afraid to put the due trial of our skill upon terms. And for this cause we durst not attempt the tendering of our own, but hourly expected from some others of more maturity; a book better balanced, for the timely encountering with such late bred broils as concerned especially those unwonted occurrents. Secondly, our said purpose for publishing this treatise, was also eftsoons nipped in the head; by often recounting the newfangled niceness of this present age: wherein, nothing almost, is now pleasing to any (especially the curious companions) but that which (being every way concluded first in scholastical form) is also, very finely flourished over with a Ciceronian varnish. And therefore perceiving these our labours to come short of such reckoning: we verily persuaded ourselves, that, this plain coin of ours, would hardly pass with those cynical censurers, for currant good payment. Thirdly, the maturity and ripeness of many ministers, and others among whom we converse: was not the least stoppage unto us. For, we are not ignorant, that men (now a days) being very acute in conceit, & too too much ready (with eaglelike eyes) to pry exactly into any thing published in print: are every way able, and apt enough also to censure (so sharply as may be) the published labours of others, how lazy or leaden-heeled soever in laying forth their own proper talents to the greatest advantage. Fourthly, our compassionable care to profit, and our exceeding great loathenesse to prejudice the parties themselves, or to aggravate (with the weight of one finger) the present afflictions of those whom this treatise of ours more especially concerns: hath hitherto forestalled our purpose from publishing our present labours. Being in very great fear that these our precious balms (how sovereign soever) would rather break their heads, Psalm. 141. 5. Luc. 10. 34. then bind up their bleeding wounds: the physical composition of our oil and our wine, it is so untoothsome a treacle to their distempered humour, and unsavoury taste. Lastly, we have thus long been held back from making our conferences common to others, in an especial regard of that christian conceit which we have hitherto had of their christian conformity to a more dexterity: together with the needlesnes (as we thought) in publishing any other new matter concerning this argument. Both, because authority itself had seized upon them long since: and for that also the printed report of the commissioners judicial proceedings against them, might (as we verily thought) have been fully sufficient (for many respects) to quiet their passionate spirits, and to calm the turbulent tempests arising from thence. For, if the good man of God (he having a far better cause and calling then these men, 2. Chro. 15. 13. 14. to persist and hold out in his purpose attempted) did notwithstanding, very dutifully submit to Amaziah his princely command concerning his silencing: we verily persuaded ourselves, that Queen Elizabeth's authentical commission concerning ecclesiastical persons and causes, (in due regard of their duties to God and her Majesty) might have enjoined them, both to lay their hand on their mouth, and to put a present end to their further proceedings, in a practice especially so directly opposite to her princely prerogative so authentically debated, and the same so judicially also determined. Lo, these (in effect) were the main reasons themselves which hitherto with held us both, from proffering our labours to the public view of the world. If happily it seem strange unto any, that we should now so suddenly desist from such a determined purpose; it may please them to consider afresh, that, for as much as some malefactors (notwithstanding their palpable crimes) in a malcontented humour, do covertly undermine and nibble in corners, the honourable credit of her majesties high commission: therefore busy must needs have a band. And, in that only respect (besides the importunities of such as have eftsoons considerately perused the work) we also our own selves have had our latter cogitations, Reasons, for the now publishing of this present treatise. concerning some seasonable manifestation thereof at this present, and that more especially for these following reasons. First, our hearty true zeal to the glory of God, the same also intermingled eftsoons with some christian care for many poor ignorant souls, as also, with an unfeigned love of that truth, Tertul. in Apologetico. quae nihil veretur nisi abscondi, which feareth nothing more deeply, then to be fearfully entombed in the gulf of forgetfulness: do, even peremptorily provoke us both, to proceed recto pectore, with all integrity and uprightness of heart, in the now publishing of this our intended enterprise. Secondly, we are so much the more willingly drawn to exhibit our travels to public view: by how much we do now very plainly perceive, that, our Antagonists printed opinion, concerning the perpetuity of such supernatural and miraculous operations in these days of the Gospel: doth fearfully shake, and very shrewdly undermine the certainty and undoubted assurance of that sacred religion which we all jointly profess. For, if our said religion standeth perpetually in need to be eftsoons confirmed afresh, by the extraordinary seal of any such extraordinary or miraculous actions? How then should we certainly know when the undoubted assurance thereof is certainly and sufficiently confirmed unto us? Sith that thing which eftsoons admitteth such essential supplies: doth implicatively import some manner of imperfection, in some show at the least. Thirdly, we were also the rather persuaded thereto, in an especial regard of that fearful effect which must necessarily succeed so absurd a conceit. For this their pestilent opinion which concerneth the working of miracles in these days of the Gospel, what doth it else (in effect) but injuriously put upon faithful professors, Math. 24. 23. 24. the lively cognizance, Luc. 17. 31. the livery or badge of that Antichristian brood, 2. Thes. 2. 9 10. to whom the unwonted accomplishment of such lying signs and wonders (by the special permission of God) doth peculiarly and properly appertain from time to time. And therefore, that any true professor of the Gospel, should now appropriate that self same power to himself which only is proper to Antichrist: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: Hieron. de illustribus. aut Plato Philonissat, aut Philo Platonissat: either the Protestant he plays kindly the Papist, or the Papist he plays correspondently the Protestant at least: for in this special point, the one is not apparently discerned from the other. Fourthly, we were now the more forward that way, because this their pestiferous opinion, doth offer directly a very shrewd check to such other very reverend Preachers, as either cannot or dare not (upon any the like extraordinary occasion) adventure (hand over head) upon any the like exordinarie course. For had not these preposterous practices with a provident circumspection been warily prevented in time: surely, the vulgar sort (whose shallow reach concerning especially such intricate cases, Lucianus. neque coelum neque terram attingere potest, and whose censure herein is like to herb john in the pottage) they would (notwithstanding their wants whatsoever) uno ore, with one mouth (as it were) have cried forth thus, M. Darel, M. Darell, he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the only Diviner of signs and of wonders: his ministery shall have my only applause. Yea, and (which more is) the very country Dames they would with their tattling tongues have told it in Gath, 2. Sam. 1. 20. that M. Darel alone he hath Delphicum gladium, Aristotoleles. the double edged Delphicall sword: both to guard the good Christian, & to gird up the Devil in a corner. As for our silly Sir john he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Aristophanes. Asinus portans mysteria, an ass in a friars cowl, a cipher in Algurisme: or rather, a leaden sword in a silver scabbard. And thus the whole country they would (in continuance of time) very fearfully have fallen unto the Corinthian factions, 1. Cor. 3. 4. 7. some holding of Paul, and some of Apollo's: where as it is the Lord alone who gives the increase. Fiftly, an apparent necessity for the now publishing of this or some other like treatise, very apparently breaks forth to the view of the world: in an especial regard of the great inconvenience, or rather the most palpable absurdity ensuing so absurd an opinion. For, if that with such other supposed miraculous actions, are now (as themselves very fond avouch) effected by the only virtue and power of the true justifying faith: what wonderful scruple of conscience might that so absurd a conceit procure to such silly poor souls, as (being eftsoons persuaded of their justifying faith) can at no hand effect the like admirable actions? Considering especially, that one and the self-same faith, cannot possibly but have (in some measure at least) the very self-same effects. Sixtly, we are now the more forward in publishing these our late labours abroad to the world; as well, to intimate our hearty desires for the timely satisfying of others, about the fearful possessions, and dispossessions of devils, as also (if this our proper opinion be deemed but doubtful) to procure from some others of better ability, a more absolute censure, or judicial determination concerning these so intricate and doubtful occurrents. Seventhly, we do now the rather exhibit these our present conferences to the consideration of all: that we might (by this means) more especially make known to the world, our christian care for the timely recovery of the principal parties themselves: who (having hitherto, Jude 22. but lightly regarded the christian compassions of such as have carefully sought their christian conversion) must now (of necessity) be saved with fear, Jude 23. through a more violent withdrawing of them from the fire, according to Ben-Sirah his sacred advise, saying thus as followeth. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Ben-Sirah in suis proverbijs. Item, citatum invenies in Medras Mesle. idest. Sapientem nutu; et stultum fuste. Correct the wise with a nod: and, the unwise with a club. Signifying thereby unto us, that, whereas all manner of lenity is forthwith to be used towards those that are tractable: the knotty or knurrie hard logs, do crave strong iron wedges, and many hard strokes to bring them in good order. Eightly, we were also the more willing in this our determined purpose, the rather to put some present good end (if we possibly might) to the indirect dealings, and preposterous proceedings of such as have preposterously taken upon them those preposterous practices. Who (being by all outward appearance of truth, and perhaps in their own conscience to) very judicially convinced for gross malefactors: do notwithstanding all this very malapertly endeavour to manage their own contradictory courses, against the authentical countermands of her majesties lawful authority. Eccles. 10, 20. 1. Pet. 2. 13. 17. Yea, and this also with most apparent depraving, disgrace, revilings and taunt. Moreover, with lying, with cogging and circumventing devices. Whereas Lady truth, the more simple she is, the more shining she is: at no hand affecting any such bombasted bravadoes, to support or bear up her unanswerable edicts, how base or how simple soever in outward appearance. Ninthly, we were lead in like manner to this late public proceeding, in an especial regard of our wonderful lothnes that so many palpable untruths, and such pestiferous opinions (as in those their published Pamphlets and printed Apologies are broached but lately abroad, to the dangerous bewitching and desperate enchanting of many poor ignorant unstable souls) should so pass underhand in the public view of tag and rag, without the timely controlment of any: or run abroad (as they do) from hand to hand for good currant payment, or ever they be tried with the touchstone of truth, and before they be thoroughly weighed with the approved weights of the sanctuary: or not having upon them some discretive stamp or discerning censure at least. Lastly, our loyal obedience, and conscionable duties towards the timely upholding of the Magistrates authentical authority and credit, which these men (in all the rest, more especially, in that their very last undutiful depraving Pamphlets) like petty young presses, underminingly have published in print, without any her majesties authentical privilege: was not (we assure thee) the least motive in duty, (howsoever the last in degree) to this our lately pretended purpose. The premises therefore exactly considered, & the reasons themselves being duly prepended in a more dutiful regard of her majesties supereminent authority over all persons & causes in Christ: we doubt not at all, but that (notwithstanding our former resolutions concerning the respective suppressing of these our private endeavours) the wiser sort, will very willingly dispense with their publishing now at this present especially: wherein (it may shrewdly be feared) the wild trees of the Forest do covert combine themselves of a very set purpose to make the proud bramble-bush some mighty Magnifico in their secret assemblies. judg. 9 8. etc. These occasions considered with a right respect, we doubt not at all, but, that this our now published Treatise, will be deemed as a word delivered in due season: to so many especially, as do sincerely affect the glory of God: as do (with a provident circumspection) endeavour to propagate the Gospel of Christ: Psal. 122. 6. 7. briefly, as do conscionably pray for, and dutifully pursue that prosperity of jerusalem, Psal. 85. 10. 11. wherein righteousness and peace have kissed each other. As for the rest, we weight every hour when their lavish tongues will be lashing abroad, and their intemperate pens will be Printing in corners, King Achab his peremptory proclamation against us: exclaiming in their outrage, & crying unto us, 1. King. 21. 20. Have you found us, 1. King. 22. 8. O our enemies, have you found us indeed. And will you in no wise prophesy any other but evil unto us? Well, whatsoever will be the issue of that their intemperate humour, all their exceptions (how virulent soever) they must be such (we are sure) as concern either our persons: or our cause at the least. Their exceptions against our persons, they must respectively concern, either our skill in learning: or, our carriage of life. Touching any our great skill of learning, we both know, and do freely confess (as before) that we are (even in our own eyes) minimi Apostolorum, the very last and the least of ten thousand: that we were borne out of due time, 1. Cor. 15. 8. 9 and are utterly unworthy the neme of public preaohers. Howbeit, by the grace of God, we are that we are, & his graces (we hope) they were not bestowed upon us in vain. Besides all this, the more unskilful we be for such public writing, the more able our adversaries are (with their exceeding great skill) to answer whatsoever we write. As for our carriage of life, their exceptions that way, they must have a more special relation, either to our precedent: or to our now present practices at least. Our precedent practices (when they were at the worst) they were none other than those that do ordinarily attend upon the corrupt nature of men: and therefore howsoever they themselves (in any Pharisaical conceit of their own proper strength) may haply imagine themselves to be able to stand, Luc. 18. 9 11. 12. let them (if they be wise) beware lest they fall. Howbeit, if for any matters past (either truly known, 1. Cor. 10. 12. or uncharitably suspected) the vile venom of their venomous spirits would swell their cankered hearts in sunder, unless (after their accustomed manner with all men) they should 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Beza annotat. in Math. 1. 19 expose our persons to public reproaches: we will very willingly undergo whatsoever disgrace the Lord (for this cause) alotteth unto us. And (which more is) we will with patience endure, 2. Sam. 16. 9 Aristophanes. that these furious dead dogs do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Canem excoriatam excoriare: stay afresh our newly slain carcases, and add affliction to our affliction. Assuring ourselves that our gracious God who gives them this leave to curse poor David afresh (so soon as proud railing Shimei hath spit forth his venomous spite to the full, 2. Sam. 16. 9 10. 11. 12. and vented the uttermost force of his limited fury) he will then (in a great mercy) behold our afflictions this day, and bestow some present new blessing upon us. Touching any our now present practices (howsoever the common calumniatours of men may happily measure the proportion of our steps, by their own proper footings, and so overreach us a large inch at the least) we do here in the honour of God's holy name (with the protestation of our hearts) very freely acknowledge, that, albeit we our own selves do know more by ourselves then all the world else: yet (we praise our good God) we do (at this present) know nothing by ourselves that may make us afraid to confront the very holiest of them all to their face; 1. Cor. 4. 4. though (notwithstanding all this) we are not therefore justified in the presence of him who judgeth the heart. In the mean time, we think it some part of brotherly duty, to forewarn all those our calumnious accusers of this; namely, that if they still make it their special glory to undergo the gung-farmers office, or if they do still take a singular pleasure to be rifling and raking in every man's channel even up to their elbows: may happily (in the end) defile their fair fingers, and procure a foul savour to their own proper persons. And therefore we do friendly advise them, to desist from those cullion-like courses in time: or if (because antiquum obtinet Crito) their tattling tongues must needs he tampering that way in corners at least: then, let them begin first (as we say) ab ipso lare, Aristides. Math. 7. 5. to be holy at home: let them first make a Saint of their own proper shrine: yea let them first pull forth the beam from their own, or ever they intermeddle with the little moat in their poor● brother's eye. Otherwise, they should show themselves very like to the slovenly barber, who (being to to curious in cutting, in washing and in trimming of others) hath no care at all how deformedly he seemeth himself. Or, like to the curious eye, which very readily espieth the least spot that may be in any one member 〈…〉 body: but, beholdeth not the foul ugly blemishes it hath in itself. Briefly, else should they declare themselves to be the hundred eyed Argos in other men's matters: but, the one eyed polyphemus in their proper affairs: according to the old rustic verses saying thus. In rebus proprijs ijt Argus in Polyphemum. Rebus in alterius, transit Polyphemus in Argum. Proud Argus, he playeth Polyphemus at home: Polyphemus playeth Argus abroad like a mome. Briefly, let them withal assure themselves, In Gemara cap. 6. that howsoever we two do determine with Drusius and say, Item in Glossa Thalmudica. Audire praestat, quam dicere maledicta: It is much better to here evil of ourselves, then to speak any evil of another) yet, eftsoons it so comes to pass, ut, qui pergit quae vult dicere, quae non vult audiet, that he which takes pleasure to speak what he please, he must now and then be content to hear what he would not: according to our english proverb which saith: In Elie, id est, in the height of his pride. qui mock at mockabitur: he that mocketh others in Elie, shallbe mocked himself at Abbington. And all this (in the just judgement of God) is but lex talionis, At Abington, id est, on the gallows that Northhamptonshire feolons are hanged upon. the rendering of like for like. Their exceptions more especially concerning our cause, they are such as respect either the matter itself, or our manner of handling the same. The matter itself whatsoever, we do freely offer to their public view and are very well willing the truth thereof; be tried down to the bran. In the trial whereof, if happily it fall forth to be either hay, or straw, or stubble, 1. Cor. 3. 12. 13. and so by consequence become utterly unfit for the building in hand: we are content that the same be forth with rejected of all, as a roving rhapsody unworthy the reading. Touching our manner of handling the cause, their exceptions that way must necessarily be such as concern the very form itself: or our order in following the same. First for the form itself, the same (you see) is Dialogicall: the which form (we are sure) is no less ancient than authentically approved of all, and therefore we know no one reason as yet, why we also ourselves may not justly challenge the privilege thereof if we please. If any may happily imagine we have purposely propounded to ourselves this dialogizing manner of dealing of a very set purpose: to the end, that by such a prosopopoeia, or feigning of persons, we might gain greater liberty to propound what seemeth good to ourselves, and to gird at whose persons we please: our answer is this, that, the speakers produced in this present discourse, they are such as directly concern the matters in question: and therefore, no man may justly be offended thereat, but he only that is tainted with those erroneous absurdities, which under that name, are so covertly touched. Neither may any be justly grieved, that we have put down many more objections, than our adversaries would ever have made: for therein, we have rather furthered, then foundered the free passage of their cause whatsoever. Yea, much more for managing their cause, is propounded by us, then hath hitherto been heard from themselves, or from any their favourites: although we have purposely ploughed with their hay four from time to time, judg. 14. 18. that we might be the more ready in reading their riddle. And therefore, they have no reason to be grieved against us for any thing, unless happily for this: namely, for that (to spare them a labour) we have framed them their answer aforehand, and buttoned up their lips, or ever they begin to speak. Lastly, for our order in following the cause: we wot not well what to answer, before we hear what they object. In the mean time, this we plainly protest; that if we have been to brief: it was because we principally effected thy ease. If we have been too tedious: the more was our toil. If we have been to soft: it was in regard of thy holy sincerity. If we have been something too sharp: it was in respect of the parties unsavoury taste. If we have been to mild: it was purposely done to break (with goats blood) their Adamant hearts. If we have been too bitter: that bitterness proceeds not from our manner of handling, but is only in the bad matter of their humour, apprehending the same. If we have been too remiss in our answers: it was, because we found themselves over reckless in all their replies. If we have been too rough in reproving: it was only, because experience hath taught us, that the resty dull jade, doth stand in most need of the roughest rider of all, to curry his coat. Briefly, 1. Cor. 9 22. whatsoever we have been: for their own, and thy sake we have been the same, as knoweth best the searcher of all hearts. For as we have set down nothing but that, which (before God) we are hitherto persuaded is true: so have we laboured with all our endeavours, to draw thee and them to the timely participation thereof. And therefore, let matter and manner be what it will be: let us find this effect, and we desire no favour at all in their answer. Only, this is all we require for the present: namely, that the Answerer would put down his own name to his answer: that so, we ourselves in replying, and they in impugning, may mutually know our proper Antagonists, which we hold a very dutiful, an upright, and honest proceeding. Otherwise, we may justly imagine, that they do either distrust their own cause: or stand in some fear of discredit concerning the same. This course (gentle Reader) if haply our night-birds refuse, and yet notwithstanding will covertly flutter their wings, and keep a vengeable coil in Conventicles and corners, like the Owl in an ivy bush that dares not endure the birds of the day: then (for thy further satisfaction herein) do thou eftsoons propound to the parties themselves and their favourites whatsoever, these following Queres. 1 Let it first be inquired, Queres, concerning the public privilege, for Printing, and publishing Books. whether our gracious Queen Elizabeth hath absolute authority from God (for the timely preventing of errors, of schisms, and of factions, as also, for the happy continuance of public peace) to establish in any her princely Dominions an uniform order; that, no one Book, Pamphlet, or Paper whatsoever shall be published in Print, before the same be exactly reviewed by some special persons deputed thereunto, and have also a public privilege from under their hands for such public passage? 2 Whether all true hearted subjects (even in conscience towards God and her Majesty) be not very strictly bound to a precise observation of such an established order: and that therefore, when any erroneous or offensive opinion shall pass from the Press with public privilege; whether the party himself who espieth and desireth presently to encounter therewith, be not (before he shall publicly proceed to such public encounter) bound in conscience and duty, first to intimate that error to public authority: that by such intimation, either the author of the error may be made to retract it, or the party informing, at least may obtain a special Commission for some orderly proceeding in the public confutation thereof. 3 Lastly, whether such, & so many Books, pamphlets, or papers whatsoever, as heretofore, or hereafter do covertly pass underhand from the Press in a contrary course: be not (in an especial regard of that authentical order) very highly displeasing to God, and greatly derogatorious to her majesties prerogative royal, concerning all persons and causes in Christ: and whether those Books, pamphlets, or papers so disorderly published abroad, are not (for such undutiful disorder) to be justly esteemed of all true hearted subjects, such dangerous libels as do insolently encounter with, and directly undermine her majesties princely pre-eminence: and that therefore, the very authors themselves, they are to be reputed and punished as pestiferous Libellours against public authority? When the main parties themselves, or the malcontented papists, whom (as miraclemongers) we have throughout our whole treatise even purposely matched together, and endeavoured (with one and the self-same stone) to beat down for jangling blackbirds both at a clap. When as they (we say) or any one of them all have fully resolved thy mind concerning these Quaeres: then let them (in God's holy name) very freely proceed in their answer and spare not. Otherwise, if (in an only distrust of their cause) they shall yet cover their weakness, and excuse their not answering for want of authority: it shall be their best, either humbly to submit themselves to her Majesty, or all jointly together (with the proscribed Apollonits' before Apollo his golden tables) very pitifully to bewail the irrecoverable subversion of their seducing oracles, through the manifestation and mighty power of the Gospel, crying thus: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Eugubinus, de perenni Philosop. lib. 3. Heu tripodes lugete, perit praesagus Apollo, i. Ay me alas tripodes, perisheth presager Apollo. These things thus dispatched in order, it followeth now very fitly in place to unfold unto thee the whole platform observed throughout the whole work. First, therefore we have alphabetically put down the seveuerall names of the several authors, whose several authorities are purposely by us produced: to the end that whosoever will, may (by knowing their names) make diligent inquiry into all the quotations, and see whether we of ourselves have propounded any one point, which some others of antiquity have not before us directly pointed unto. Then next, we have placed in order the several arguments of each several Dialogue: to the end that such and so many good souls as (being persuaded of some points) are yet very doubtful concerning some other: might (if they please not to peruse the whole) make their special choice of that which they chiefly affect. In like manner, we have methodically prefixed before the main treatise itself, a brief Analysis or summary resolution of all the whole tractate: and all this of very set purpose to propound to thy view (at a blush) the whole body of the Book, and the very strict order itself, which (albeit the whole be divided into Dialogicall Discourses) we have precisely observed throughout the whole work. After all this, we have put down the main discourse in a Dialogicall form, and purposely produced six such several speakers therein, as should by their several significant names, supply whatsoever might tend to the timely effecting of an absolute tractate concerning such matters. For first, Philologus signifieth a Lover of talk: and representeth such persons as trudge to and fro; tattling these news without any regard or due search into the soundness thereof. Then next Pneumatomachus, signifieth a fighter or contend against the essential being of Spirits: and representeth those Swinish Saducees of old, and those godless Atheists now in our days, who hold there are neither Spirits nor Devils. Then thirdly, Lycanthropus, signifieth a man essentially transformed to a wolf: and representeth such persons as do hold (with tooth and nail) the transformation of devils. Then fourthly, Exorcists signifieth a conjurer or caster forth of spirits and devils: and representeth those persons that do hold (in these days of the Gospel) a real, or actual possession of devils at the least. Then five, Physiologus signifieth a discourser of nature's secrets, or a natural philosopher: and representeth such persons as (by the only light of reason) are able to discover the gross and palpable absurdities, ensuing such fantastical & absurd opinions. Then lastly, Orthodoxus signifieth one of an approved or upright judgement: and representeth all such illumined divines and others, as are able by the sway of reason, the authority of writers, and plain evidence of scripture to censure the objections, and very sound to set down the infallible truth. All these are introduced as actors in these our discourses: the which also we have purposely divided into eleven several dialogues. And this, partly, for an ease to thy memory by avoiding that intricate, that endless and tedious toil, which otherwise would have wearied thy spirits: if (without intermission) thou hadst been entirely tied to the whole treatise itself. And partly also, to point forth unto thee the principal matters which are principally handled throughout the whole work. Lastly, we have in the end of the book, summarily also annexed a table of all the principal points, the special matters, the several syllogisms, and the sundry expositions of such places of scripture, as are any way pertinent to the main purpose itself: that, by the only direction thereof, thou mayst find forth (with a trice) whatsoever thou wishest to see concerning such rare and unwonted occurrents. And now (gentle Reader) least happily the curious sort should cry out and say, Quid de pusillis tam●magna prooemia? What needs so great a cry for so little wool? we will therefore no longer withhold thee from the treatise itself. Beseeching the God of peace, to give thee peace always, by all means. Grace be with all them that love the Lord jesus to their immortality. Even so: come Lord jesu. So be it: Amen. Thine ever in the Lord, I. D. I. W. The names of the several Authors. A AVlerius Augustinus. Ambrose. Athanasius. Aries Montanus. Author de eccles. dogm. Andrea's Hierosolomit. Alexander Aphrodisaeus. Augustin. Marloratus. Amandus' Polanus. Albertus Magnus. Andrea's willet. Auicenna. Aetius. Aristides. Aristoteles. Adamus Hill. Aristophanes. B BAsilius Magnus. Beda presbyter, Bernardus. Benedictus Pererius. Benedictus Aretius. Bee-hyve. Bristol. Ben-Sirah. C CYprianus. Cyrillus. Caietanus. Coelius Rhodiginus. Cardanus. Cassianus. Carolus Magnus. Concilium Acquirense. Concilium Ancyranum. Concilium Bracharense. Concilium Lateran. Cicero. D DRusius. Damascenus. Dionysius. Destructorium vitiorum. Decretalia. Didimus Alexandrinus. E EPiphanius. Eusebius. Eucherius. Erasmus Rhoterodam. Erasmus Sarcerius. Emanuel Tremelius. Edwardus Dearing. Eugubinus. F FRacastorius. Franciscus Georgius. Fulgentius. Franciscus' Titleman. G GRegorius. Gregorius Magnus. Gregorius Naziansen. Gregorius 1. Rom. Gilbertus' Longolus. Glossa ordinaria. Gryllandus. Gemnasius. Gratianus. Georgius join. Georgius Alley. Georgius Gifford. H HVgo Etherianus. Hilarius. Hieronimus. Hieronimus Zanchius. Henricus Bullinger. Hippocrates. Horatius. Hermes Trismegistus. Hugo Cardinalis. Harmonia confessionum. Henricus jaakob. Hortus sanitatis. I Josephus. Isidorus. jacobus Pamelius. johannes Brentius. johannes Drusius. johannes Chrysostomus. johannes Calvinus. johannes Piscator. johannes Auenarius. johannes Ferus. johannes Wierus. johannes Wulcurio. johannes Bromyard. johannes King. johannes Bodin. justinus Martyr. julius Scaliger. johannes Darel. johannes Gorraeus. L LAmbertus Danaeus. Leonardus Culmanus. Leonardus Fuchsius. Laurentius Codmanus. Lavaterus. Levinius L●mnius. Ludulphus. Lucas Lossius. Legenda aurea. Lucianus. M MArtinus Bucerus. M. in historijs. Methodius. Michael Psellus. Marcilius Ficinius. Malmesburius. Malleus mallificarum. Marcus Vigerius. Moses Barsephus. Moses Pellacherus. N NIcephoras. Nicholaus Lyra. Nicholaus Hemingius. Nichol. Selneccerus. Narration of Darel. O OTho Casmannus. Origines. P PAulus Frisius. Patricius. Paulus Aegenitus. Paulus Burgensis. Petrus Martyrus. Petrus Lambertus. Petrus Thyreus. Philosophus. Pellicanus. Philippus Barough. Plinius. Plutarch. Pompanatius. Prosper. Proclus. Pythagoras. R R. D. Kimhi. Rodulphus Gualterus. Robertus Rollocus. Reginaldus Skotus. Rhemish Testament. Robertus Pontus. Ruffinus. S SEbastianus Martyr. Stenchus Eugubinus. Strabus. Sanhedrin editio Basiliens. T TErtullianus. Thomas Aquinas. Theophylactus. Theodoretus. Theodorus Beza. Theupolus. Timotheus Brichtus. Tatianus. Thomas Cooperus. W WOlfgangus Muscul. Wilel. Minatensis. Wilelmus Fulke. Wilelmus Perkins. X Xantis Pagninus. Z Zozomenus. FINIS. The several arguments of the several Dilogues following in order. The first Dialogue. pag. 1. The Argument. 1 THat there are essential Spirits and Devils, as appeareth plainly, from their essential creations, and effectual operations. Their spiritual and substantial being. The second Dialogue. pag. 31. The Argument. 2 THe power of Spirits and Devils. Their possession, what it is with the several parts thereof. And whether the Devil doth essentially enter into the possessed man's mind or not? The third Dialogue. pag. 64. The Argument. 3 whether Spirits and Devils do essentially enter into the possessed man's body, or not? And, whether for that purpose, they have peculiar to themselves, their true natural bodies. The fourth Dialogue. pag. 99 The Argument. 4 whether Spirits and Devils can assume to themselves true natural bodies? What bodies they are said to assume? And, how those Scriptures are to be understood, which be for this purpose produced? The fifth Dialogue. pag. 165. The Argument. 5 whether Spirits and Devils can essentially transform themselves into any true natural body? And how those Scriptures are to be understood, which many produce for that purpose? The sixth Dialogue. pag. 131. The Argument. 6 OF actual possession, what it is? And whether Spirits and Devils (in these days of the Gospel) do now actually possess either the mind or the body: by any extraordinary afflicting or vexing? The seventh Dialogue. pag. 199. The Argument. 7 COmmon experience what it is? Whether the actual possession of Spirits and Devils, especially that supposed in the young man at Mahgnitton may be proved thereby? And of the Devil his power of obsession. The eight Dialogue. pag. 232. The Argument. 8 OF the undoubted true force, for the timely subduing of this the forenamed power of the Devil. Whether any created means may therein prevail? And, whether prayer and fasting have any power in themselves to effect such a work? The ninth Dialogue. pag. 263. The Argument. 9 whether prayer and fasting be established by Christ, as a perpetual ordinary means for the powerful expelling of Spirits and Devils? Whether the power therein be a vocal or a personal power? Or, whether a true justifying faith (apprehending some supernatural power of God) doth effect that work? The tenth Dialogue. pag. 304. The Argument. 10 whether a miraculous faith (apprehending the power of God for the powerful expelling of Devils) be yet still continued? what a true miracle is? And whether the working of miracles be now fully determined in the true Churches of Christ? The eleventh Dialogue. pag. 339. The Argument. 11 A summary recapitulation of all the premises, very concludentlie repeating and proving the precedent purpose: with a pathetical persuasion to subscribe to the undoubted truth thereof. A brief Analysis, or summary resolution of this present treatise: the same affording unto us Certain Dialogicall discourses: declaring especially 1. that there be spirits & devils: this proved from 1. Their essential creation. 2. Their effectual operation. 2. What we have to consider in them: namely, 1. Their power the same being a power either 1. Of possession, and this also is, either 1. Real, the same being, either Mental. 1. essentially in the mind Corporal, 1 essentially in the body, by their assuming of true natural bodies. their transforming of true bodies. 2. Actual, this also either by a mental, afflicting and grieving. a corporal, tormenting & vexing. 2. Of obsession which stands either in an outward assaulting and circumventing. inward suggesting and tempting. 2. The subduing of that power by a power 1. Immediate, and this in Christ. 2. Mediate by others, this, either Apostolical, having from Christ a power over devils. Ecclesiastical it being in the church either Primitive, wherein the continuance of that power. Successive, wherein the compass of that power, DIALOGICALL discourses, of SPIRITS and DEVILS. The first Dialogue. THE ARGUMENT. That there are essential Spirits and Devils, as appeareth plainly by their creation, and operation▪ Their spiritual and substantial being. The speakers names. PHILOLOGUS. LYCANTHROPUS. PNEUMATOMACHUS. PHYSIOLOGUS. ORTHODOXUS. EXORCISTS. Philologus. WHat Lycanthropus? and you master Pneumatomachus, my old companions? well met at this present. From whence come you? & whether walk you so fast, if a man may be bold to inquire the same at your hands: without offending your persons, or hindering your business. Lycanthropus. We come even now from that famous city Mahgnitton, my good friend Philologus: and are presently traveling towards the Island of Eirtwab with speed, upon very special and urgent business: concerning the glory of God and the good of his Church. Philologus. What news from Mahgnitton I pray you? Lycanthropus. News sir? the strangest news I assure you that hath been heard of this hundred years. Philologus. What news is that? Lycanthropus. Of a young man there. Who being really possessed with a Devil: was very strangely, or rather miraculously delivered by prayer and fasting. Philologus. How strange news soever the same seemeth to us, very certain it is, Math. 17. 21. Marc. 9 29. as appears in the Gospel: that Devils have been driven forth by prayer and fasting. Howbeit, that the Devil should now in these days of the Gospel, have a real possession in any: is greatly doubted of the most, and very flatly denied of some. Lycanthropus. The real possession of Devils may justly be called in question, if Pneumatomachus his opinion be canonised for currant: who very confidently avoucheth, that there are neither Spirits nor Devils at all. Which being so: how should there be a real possession of Devils in any? Philologus. Very true: for Devils must first be, before they can have a real possession in men. But, Pneumatomachus he holds (I am sure) no such opinion: unless it be for argument sake. Pneumatomachus. Yes, I am very confident therein I assure you. And about that point, my neighbour Lycanthropus and myself: have held a hot dispute all the way we have come. But, being neither of us satisfied with the others reply, we jointly concluded to refer the whole decision of these controversies, to master Orthodoxus his determination: promising each other, to rest satisfied herein, upon his resolute judgement, and thereupon, we are now traveling towards the Island of Eirtwab, for that self-same purpose. Philologus. Such conferences I assure you are both-commendable and comfortable, especially in travel: for they do sharpen the wit, delight the mind, and make the journey seem short and sweet. And herein withal, you are worthy great praise, both because you do pass forth the time in profitable talk as you travel: and for that also (being loath to lose the fruit of your conference, you do so friendly and so freely, refer yourselves to the judgement of such as are able, and willing to determine your doubts. Howbeit, our meeting is wrought (I perceive) by the special providence of God. For this I dare tell you for truth, that master Orthodoxus, he is not even now in the Island of Eirtwab, but newly removed into the confines of Eibrad: intending this winter to sojourn there, with one master Physiologus his faithful friend, of very purpose to confer with the Exorcist himself that cast forth the spirit, for the benefit of which conference, I also am now traveling thither myself. And therefore if it please you, I shall not only be glad of your companies: but will very carefully conduct you the way. Pneumatomachus. With all my heart, if Lycanthopus consent to the same. Lycanthropus. Else should I dissent from the singular providence of God. Philologus. Well then, let us leg it a little. And, do tell me as we travel (I pray you) the strange manner of the yoongman his handling, in that fearful possession. Pneumatomachus. Ah Philologus, Act. 17. 18. your ears (I perceive) they are itching after some tidings-bringer of new found Devils. 2. Tim. 4. 3. Howbeit because my neighbour Licanthropus hath been, and is now over credulous concerning such Legerdemaines, I do leave the relation wholly to him: who shall (for publishing these unwonted wonderments) have the whole glory, or shame, to himself alone. Licanthropus. As I hunt after no glory: so, I hope I shall reap no reproach at all for reporting these news. The rather, because my main purpose in publishing them, is, and shall be for none other respect in the world: but, to lay open the devils inveterate malice, man's miserable condition by nature, the extraordinary faith of the Exorcist, and the singular mercy and power of God. Philologus. All these (I assure you) are holy respects. But, relate the manner of his passions I pray you in order. Lycanthropus. Withal my heart. And (to my remembrance) they were eftsoons upon him in this following order. 1 There seemed to run along his leg, These passions are apparent in Dorel his Apology. and thence into his toe, belly, throat, tongue, cheek, eye, and other parts, a lump sometimes bigger, or lesser than an egg, being soft. 2 The lump being in his leg, it was heavy, and inflexible like iron. 3 He had such extraordinary strength, that sometimes three, four, five, six or more, were scarce able to rule him. 4 When four or five struggled with him, so as they were wearied, he did not sweat, pant, or change colour. 5 He wallowed, gnashed with his teeth, stared with his eyes, and foamed at his mouth excessively: having neither eat nor drunk all the day before. 6 There seemed to run under the coverlet where he lay, as it were kitlings: to the number of four or five. 7 His face and his mouth were fearfully distorted: one lip towards one ear, and the other lip towards the other ear. 8 His face was turned directly backward, not moving his body at all. 9 His neck doubled under him. 10 His body doubled, his head between his legs, suddenly plucked round, like a round brown loaf: he was cast up like a ball from the bed, three or four times together half a yard high. 11 Being cast into the fire, where he lay sometimes against the walls and iron bars in the chimney with great violence: he received no appearance of hurt at all. 12 His body seemed to be extended to the height of the tallest man: when once he endeavoured to hang himself. 13 He told of divers things done in his absence, without notice given by any person. 14 There were strange speeches uttered by him in his fits, in a strange voice: as, that he was his, that he was God, Christ, and a king, that he made baptism. I will use William Summer his tongue and members for three days, Ego sum rex, ego sum Deus. That there was no God, that he was king and prince of darkness. And, in saying the Lords Prayer, he could not say, Led us not into temptation, but, Led us into temptation. Also, before Master Darel had seen him, he said Darel comes, Darel comes, he will have me out, but, I will come again: for, Nottingham and Burton, are jolly towns for me. 15 Being recovered out of his fits, he knew not what he had said or done. 16 In his fits, strange smells were in the place where he lay: sometimes like brimstone, sometimes very sweet. 17 There was a strange knocking perceived about his bed in his fits: both his hands and feet being held unmovable. 18 He did cry hideously, sometimes like a bull, bear, swine: and in a small voice impossible to be counterfeited. 19 His legs would be crooked with his falls, and remain unflexible. 20 He spoke in a continued speech, his mouth being wide open, his tongue drawn into his throat: neither his lips nor chaps moving. 21 He spoke a quarter of an hour, his mouth being shut close. 22 In his fits, his pulses and temples did not beat: he lay for dead, and as cold as ice. 23 His eye was black, and changed colour in his fits. These, and sundry other passions, at sundry times appeared in him, which I remember not now: but these which I have told you, are certainly reported by sundry persons of good account and credit, being eye witnesses thereof themselves. Pneumatomachus. The persons reporting these news may be of good account and credit I grant: but Lycanthropus? how can yourself so confidently report any thing from them for certain truth: sith themselves (as your speeches import) do only but speak of things as it seemed to be? Lycanthropus. Howsoever they seemed to them: the news (I assure you) was strange unto me. Philologus. Trust me, these are strange and wonderful news indeed. Lycanthropus. Not so strange (I assure thee) as true. Philologus. God grant they may work in every of us, an holy reverence and fear of his majesty. But, come on (I pray you) and cheer up yourselves: for, we are now (in a manner) at our journeys end. Pneumatomachus. I do heartily rejoice to hear of that news: being even toiled, and tired out with the new-fangled news of my neighbour Lycanthropus. But what three persons are those, that come yonder walking this way? Philologus. If I be not foully deceived it is master Orthodoxus, master Physiologus, and the Exorcist also himself, who cast out the Devil: they are even the same. This falleth forth pat for our purpose: we have now very fit opportunity to confer of these points to the full. Lycanthropus. Blessed be God for this special providence and favour. Orthodoxus. God bless you good brethren, & prosper your journey. Philologus. God bless you also good master Orthodoxus: and the rest of your company. What, my old friend Philologus? what make you in these quarters? and whether wander you so fast with these good companions? Philologus. Good sir? we are even now (I hope) at the furthest. For our coming into these quarters, is (upon special occasion) to confer with yourself and the rest of this company, about the marvelous wonders befallen at Mahgnitton of late: concerning a young man possessed there. Orthodoxus. See, see the strange nature of man? we were conferring even now, about the transforming of Devils: Howbeit, all the world (I fear me) will shortly become transformed Athenians. Act. 17. 21. For every man now, doth give himself wholly to the hearing or telling of news. Notwithstanding you are all heartily welcome: and this I tell you here by the way, that, we also ourselves, are now in debating those matters. Lycanthropus. Good sir? then pardon us we pray you, for interrupting your talk: and we will walk here apart by ourselves, attending your leisure. Physiologus. Nay not so: for, neither is the matter itself so secret, nor we so earnest upon it, but that (if it so please master Orthodoxus, and this other companion) you may all be jointly partakers of our mutual conference: and so much the rather, because you are come (as it seems) for that self-same purpose. Exorcists. I am very well willing, if master Orthodoxus thinks good. Orthodoxus. With all my heart. And seeing it hath pleased our good God to bring us so fitly together, let us (for more ease to ourselves) shroud us here under the shade along this bank: where we may have the benefit of the running stream to recreate our eyes and senses, and (in so solitary a place) very fitly confer of our matters, without the discovery of neighbours, or any the interruption of travelers. Physiologus. Well sir, first place yourself where you please; and you shall see us quickly come clustering about you. Orthodoxus. Come then let us sit closely together. Howbeit, before we begin our conference (to the end the same may be every way conformable to the will of God, and comfortable also unto ourselves) Let us all join together in hearty prayers, and say. O Lord our God, the fountain of life, the wellspring of grace, and the only infuser of all spiritual knowledge: Behold us here at this present (we humbly beseech thee) in that acceptable beauty of thy son our Saviour wherein thou so highly delightest, and for whose sake, thou canst not but be well pleased with every of us. Grant dear father, that, as thou hast ordained him to be the true light which lighteneth every one that comes into the world: so, he may graciously enlighten our hearts, who do naturally sit here in darkness, and in the shadow of death. Remove from our gross and senseless souls, all those palpable clouds of ignorance, error and unbelief, which seek to foreclose our saving knowledge in jesus Christ. Pluck (we pray thee) from our uncircumcised eyes, those thick and foggy seals of natural corruption, which do (at this present) so fearfully dim, and dazzle our dark understandings, as, we are utterly unable to discern aright, the hole some things of thy holy law. And grant we beseech thee yet further, that, this our intended conference concerning the timely discovery of these hidden mysteries of Satan, sin, and iniquity: may directly tend to the glory of thy great name, the good of thy Church, the unfolding of error, the manifestation of truth, the confusion of Satan, the triumph of our conquering Christ, and the everlasting salvation of all our souls: through jesus Christ our only Lord and Saviour. Altogether. So be it Lord jesus: even so, Amen. Orthodoxus. Well: now (in God's name) declare briefly and plainly what you desire to know concerning the possessed man at Mahgnitton? Philologus. First sir (or ever you enter upon the particular discourse of the possessed himself) our desire is, to hear whether there be any spirits or Devils to possess men at all: the rather, because there is one in our company, Act. 23, 8. who, very confidently avoucheth, that, there are neither Angels nor Spirits. Physiologus. Who is he? and what is his name? Pneumatomachus. I am the man if it please you: and my name is Pneumatomachus. Physiologus. Your name was given I suppose: to express your nature. For, Pneumatomachus, is as much to say, as a despiter of spirits: or rather, it signifieth one, who flatly opposeth himself to the essential spirits and powers of God. Howbeit (by that time Master Orthodoxus hath fully confuted your fowl and palpable errors) I doubt not, but, you will, both be ashamed of your gross understanding, and desirous to exchange your odious name. Pneumatomachus. By your patience (good sir) it argueth in you a contentious nature, to stand deskanting thus upon names: which are but bare notions of things, when you have said what you can. Physiologus. And, good sir (by your Licence) if so be your inward nature be the thing itself whereof your outward name doth give us the notion: then (out of doubt) your very name (how bare a notion soever) must needs argue in you an erroneous mind. Pneumatomachus. Err I confess I may, but dwell in an error I will not: If once I be brought to perceive it. Orthodoxus. God's name be blessed for this so good a beginning. Go to then, seeing you make it a Question whether there be spirits and Devils or no, it shall not be amiss, first to demonstrate plainly unto you, that there be Spirits and Devils: and then next, to declare, what we have more especially to consider of them. This I take it, will be a very plain course, and such also, as comprehendeth fully the limits and bounds of our conference. Physiologus. No doubt, it comprehendeth fully, whatsoever may fall forth concerning our present purpose. Exorcists. The order is such as no man dislikes. Philologus. I think even the same. What say you P●eumatomachus. Pneumatomachus. I dislike not the order. But sir? how prove you there be Spirits and Devils? Orthodoxus. I prove it first from their essential creation: and then next, from their effectual operation. Pneumatomatichus. How first from their essential creation? Orthodoxus. Because they were essentially created of God. For the Lord God (creating the whole host of heaven) created Angels and Spirits among the rest of celestial creatures, to be of principal account in that heavenly host. Now then, Angels and Spirits, they being such excellent creatures of God: we need not to doubt of their essential being. The rather, because every creature else (how contemptible soever) being once created, it hath an essential substance: and if the basest of all, then much more the Angels, they being (indeed) such excellent creatures. Pneumatomachus. Well, go to, how next from their effectual operations. Orthodoxus. Thus, their operations have been, and now are apparently evident to all the world; whether we respect the Lord, or his church. So that for any to doubt of their essential being, is to call in question the sunshine at midday: and as well may he deny their operations whatsoever. Pneumatomachus. Good sir, is this your substantial proving of Angels and Spirits: I deny that the Lord God ever created any Angels at all: and then to what purpose do you urge their supposed operations? Orthodoxus. Sith you so confidently deny both Spirits and Devils, tell me what you imagine those to be, which we generally hold for Spirits and Angels. Pneumatomachus. Sir, johannis calvini opuscula, contra Libertinos. c. 12. fol. 179. G. Alley in his poor man's library. fol. 123. Master Perkins upon the Creed, fol. 73. I take those your supposed spirits for none other matters at all, but the good or evil motions and affections arising in men: as also, those your imagined Angels, I hold them to be nothing else but the sensible signs or tokens of Gods unspeakable power. Orthodoxus. You do then conclude (it should seem) that our faith (concerning those matters) is grounded altogether upon bare supposals, and idle imaginations of wandering brains. I like well your plainness in laying open your mind: although I allow not your pestiferous opinions, jumping so pat, with the peripatetical and sadusaical sort. josephus de Antiquit. jud. lib. 20. Magister in historijs. Who (flatly denying either Angel or Spirit) do confidently avouch that there is nothing immortal in man, which is a very dangerous gulf of hell that devoureth and swalloweth up all sound divinity and sincere knowledge of God. For first, by opposing yourself against all the essential spirits and powers of the Lord, what do you else in effect, but implicatively reject the essential being of the holy Ghost? and then next, joh. 4. 24. 1. Cor. 3. 16. you do also (by consequence) very flatly deny that there is any God at all: for what (I pray you) is God, but a Spirit? Pneumatomachus. Nay sir (howsoever I oppose myself to the catholic opinion of Spirits and Devils) I do confidently avouch and confess that there is one true everliving God, of an incomprehensible, invisible and spiritual essence: distinguished into the Father, the Son, and the holy Ghost. And moreover (concerning men and myself) I do with like confidence, very clearly acknowledge, that every of us also are essentially endued with spiritual and immortal souls. Orthodoxus. You cannot faithfully & finally hold these infallible truths from your heart: but you must and will presently banish those other palpable errors from out of your breast. For, Exod. 7. 12. even as Aaron his rod devoured forthwith the counterfeit rods of all the Egyptian Sorcerers: so surely, these your confessed truths (concerning the essential spirits and powers of the Lord) being faithfully held from the heart will in the end (I doubt not) be another aaronical rod, to confute and confound those other Sadusaical sorceries wherewith the Devil hath so dangerously bewitched your soul. Lycanthropus. Very true, if he be not to opinionate therein. Pneumatomachus. Sir, howsoever I have been hitherto opinionate in this special point, I am notwithstanding very loath that reason should be overruled by will, or that the holy truth of God should give place unto error: and therefore proceed (I beseech you) in the timely unfolding of this hidden mystery. Orthodoxus. With very good will: wherein also (for your speedier conceiving of that which is spoken) we will first lay open the original fountain from whence this error floateth abroad: and then next (having fully answered your arguments) we will directly prove unto you, both Spirits and Devils. Exorcists. A very excellent order. For there by first you shall clear our judgements: and then next you shall the more fully confirm us in the infallible truth. Lycanthropus. That is certainly so. But what thinks Pneumatomachos? Pneumatomachus. I acknowledge no less: and do promise withal, to give an attentive ear to whatsoever is spoken. Orthodoxus. Well then, to proceed therein accordingly, this I dare boldly affirm, that your peripatetical opinion, or rather, that this your sadusaical sorcery concerning the non being of Spirits and Devils: proceedeth directly from a twofold false ground. Namely, first, from the natural corruption of your proper mind: and secondly, from a careless misconstruing of some certain places of Scripture. Both which said false grounds, albeit I could and might well relate them myself: yet (because the first is rather Philosophical then Divine) I do purposely put over the prosecuting thereof (as of all other like points) to this my good brother, if it please him to travel therein: reserving the latter to entreat of myself. Physiologus. Sith it is your good pleasure to have it so, I will gladly give my endeavour to satisfy the man, so it seemeth him good. Pneumatomachus. With all my heart: if first you will tell me who you are, and what is your name. Physiologus. I am (I assure you) a friend to the truth: and my name is Physiologos. Pne●matomachus. In very good time be it spoken. But may I be bold (by the way) to ask you a question without offence? Physiologus. Propound at your pleasure: and ask what you please. Pneumatomachus. Was not your name also purposely given, to purport unto us your proper nature? For, Physiologus (you say) is your name: which (unless I be foully deceived) is as much to say; as a babbler or prattler of natural Philosophy: or, it signifieth rather some notable discourser of natural causes. I hope you are none of those cogging companions of whom the Apostle doth wish us beware: Col. 2. 8. who go purposely about to spoil men with Philosophy and vain deceit? Orthodoxus. Nothing less. For the man (I assure you) is both a sound Philosopher: and a sincere Divine: Neither would I have you once to imagine, that Paul doth there purposely oppose himself to all true Philosophy, whether natural, or moral, no: but reproveth rather, that false and counterfeit Philosophy, which (having only an appearance of truth, and not the substance of truth itself) is cunningly foisted in by cogging companions, to spoil and deceive men's minds of the truth indeed. For otherways, all true Philosophy is the special gift of God, and a principal help to Divinity: so far forth especially, as she is made a submissive Moderator in natural causes, and not a commanding Mistress over Divinity. Then I assure you, she comes in her natural kind: and thrice happy is he that hath a true insight into her, according to that old accustomed saying: Foelix qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas. The wight that could all causes skan: Might count himself an happy man. Now then, such a Philosopher is this, and therefore, be bold upon my warrant) to hearken freely unto him, concerning the first ground of your error. Pneumatomachus. I credit your words: let him therefore proceed in his purpose. Physiologus. The first ground of this (as of all errors else whatsoever) doth undoubtedly arise (as you heard) from the natural corruption of your proper mind. And, this may more plainly appear, if I first show you what the Mind is: and then, tell you how the same is corrupted. The Mind, is that reasonable faculty or power of the soul; whereby the natural man perceiveth, knoweth, and discerneth all intelligible things. By which words it is plain, that, the proper end and office of the Mind, is especially to perceive, to know, and discern things. And, this office also it accomplisheth by the help of no bodily Organon, but only by itself alone: unless haply the senses do sometime assist the intellective virtue therein. The Mind therefore it differeth (you see) from the Will. For, the Mind, only perceiveth and knoweth a thing: the Will, it maketh free choice, either to pursue, or eschew the thing that is known. Now then, the Mind (in a mere natural man) is easily corrupted by reason of the fantasy, through whose only help, the aforesaid knowledge of things intelligible is conveyed and offered unto it. For, the fantasy, it being that interior sensitive knowledge which (by the middle ventricle of the brain) receiveth into itself a very deep impression of the sundry kinds of sensible things either present, or absent, and labouring also to draw forth from those several kinds of sensible things, the like sensible kinds in conceit: it cannot otherwise possibly be, but that the said fantasy (not being able to transcend beyond the sensitive knowledge of natural and corporal substances) must needs offer the mind such sensible notions as her special object affords. And, hereby also it cometh to pass, that, the mind eftsoons is deceived in perceiving, knowing, and discerning aright of every intelligible thing: more especially, if the said fantasy at any time endeavoureth to draw forth from some sensible things, an imaginary conceit of some intelligible matter. For then, the understanding or mind (being mightily misled by the fantasy) must needs be deceived in perceiving and discerning such a matter; it being supernatural, spiritual, and heavenly: and surmounting the compass of human reason. As for example. The mind of a mere natural man, being at any time desirous to perceive and discern aright of God, of Angels, or Devils: it looketh forthwith to receive from the fantasy or interior sensitive knowledge, some certain notions concerning these matters. Which said fantasy, receiving an impression, only of sensible things from the exterior senses themselves, and having in her naturally, no impression at all of any the aforesaid supernatural, spiritual, and heavenly matters: therein, she affordeth the mind, either, no notions at all, or none other (at least) then only such, as she reeeiveth herself from corporal, sensible, and mere natural objects. Whereupon, the mind (being still desirous to perceive and discern the aforesaid supernatural matters, and having thereof (I say) no notions at all, or, deceivable notions at least) she forthwith concludes, either, that there are neither God, nor Angel, nor Devil: or, none other at least, than such as she hath notions of in an imaginary conceit, arising only upon a sensible knowledge from corporal, sensible, and natural objects. That is, the said fantasy, receiving some sensible knowledge from the sense of the ear, Gen. 17. 1. that God is an almighty and magnificent Lord of hosts, Isa. 6. 3. it imagineth forthwith, some sensible or corporal potentate; and thereupon, receiving an impression of some such sensible thing in conceit: the mind by and by (from such sensible notions) concludeth, that God is some almighty, supereminent, and sensible potentate in deed: having all princes and powers subjecteth unto him. Again, the said fantasy, having received by the ear as before, a like sensitive knowledge, that the Seraphims (shadowing the throne of grace) have six wings apiece, Isa. 6. 2. to fly, and to cover themselves withal, it forthwith supposeth some sensible creature: and thereupon (receiving as before, a sensible impression of some such sensible thing in conceit) the mind eftsoons resolveth, that Angels (if there be any) are none other but fiery and winged creatures. To be short, the fantasy having received by the ear, as before, that the Devil is a terrible tormenting Termagant, 2. Pet. 2. 4, jude. 6. chained up under darkness, and taking an impression of some such sensible thing in conceit: the mind strait way supposeth, that, infernal spirits (if there be any at all) are undoubtedly some black, grim, grisly ghosts, having goggled eyes, fearful claws, with two cloven feet: Thus then, you see how the mind in a mere natural man (receiving but bare fantastical notions of sensible things in conceit) is too too corrupted in judgement: and therefore, hath naturally, no power in itself, to perceive, to know and discern aright of any supernatural, spiritual, or heavenly matters. Pneumatomachus. From hence you would seem to infer, that, the mere natural man is utterly unable (by natural reason) to conceive fondly and rightly of spiritual causes. Orthodoxus. Very true. For, jam. 3. 15. as that wisdom which is from below, is but earthly, 1. Cor. 2. 14. sensual, and devilish: so surely, the natural man, he cannot possibly perceive the things of the spirit of God, for, they are but foolishness to him. Neither can he know them at all: for, they are spiritually discerned. And, this spiritual discerning of things, is no natural, but a supernatural work of faith which doth not arise from sensible notions: but, from a supernatural knowledge infused spiritually into the enlightened soul, Heb. 11. 1. and which also (being grounded on things that are hoped for) is an undoubted true evidence of things unseen. Otherways, faith could be no faith at all: as one very fitly affirmeth saying. The divine operation (if it may possibly be comprehended by reason) is nothing admirable: neither can that faith find any merit, Gregorius in Homil. 26. supper evang. whereunto human reason affords an experiment. Philologus. How now Pneumatomachus, what say you to these matters? Pneumatomachus. By that which is spoken I do plainly perceive the very first ground of all gross and palpable errors: namely, the gross conceiving of spiritual matters according to that natural knowledge which naturally ariseth from mere sensible and natural notions. Exorcists. You have conceived aright: but how is your heart affected therewith. Pneumatomachus. It is affected (I hope) as it ought to be. For surely, this I must needs confess to my shame, that, hitherto I have adjudged nothing either possible in nature, or credible in action: which could not absolutely be comprehended by human reason. And, 1. Cor. 1. 20. this (now I perceive) is that worldly wisdom which the word accounteth foolishness with God. But, do show me (good Master Orthodoxus) the other ground also of these gross opinions. Orthodoxus. With very good will. The other ground of your errors ariseth (I assure you) from a careless misconstruing of some such places of scripture, as do attribute to God, and to spirits a corporal form: as eyes, ears, hands, feet, bodies, wings and such like. Which said places (your self understanding them carnally) do seem to import unto you at a blush; that God and spirits have visible forms and corporal substances. And thereupon, you do rashly conclude, that spirits and Devils must necessarily be even such as yourself by those places suppose: or none at all. But now, because you your own self (with your corporal eyes) did yet never behold any such corporal Devils as you by those Scriptures have grossly imagined: therefore you do flatly resolve with yourself, that there are neither spirits nor Devils at all. Pneumatomachus. Why? what other thing else should those corporal forms, attributed to spirits & Devils in the sacred scriptures import; but, either that Devils and spirits are visible substances, if those scriptures say true: or that there are (at the least) neither spirits nor Devils at all, as I have hitherto held. Orthodoxus. That the scriptures say true, being truly understood; no true hearted Christians may dare to deny. That there are also both spirits and Devils (though in truth and in substance they have no such visible forms as those places of Scripture do literally import) shall be proved anon. In the mean time, this I must tell you for truth, that, those scriptures which attribute to God, and spirits, a corporal form, as eyes, ears, hands, feet, bodies, wings & such like; may (at no hand) be expounded literally; but must rather be metaphorically, and spiritually understood of us. So that, (by any those corporal forms) we may not grossly conceive in God, or in spirits, such corporal members, Gregorius in morali●us. Item, in libr● de collatione patrum. appertaining especially to their essential being: but, we must spiritually understand ●hereby, those their supernatural virtues, operations and actions, which (by such corporal forms) are metaphorically commended to our human capacities. And without doubt, such a carnal misconstruing of scriptures, was the only main cause which made the silly old monks in elder times, to fall fearfully into the palpable error of the Anthropomorphites: who (by understanding such scriptures literally) did grossly attribute to God, such human actions and passions as are proper to men. The holy scriptures than I perceive, they may not be interpreted hand over head: neither are they in every place to be opened literally. Orthodoxus. Nothing less, for, so should you fall into a thousand absurdities. And therefore, unless you will purposely show yourself a swinish Saducee, or impudently make yourself known a monkish Anthropomorphite: be now ashamed (I beseech you) of this palpable grossness, and hold confidently with the catholic church, that there are essential spirits and Devils. Philologus. Pneumatomachus? how goeth the matter? Pneumatomachus. That which hath been hitherto spoken, doth sufficiently set forth a twofold ground of erroneous opinions. Howbeit, this my opinion concerning the non being of Angels or spirits, appears not (for any thing heard as yet:) to be erroneous at all. And, I yet verily think (as before) that Devils are none other thing else, but those good, or evil motions in men, which do marvelously comfort, or afflict their minds. Orthodoxus. Think you so as you say? Gen. 3. 1. Go to then, tell me (I pray you) what was the Serpent that tempted our grandmother Eva in Paradise? 11. Cor. 3. 3. Was that any good, or evil motion in Eva? If so, then tell me further, whether you think that motion was within, or without her: If within her, how came the temptation then from the Serpent, and from without her altogether? But, if it came from without her, how should then the temptation be justly accounted any motion of hers: sith the same cannot truly be said to arise from within her? Again, if you take Devils to be but the good, or evil motions in men: what think you that tempter was, Math. 4. 1. 3. who tempted Christ in the wilderness? Was it (think you) any motion in Christ? Luc. 4. 2. 3. If yea: then, whether was it an evil, or a good motion? An evil motion you may not avouch it to be: because, Christ being free from all sin, could not possibly have in him any evil motion at all. As also, it were very absurd to affirm it a good motion: for, how could that motion be good, which tempted Christ unto evil? Moreover, if you take Devils for the good, or evil motions in men, what think you then that Legion was, Math. 8. 28. wherewith the two men were possessed? Marc. 5. 9 Could the motions of men crave leave, and enter into a whole heardship of Swine? Luc. 8. 30. And, what became of those motions, when they were cast forth by our Saviour Christ? Were they drowned together, with the Swine in the Sea? If so, what then became of the men themselves from whom (as you dream) those motions arose? Were they dead all the while their minds were bereft of their motions? For, the mind (you know) is in perpetual motion. Or, if those men (all the while, and ever after their motions, were cast forth and drowned in the Sea) remained still in their lively estate: it should seem that Spirits and Devils are some other essential powers, than the bare motions and affections arising in men. Briefly, if Devils be nothing else, but the good, or evil motions in men; what think you those tormentors to be, which vex and torment men in Hell, Math. 25. 41▪ 46. with the Devil and his Angels? Yea, and do tell me (I pray you) what goeth to Hell: the good, or evil motions? If only the evil, what then must become of those other which were good in the man? For, sith none in this life can possibly be either so good, or so evil, but that they have in them both good, and evil motions, it cannot otherways be, but that, either the good, and evil motions in men, must (after this life) be monstrously confounded together; or else, if the good motions go roundly to Heaven, and the evil unto hell: then, the body and soul must be divided, part unto heaven, and part unto hell, like an individuum vagum, or, some little new nothing that hangs in the air. To be short, if man, with his good, and evil motions together, goeth forthwith, either wholly to heaven, or wholly to hell: how then should his joys, or his torments be either absolute or endless? Because, look how fast his good motions do minister comfort unto him: so fast (at the least) his evil motions will afflict and torment him. Phylologus. Surely Pneumatomachus, this opinion (I see) is so absurd and so sottish: as, even a sucking babe would blush to be tainted therewith. Lycanthropus. A sucking babe blush? yea, it is such a stale ridiculous jest, as might make even a mad man to hide his head in a corner. Pneumatomachus. Very true: and I also myself, am now ashamed thereof. Notwithstanding, how soever it is certain that spirits and Devils be more than the good or evil motions in men; it appears yet (for any thing heard) that those your supposed Angels, are nothing at all but the sensible tokens, or signs of God's power. Orthodoxus. What mean you by the sensible tokens, or signs of God's power. Pneumatomachus. I understand thereby, those extraordinary judgements of God which demonstrate unto us, the incomprehensible majesty and might of his power. Such (I mean) as was the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrha: the extraordinary speech of baalam's Ass: the wonderful overthrow of the Assyrian host, and such other beside. Orthodoxus. Your error concerning this point undoubtedly consisteth herein: namely, in confounding the cause of those judgements with the effect itself. For, howsoever those the aforenamed judgements may truly be said to be the sensible signs, and effects of the extraordinary power of God: yet can you at no hand deny, but that the Lord also himself effected those extraordinary judgements, by some extraordinary wonderful means, namely by the appointed ministery and execution of his heavenly Angels. As for example, howsoever the extraordinary overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrha, was a sensible sign and effect of the extraordinary power of God: very certain it is, Gen. 19 13. that the two Angels sent forth from the Lord for the execution of that power, they were also the instrumental means that effected the same. Numb. 22. 27. 28. Again, howsoever the fall and of speech Balaam his ass, was some extraordinary effect & sign of God's power: yet was it the Angel with his sword drawn in his hand, 2. King. 19 35. who extraordinarily accomplished the same. Briefly, howsoever that fearful massacre, so miraculously made upon the hundred eighty and five thousand of Saneheribs army, was an extraordinary and sensible sign of God's wonderful power: Aug. de cognition verae vitae cap. 6. yet was it the Angel of the Lord, who extraordinarily effected the same that self-same night. By all which you see it very apparent, Danaeus in Enchir. August. cap. 57 pag. 193. that (whatsoever yourself surmise to the contrary) the scriptures they set forth unto us essential Angels or spirits, as the extraordinary executioners of those sensible signs or tokens of the extraordinary power of God. Pneumatomachus. Surely good sir, I should soon be persuaded to that which you speak: were I not mightily withheld by an unanswerable argument. Orthodoxus. What argument I pray you is that? Pneumatomachus. This, namely, for that Moses in the history of the creation (entreating compendiously of all those works of God which in six days before the Saboth were perfectly finished) maketh no mention at all of the creation of Angels, spirits, or Devils. Whereupon it followeth, that (if any such be) they must needs be uncreate, and eternal: or created (at least) before, or after the worlds creation. Orthodoxus. Thus you reason. There is in the history of Moses no express mention of the creation of Angels: therefore, if any such be, they are either uncreate, or not created within the six days. Pneumatomachus. So I reason indeed. Orthodoxus. Then I must tell you, your argument is faulty, and halteth down right, neither hath it any such certain consequence as you seem to set down: else, how say you to this that I make? There is in the history of Moses no express mention of the creation of Lions or Bears: therefore, if any such be, they are either uncreate, or not created within the six days. Pneumatomachus. That followeth not. For, Gen. 1. 24. 25. howsoever Lions or Bears, be not expressly mentioned there: yet is their creation implicatively contained within that six days work, wherein God created the earth, and all the creatures therein. Orthodoxus, Very true. And thus you yourself at unawares have answered this your unreasonable argument. For howsoever Angels and spirits are not expressly mentioned in Moses his history: yet, Gen. 1. 7. 8. is their creation implicatively comprehended in that second days work, wherein God created the heavenly firmament, with all the whole host above the same, among whom the Angels and spirits have special pre-eminence. Pneumatomachus. You say some thing unto it. Orthodoxus. Something say you? such a something I assure you, as is able to batter your unanswerable argument to nothing. Howbeit (for further answer) this I do confidently oppose to that which you falsely infer, Hieron, Zanchius deoperibus Dei. lib. 2. cap. 5. namely, that Angels and spirits are neither eternal nor uncreate: but such essential powers of God as had their first beginning and being, Theodorelus quest. 3. super Genes. by the work of creation. Neither were they form or made before the first created matter of this visible world: neither yet after the accomplished works of this visible world. Gennadius, Otho Casmannus Angelographiae part. 1. cap. 5. pag. 107. Psal. 33. 6. Yea, and thus much I do further affirm, that they were not created before, but jointly together with that celestial firmament, which we commonly call the heaven of the blessed. Pneumatomachus. How prove you them creatures created by God? Orthodoxus. This may plainly be proved from most infallible and apparent places of Scripture: especially that in the Psalms: Psal. 148. 2. 5. where David (inviting and summoning all sorts of people to sing praises to God) saith also of the Angels: praise ye him all ye his Angels, praise ye him all ye his power. And therewithal, he giveth this reason, saying: for, He spoke the word and they were made, he commanded, and they were created. And hereunto also acordeth that which the Apostle speaketh saying: Col. 1. 16. by him were all things created which are in heaven and in earth, things visible, and invisible: whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers, all things were created by him, and for him, By all which it is clear, that the very Angels are creatures: and created also by God. Exorcists. Yea, but when, or in what day created he them? Orthodoxus. This I confess, is a more difficult question, then that it may well be answered by any express words set down in the sacred scriptures: Gen. 1. 1. 2. Psal. 148. 2. 3. Heb. 1. 7. Revel. 4. 11. Psal. 33. 6. Revel. 10. 6. Gen. 2. 1. 2. although yet, by the Scriptures themselves, by probable reasons, and by the authority also of ancient Fathers, some certainty may be determined concerning this point. Pneumatomachus. How first by the Scriptures themselves? Orthodoxus. The Scriptures declare, that they were undoubtedly created all within the six days: as to allege one or two out of many. Psal. 33. 6. First David he saith, By the word of the Lord were the heavens made: and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth. Again, Revel. 10. 6. the Angel in the Revelation, sweareth by the Lord, Who created the heaven, and the things that are therein, and the earth, and the things that are therein, and the sea, and the things that are therein. In both which places you see, how the holy Ghost (speaking of the creation of all things) doth first set down the continents themselves, namely the heavens, the earth, and the sea: and then next, the things contained in them. Showing by this self-same order, that the heavens, the earth, and the sea, were first created themselves: and then the creatures contained in them. But the heavens, the earth, and the sea, were all of them created within the six days: and therefore also the host of heaven, and all the creatures in the earth, and the sea, were every of them created within the six days. Gen. 2. 1. 2. For Moses saith flatly, that even in those six days, all the works of the Lord were fully finished: and that God ceased the seventh day from all his labours. Thus than you see it plainly demonstrated by sundry places of Scripture: that the Angels also were all created within the works of those six days creation. Pneumatomachus. Well, and how prove you the same by probable reasons? Orthodoxus. I prove it thus. Patricius lib. de essentia, & ente. 1. The Angels they are either created, or uncreated: but not uncreated: therefore created. They cannot possibly be uncreated substances: for then, they should also be infinite. Howbeit, Angels they are finite creatures, for their actions are finite: yea, and then also their power, it is finite. But if they be of a finite power, than also of a circumscriptible essence. Moreover, it shall plainly appear anon in place convenient, that Angels are finite creatures, and definitively also in some certain place: which thing can not possible accord to any uncreated essence at all. And therefore Angels they are not uncreated substances. 2 Secondly I prove it thus. If Angels be uncreated, then are they eternal: but not eternal, therefore, not uncreated. That they are not eternal it is very apparent. For, then should they be such as have neither beginning, nor end of their essence: as also, their essence or nature itself, should then be such, as hath nothing in it either first, or last. But this agreeth only to God himself, and not to any creature in heaven, or in earth. And therefore if there be Angels then were they created; and if created, then created no doubt within the six days as was showed before. And thus much for the proof of this point, by probable reasons. Pneumatomachus. Well. Let us hear next the testimony of father's concerning this Question. Orthodoxus. Withal my heart. Methodius in serm. de resurrect. lib. 2. tom. 1. Epiphanius lib. 2. tom. 2. Wherein also (for brevities sake) I will only but rehearse their names, and refer you to the consideration of their several treatises. The authors be these. Methodius, Epiphanius, Athanasius, Augustine, Eucherius, Theodoretus, and Damascenus. All these do very confidenly avouch upon special occasions, Athanasius, de beatit, fi●ij Dei. Aug. de civit. Dei. lib. 11. cap. 5. and, against the Manicheiss, the Priscillianists, and other such heretics: that the Angels whatsoever were the undoubted workmanship of God, howsoever their creation is not apparently laid forth in the sacred Scriptures. Yea, Eucherius, de create. Angel. Theodoretus, de dijs, & Angelis, lib. 3. The Counsels of Lateran and Bracha both, do jointly determine, that the Angels are created of God, and are not eternal: in so much, as if any shall hold the contrary, they conclude him accursed of God. Thus then, you see it apparently evident by Scripture, Damasc. de orth. fide lib. 2. cap. 3. by reasons, and the testimonies also of sundry fathers: that Angels and spirits (being finite creatures of God) were undoubtedly created within the six days. Conc Lat. magn. Can. 1. Pneumatomachus. But in what day of those six were they created? Conc. Brachor. council. primum. cap. 5. Orthodoxus. Touching the very day itself, there is some difference in judgement among the Divines: Magist sentent. lib. 2. dist. 2. some hold they were created the first day, and some the second. But, whether of both, is not certainly concluded: although it may probably be gathered, August. in libro de trinitate. they were (in very deed) created the secondday, thus. That they were created before the third day, may plainly be proved by the words of the Lord unto job, job. 38. 4. 5. 6. 7. saying. Where wert thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? Declare if thou hast understanding. Magist. sentent. lib. 2. dist. 2. Beda in job. 38. 7. Strabus, job. 1. ●. and 2. 1. Who hath laid the measures thereof if thou knowest? Or who hath stretched the line over it? Where upon are the foundations thereof set? Or, who laid the corner stone thereof? When the stars of the morning praised me, and all the sons of God rejoiced? The Lord in that place (by the sons of God) understandeth the Angels and spirits: affirming moreover, that, even they also did celebrate his name with praise, so soon as he had laid the earths foundation. Gen. 1. 10. Now the earth (Moses saith) was made the third day: and therefore, if the Angels on that day sang praises to God, it followeth necessarily, they were then created before: for, how should they sing praises before their creation? But, it is unlikely they were the first day created: because, Gen. 1. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. nothing on that day was created (saith Moses) but the confused Chaos from whence the rest of the creatures were orderly form: and that primary light, which separated the night from the day. If followeth therefore, that they were all created the second day, together with that celestial firmament: under whose name is also contained that supreme heaven, which is called the third heaven, paradise, or the heaven of the blessed. And this thing also is yet more plainly expressed by the words of our Saviour Christ, who saith that the kingdom of heaven was prepared for the elect, Math. 25. 34. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, from the world's foundation: that is, after the Lord, upon the very first day had created the Chaos aforesaid, then by and by, from out of that Chaos, Gen. 1. 6. 7. 8. was brought the firmament (as Moses affirmeth) which the Lord God prepared for all the elect. By all this it is evident, that Angels and Spirits, they are essential creatures of God, created also within the six days: and so (by consequence) your unanswerable argument, is answered (you see) to the full. Pneumatomachus. I acknowledge no less. But sir, (having laid down the main grounds of my error, and answered directly my arguments) it remaineth by promise, that now likewise you produce your own reasons, to prove plainly unto me, both spirits and Devils. Orthodoxus. Very true. And therefore (having first removed the old rubbish which overturned the rule of your reason) it cometh now very fitly in place, to show further unto you, that, the Angels of God (whether good or evil) are truly essential and substantial spirits: as may plainly appear by these following reasons, & first, from their sundry names attributed unto them thus: 1 Names, Hieronimus Zanchius, de operibus Dei, lib. 2. cap. 2. they are the signs and notions of things. Which names, when they signify any thing, properly subsisting of itself: then, that thing also itself is a substance no doubt. But the Angels, they are set forth by sundry names, which do signify substances. Math. 25. 41. For, first they be called Angels, that is to say, messengers: but, a messenger, or a minister appointed, cannot but be a subsistence. Also, they are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉▪ that is, intellectual powers: but, that which hath understanding and knowledge, is undoubtedly a substance. Zach. 3. 2. Briefly, they be called Satan, that is an adversary, Math. 4. 1. 5. also Devils, that is accusors also, strong armed men, also the God of this world, Luc. 11. 21. the princes and powers of the air, the governors of this world, 2. Cor. 4. 4. Eph. 2. 2. &, 6. 12. murderers, roaring lions, the dragon, the old serpent, & so forth. All which several names, do undoubtedly signify a thing subsisting; joh. 8. 44. 1. Pet. 5. 8. Revel. 12. 7. 9 wherein is a power, from whence proceedeth an action: and therefore, there are essential spirits and Devils. 2 Again, if spirits and Devils were only but the secret motions and affections of men, then undoubtedly, so many famous actions as the Scriptures record, and the same also externally to the outward senses, could in no wise accord unto them: but the consequent is false, for the Scriptures apparently, and without any trope, do celebrate their office, and record their sundry actions, namely, that they stand before God, serve him, execute his precepts and judgements, that they do daily, assault, tempt, torment, cirumvent, and seek to devour us, and so forth. But, how should these, or any one of these actions, be possibly performed of such as are not in (deed) true substances? 3 Again, things created in them selves and not in an other subject, yea, and so, as they subsist of them selves alone, those things undoubtly have a true subsistence. But, spirits and Devils, they are so created (no doubt) as they subsist in themselves, neither are they inherent, or inexistent, in any other subject whatsoever: and therefore spirits and Devils, they have undoubtedly a true subsistence. 4 Again, whatsoever living creature is endued with reason, understanding, and will, that must needs be some thing of itself subsisting: but, spirits and Devils, they are living creatures endued with reason, understanding, and will: and therefore, somethings (no doubt) of themselves subsisting. 5 Again, nothing can possibly persist in the truth, nor nothing can fall from their first estate, unless the same be some essence subsisting of itself, and partaker also of understanding, and will. But, some of the Angels do persevere in the truth, and some again, have fallen from the same: and therefore, Angels and spirits, are some essences subsisting of themselves, and partakers also of understanding and will. 6 Again, if spirits and Devils, were only but the evil motions, and affections arising in men, it should be absurd, either to distinguish their numbers, or to express their several actions: but the consequent is false, as all that fear God will confess, and therefore also the antecedent itself. 7 Again, whatsoever doth speak, assault, suggest, tempt, afflict, torment, and cirumvent, to devour, that must necessarily be a subsistence. But spirits and Devils do so, for they spoke to Eva, Gen. 3. 1. they assaulted Achab, and suggested an untruth into all his prophets, 1. King. 22. 22. they tempted Christ, they afflicted and tormented Saul, Math. 4. 1. they made judas to hang himself, they seek to winnow and fan men, 1. Sam. 16. 14. yea & to cirumvent all the children of God to destruction: Math. 27. 5. and therefore, spirits and Devils, Luc. 22. 31. 2. Cor. 2. 11. must necessarily be some subsistence. 8 Again, if Angels and spirits be only but accidental affections, 1. Pet. 5. 8. and no true substances in deed, then, neither shall we after this life, Math. 22. 30. be any true substances, for, the scriptures affirm, that after the resurrection, we shall be like to the Angels in heaven. Now then, if Angels and spirits be not true substances in deed, shall we also cease to be substances? 9 Again, Aristotle, he proves this world to be perfect, for that it consists of all those things which can be desired therein, or which may in any wise appertain to the perfection thereof. Howbeit, to the perfection of the whole, there is required therein, three several sorts of substances: the first invisible, the second visible, and the third partly invisible & partly visible. The second sort, namely the visible substances, are the heavens, the elements, and all things made of the elements. The third sort, namely the substances, partly invisible, and partly visible, are men who consist of a soul and body together, the soul invisible, and the body visible. Now then, if Angels, who are of themselves invisible, should not be substances, than should there be wanting to the world, invisible substances: and so, the world should be unperfect. But the world, it is perfect, as all, both Philosophers and Divines do affirm. And therefore Angels they be substances invisible and spiritual. 10 Lastly, common experience (from the beginning of the world to this present hour) hath apparently approved unto us, that there be Angelical spirits and Devils: and therefore not to be denied of any, unless he will show himself a swinish Saduce, or some monkish Anthropomorphite, as was showed before. And thus have you briefly heard my several reasons, which prove unto you both spirits and Devils. Pneumatomachus. Sir, by that which you have spoken, I am now throughlie persuaded, that Angels are indeed essential and spiritual substances. Howbeit, this one thing doth trouble me greatly: namely, that (seeing all Angels were equally created according to the true image of God) no one of them all may truly be said to be evil. Orthodoxus. You do well in delivering your doubts, but, go to, frame your argument. Pneumatomachus. I frame it thus. Timoth. Brichtus in animaduers. Physica. A thing created to the image of God, cannot be, nor may not be said to be evil. But all Angels and spirits were (in the beginning) created all alike to the image of God: therefore no Angel or spirit either can be, or may be said to be evil. Now sir, if none of them can, or may be said to be evil: how should there be any Devils at all? Orthodoxus. Very true as you say, if that which you seem to conclude were as truly concluded. Howbeit, I answer thus. First concerning your proposition I say. That, so far forth as any thing created to God's image hath truly that image, keepeth and looseth it not: so far forth, and so long, any such thing may not truly be said to be evil. Now next to your assumption I answer thus. All those Angelical spirits so created of God, they did not retain and hold fault that true image of God wherein they were first created: but willingly rejected and fled from the same. And therefore I distinguish thus. The Harmony of confessions, 58. Confessio Belgia articls. 12. Confessio Franc. artic. 7. Angels created in the beginning according to the true image of God, did either persever in that original integrity: or else, they wilfully fell from the same. The one sort are finally confirmed in that self-same goodness wherein they were first created, and therefore, good Angels: the other sort losing their first goodness, are hardened in that self-same evil whereinto they first fell, and therefore evil Angels. So then, to imagine that the evil Angels also notwithstanding their evilness, must still show forth that self-same image of God from which they fearfully fell: is nothing else in effect, but to confound the forms of their distinguished kinds. For it is one thing to be created good; and another thing, still to retain that self-same goodness. The one is past: the other is present. And the vanity of that childish conceit may be made evident by the like reason thus. All men are created in Adam to the image of God. But Atheists and ungodly ones are men: therefore Atheists and ungodly ones, they show forth the image of God. Here is more in the conclusion, than was put in the premises. For this only should follow, namely, that Atheists in as much as they are men, were first created according to the image of God: but in that they are now fallen, they do resemble the image of the Devil. Pneumatomachus. Sir, my judgement concerning these points, is now (I praise God) so clearly enlightened, as my neighbour Lycanthropus & myself may well be at one: being both fully resolved (I hope) in that self same controversy which we held so hotly as we came from Mahgnitton. Lycanthropus. If you be therein at one with your self: you are also at one with me. For, I was resolved before, and your self now confesfesseth: that there are essential spirits and devils. Pneumatomachus. Yea, I do freely confess it from my very heart. Physiologus. I am right glad to hear so good a beginning. Exorcists. And even so am I, I assure you. Orthodoxus. God's name be blessed for this special grace. Lycanthropus. So be it. But sir? as there will be tide after tide, all the while the Seas themselves do ebb and flow: so surely, so long as men have in them their boiling affections, 1. Cor. 1. 10. so long no doubt, the dispatch of one controversy, jam. 4. 1. will be but the beginning of another, as we see here by present experience. For, at our very first meeting, my friend Phylologus affirmed flatly, that (howsoever there be granted essential spirits and Devils) their possession (in these days of the Gospel) is denied of some, and doubted of many. Philologus. I said so in deed. Orthodoxus. This falls forth very fit for the next main point, Namely, what we have to consider concerning spirits and Devils. Howbeit, because (it may be) you grow faint by reason of travel: Let us here break off (& after we have refreshed our bodies) make speedy recourse to this present place: and so enter a fresh on the matter. Physiologus. Sir, we do willingly attend your good pleasure: if it pleaseth the rest of our company. Lycanthropus. It pleaseth us wondrous well. For the motion (I assure you) is such, as I would have made mine own self: but for giving offence. Orthodoxus. Let us then arise and depart. The end of the first Dialogue. The second Dialogue. THE ARGUMENT. The power of Spirits and Devils, their possession, what it is: and whether the Devil doth essentially enter into the possessed man's mind, or not? The speakers names. PHILOLOGUS. LYCANTHROPUS. PNEUMATOMACHUS. PHYSIOLOGUS. ORTHODOXUS. EXORCISTS. Philologus. GOod Sirs? We three have long expected your coming: howbeit, you are heartily welcome. Lycanthropus. Phylologus (I perceive) is wholly upon the matter. Pneumatomachus. Pardon the man, he is pained (you see) like to a traveling woman, that wanteth only a midwife. Physiologus. What is the opinion (I pray you) that troubleth his patience? Lycanthropus. This Sir. He saith, that howsoever there be granted essential spirits and Devils, yet, their possession (in these days of the Gospel) is denied of some: and doubted of many. Philologus. I said so in deed. And, although I dare not flatly deny: yet, I also do much doubt it myself. Physiologus. Your name I perceive, is Philologus: which in signification, is as much to say, as a man that delighteth or loveth to talk. You propound not this opinion of purpose (I hope) to declare unto us, that you have a name given you, very fitly resembling your nature: namely, that you are but a talkative person, or one that taketh great pleasure to hear himself speak in these points? Philologus. No truly, I propound the same in simplicity of heart, showing you plainly what myself suppose: and desiring resolution wherein I do doubt. Physiologus. Wherefore doubt you that Devils have possession in men? Philologus. Because I suppose it impossible in nature: and, incredible also in all sound Divinity. Lycanthropus. What Philologus? Is it supernatural for the Devil to possess a man? Math. 8. 28. Do not the scriptures in every place speak plainly of the possessed with Devils? Marc. 1. 32. of the entering of Devils into men? Math. 12. 45. of casting them forth? Marc. 9 25. of the Devil that entered into the heart of judas? Luc. 22. 3. of the Devil that filled Ananiah his heart with a lie, and a thousand such places? joh. 13. 27. All which, so apparently and so plainly approveth this point: Act. 5. 3. that (for any to doubt thereof) were but to call into question, the sunshine at midday. Philologus. I neither hold in supernatural, for the Devil (in some sort) to possess a man: neither doubt I of that truth which those Scriptures import. I only suppose, that the matter itself is not so grossly to be understood, as some (from those places) would seem to conclude: wherein, I do freely submit to master Orthodoxus his censure. And therefore, object what you can for yourself: and, let him resolve us both in the point. Lycanthropus. Content, if it please him to take the pains. Orthodoxus. With very good will, and so much the rather, because it falleth forth fit for our next general purpose; namely, what we have especially to consider in spirits and Devils. Lycanthropus. What have we especially to consider in them? Orthodoxus. Having proved directly, that there be Spirits and Devils: we have now next, to consider in them, two principal things. The first concerneth their power over men: the second respecteth the timely subduing of that self same power. Lycanthropus. What mean you by their power over men? Orthodoxus. I understand thereby, Martinus Bucerus, in Marc. 1. 23. that Dominion, or rule which the very Devils themselves (by the just judgement of God) do (in all outrage) even exercise over the natural offspring of Adam: and, which is undoubtedly most wonderful, respecting both body and soul. Howbeit, this their appointed power is determinate, joh. 12. 31. and 16. 11. finite, Eph. 2. 2. and 6. 12. and limited certainly within it own special bounds: Math. 12. 29. albeit the Devil (in an especial regard thereof) be called the prince of this world: Luc. 11. 12. the God of this world: the prince of airy powers: and that strong armed man which keepeth his house in peace, till some stronger invade him. And, this their said power is twofold. Namely, either their power of possession: or, their power of obsession. Lycanthropus. What is your opinion (I pray you) concerning the possession of Devils: in these days of the Gospel? Orthodoxus. My opinion therein, shall be showed at large: after yourself have first opened unto me, what you do mean, by the Devil his possession in man. Lycanthropus. By the Devil his possession in man, Luc. 11. 22. I understand his essential and violent entering into him, Tho. Aquinas 2. 2. q. 136. artic. 2. fol. 275 Erasm. Sarcereus in Luc. 11. 20. 21. as men, by force and arms do enter an house: and so, inherently possesseth, and peaceably enjoyeth that self same person, as his proper possession, and peculiar dominion, appointed unto him of God. For, possession (you know) it importeth a peaceable dominion. Orthodoxus. That, possession importeth a peaceable dominion, we do never deny. But where prove you such an essential possession as yourself speaketh of, in all the Scriptures? Nay, where find you these words (possession, or possessed) peculiarly appropriated to the Devil over men: throughout the whole Bible, in the old, or new testament. Lycanthropus. Where find I the words (possession, or possessed) appropriate to Devils, throughout the whole Bible? Surely, wheresoever the Evangelist Matthew doth handle those matters, there he usually, and purposely puts down those self same words. As for example, Math. 4. 24. and 8. 16. and 8. 28. and 8. 33. and 9 32. he saith, they brought many to Christ that were possessed with Devils. Again, he healed many that were possessed with Devils. Again, there met him two possessed with Devils. Again, they told the people what was become of the possessed with Devils. Again, they brought unto him, a dumb man possessed with a Devil. Yea, and in every place else, where like occasion is offered, he useth like speech: which argueth evidently, that the Devil hath an essential possession in men. Orthodoxus. Arguing (as you do) from a deceivable ground, you cannot possibly collect from thence, any certain conclusions: concerning especially your cause in Question. For, this I assure you of, that, in no one of those places which yourself have recited, neither, in any other text else throughout the whole Bible, is there any one word in the Original, that importeth an essential possession applied to Devils: I mean, that (by any one Lexicon) may possibly bestretched to signify any such essential inherency of Devils in the bodies of men, howsoever it hath pleased the English translator to thrust in the same. Lycanthropus. The English translator, he hath thrust in no more I hope: then the original text will bear. Orthodoxus. Yes, howsoever yourself do absurdly collect from the English translation, an essential possession of devils: I assure you of this, there is no one word throughout the original, intending such purpose. And, very certain I am, that, if the holy Ghost had ever but purposed to put down such an essential possession of Devils, as you would bear us in hand: he wanted not his proper words or terms to express the same either in the Hebrew or Greek, in which two languages, the canonical scriptures themselves, were primarily indited by the spirit of God. For, first concerning possession: the Hebrews they use (for the most part) two special words to express the same. Lycanthropus. What is the first word they use for possession? Orthodoxus. The first word is achuzzah, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, id est, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, id est, apprehendit▪ apprehensum, detinuit, obtinuit, retinuit. Hinc, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ut Nomb. 31. 30. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, id est, apprensum, captum. which ariseth from the radical verb, achaz: that is, to hold, to apprehend, to detain, or retain the thing apprehended: to obtain very firmly, or strongly. Hereof comes, the noun, achuz: which properly signifieth, that special part of the inheritance which is taken, apprehended, or held by a special right. As appeareth in Numbers, saying: But of the half of the Israelites (which went not to war) thou shalt take one (achuz) that is one apprehended, possessed, or taken out of fifty. In like manner from the aforesaid radical word (achaz) is derived the noun, achuzzah: which properly importeth such a detension, Item, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, possessio, apprehensio, detentio quae tenetur à possidentibus, ut Nomb. 32. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, id est, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in possessionem apprehension, or possession, as is peculiarly possessed of the possessors themselves, as very plainly appeareth in Numbers, by the Rubenits petition put up unto Moses, saying thus. If we have found grace in thine eyes, let this land be given to thy servants (laachuzzah) that is, for a peculiar possession, and bring us not over Iorden. The very self same use of this word, appeareth also in joshuah, saying thus. Now return ye, josh. 22. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 id est, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. ad terram possessionis vestrae. Psal. 2. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 id est, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. in possessionem tuam. and go to your tents, achuzzathchem, that is, to the land of your proper possession: or to that land which you peculiarly apprehend, possess and hold. Again in the second Psalm, the holy Ghost puts down that self same word, to the self same purpose, saying thus: Desire of me, and, I will give thee the heathen for thine inheritance; and the utmost part of the earth: vaachuzzatheak, that is, for thy possession, or thy peculiar apprehension and right. In these and infinite other places of scripture, the holy Ghost (you see) intending purposely to speak of any matter of possession: he useth a very fit and significant word for that self same purpose. And therefore, if he had ever purposed to put down any such essential possession of Devils, as you dream of: he wanted not words for the same. Although notwithstanding, this I must tell you withal, that if he had borrowed this word from the Hebrews for such a supposed purpose: Yet could not the same have imported any such an essential inherency in the bodies of men, as you bear us in hand, but had signified only, an apprehending, an holding, a firm detaining, or possessing of a thing, and no more. Lycanthropus. Well, yet in the new testament (it may be) the Greek text, hath for that Hebrew word achaz: some word in the Scriptures importing such an essential possession. Orthodoxus. It may be it hath not: and, how then? that it hath not, it is very apparent. For, from this Hebrew word, achaz: the Grecians (by an inversion, or turning of letters) do purposely derive the Greek verb Scheo: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, id est, teneo, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, id est, apprehendo. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, id est, detinut, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, id est, contine●item, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, inde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Aristophanes. Luci●nus. Math. 19 22. M●rc. 10. 22. Act. 2. 45. and 5. 1. 1. Thes. 4. 4. which signifieth to apprehend, or hold. And thereof comes, metascheo: which signifieth to apprehend, or lay fast hold upon. Also, kateschon: which signifieth to detain. Also, ischanao: which signifieth to retain, or to hold. Again, they use eftsoons the word ctema: which properly signifieth a possession: albeit that men captivated and taken in wars, are also called, ctemata: that is, such persons as are made bondslaves, or held in a slavish thraldom or bondage. This word ctema, is ordinarily observed in the new testament, to set forth possessions by: as appeareth in sundry places. Neither of these words is used of the holy Ghost, to express that your pretended possession of Devils: which if they had been indeed, yet (unless to apprehend, to hold, to contain, to detain, to retain, or keep fast, be but one, and the same with these your supposed essential possessions) you cannot congruently conclude from thence, any essential inherency of Devils, in the bodies of men. Lycanthropus. Well, be it so: but what is that other word which the Hebrews do use for possessions? Orthodoxus. The other word which they commonly observe for such purpose, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, id est, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, id est possedit, occupavit, habuit in dominio, & potestate sua. hinc, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, id est, possessio. is, iereshah: arising from the radical word, iarash: that is, to possess certain bounds or territories, to hold in his proper right dominion, or power: to obtain by special right, to inherit, etc. Properly, it signifies the challenging of something peculiar to a man's self, the same being primarily obtained by his proper coin, by a lawful succession, or proper dominion: as a thing that was conquered by war, or some other such means. Neither is such a possession as the word, iareshah importeth to be only understood of grounds, or of territories: but the same also, is usually spoken of such servants, or men, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, id est efflagitatio contentiosa. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, id est, concessit, vel potestatem dedit. as are brought into bondage. It hath a special affinity with two other Hebrew words: namely, aresheth: which signifieth a contentious, importunity, or an earnest begging of something: and, rashah, which signifieth to grant, or give power. Because, to possess a man, is, so to employ him, withal his faculties, possessions, and treasures: as if he were altogether, but an exiled person, or a poor man destitute of succour, being utterly ejected from his proper bounds, and peculiar territories. For the sense of this word, iarash; you may see in sundry places: especially, jerem. 49. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nomb. 24. 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, id est, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, i. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, id est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, i. possessio. in jeremy. Hereof comes (as I told you before) the word, iereshah: that is, a possession: and thereby, is signified properly, any thing whatsoever, that hath been subdued by the party possessing the same, as appear in Numbers. Also, from the word iarash, is derived the noun, ierushah: which signifieth properly, such a possession as some doth peculiarly possess. And, this word, is so taken, but thrice in the Bible. Howbeit, Isa. 14. 24. when this word, ierushah, is applied to the heart: Abd. 1. 17. then, it betokeneth properly, job. 17. 11. those self-same cogitations or thoughts, which the mind itself doth peaceably possess: as appeareth in job, job. 17. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, id est, possessiones cordis mei. vide Tremel. in job. job. cap. 17. 10. & Franciscus vatabal. ibid. Deut. 33. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Exod. 6. 8. Ezech. 11. 4. and 25. 4. and 33. 25. and 36. 2. where he saith. My days are passed away, my cogitations are violently taken from me: I mean (morashe lebabi) the possessions of my heart. That is, those happy and comfortable cogitations which my soul in a good conscience, by the blessing of God, did challenge to itself by a peculiar right or possession. In like manner, from, iarash, ariseth the word, morashah: which signifieth properly, such a kind of possession as people enjoy by a certain peculiar right, as appear in Deuteronomie, where the people say thus: Moses commanded us a law, morashah kehillath jaakob. I mean, a peculiar inheritance for the congregation of jaakob: That, is, such an inheritance, as shall pass, by an hereditary right or possession, among the house of Israel, from generation to generation. The like use of this word morashah, doth evidently appear by those several quotations of scripture; which we have purposely put down in the Margin. By all which it is very apparent, that, albeit the holy Ghost should have purposely used any one of these Hebrew words to express your pretended possession of Devils: yet could you not have concluded from thence any such an essential inherency of Devils in the bodies of men, as you would bear us in hand. Licanthropus. But, doth not the Greek word, which the Septuagint useth to express the word, iarash; import so much? Orthodoxus. Nothing less I assure you. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, id est, termino, & determino. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, id est terminus. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, id est, definitio, vel constitutio. For, from that word iarash: ariseth, orizo, and orixomai: which signifies, to bound, or determine the territories, and possessions of land. From thence also is derived these following nouns: namely, orion, and orismos: which signifieth, a bondarie, a definition, or constitution. Also, this word, exorizo, that is, to exterminate, or to disherit. Also, exorismos: which betokenth an exile, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, id est, extermino, & exhaeredito. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, i. exilium. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, possessio, vel haereditas. Math. 5. 5. and 10. 9 Act. 1. 18. and 5. 1. 1. Cor. 6. 9 and 7. 30. 1. Thess. 4. 4. or banishment. From whence also ariseth very fitly, the inheriting, or dishinheriting: or rather (if you please) the possessing, and dispossessing of heirs. The Grecians in like sort they use another word, called cleronomia; which signifies properly, an inheritance, or rule of possessions. Briefly, albeit, the holy Ghost (in the new testament) hath sundry words to set out the possession of things as appeareth by the places put down in the Margin: yet, could no one of them all have fitted your turn, or possibly have extended itself to this your pretended purpose. By all the premises then, it is very apparent, that, if the holy Ghost had ever determined to establish your supposed essential possession of Devils: he wanted not proper and significant words to express his said purpose. Albeit notwithstanding, if he had purposely put down any one of these words either Hebrew or Greek to import a possession unto us: yet would no one of them all (in any congruent speech) have ever been able to avouch that essential inherency of Devils in the bodies of men, which yourself would fond conclude from our English translation, without any warrant at all from the original text. Lycanthropus. Though none of the Evangelists have precisely put down in any one of those places, no such word at all, as may properly express the essential possession of spirits and Devils: perhaps yet, they have some other word else equivalent therewith in sense. Orthodoxus. Perhaps no: and, without all peradventure they have not. For, the very word itself, which the holy Ghost observeth in every of those your quoted Scriptures, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. jam. 3. 15. Erasmus, in Math 4. 24. Hugo Cardinal. Math. 4. 24. Gualther ibid. Moses Pellach. in Mat. 17. 16. Beza, ibid. Arct●us, in Marc. 5. is Daemonizoménoi: which with all true interpreters, both Latin, Italian, French, and English, is ordinarily and usually translated demoniacs: that is, men Divillished, I mean actually afflicted, tormented, or vexed with Devils. But no one of them all did ever translate it thus; namely, men essentially possessed with Devils inherently in them. Yea, this very word Daemonizoménos, is not only so translated, but, is so also understood of the most judicial, and soundest Divines. For not any one of them all, do understand the same of essential possessions: but, every of them do take it to signify only, some such extraordinary actual affliction, vexation, or torment, as Satan himself (by the special appointment of God) doth effectively inflict upon men for a time. Mart. Bucerus in Math. 1. 23. johannis calvini. in Math. 4. 24. & 8. 16. and 9 32. Aug. Marlorat. in Act. 10. 38. Gualther, in Math. 12. 22. Theod. Beza in Math. 8. 16. If you haply do call the truth of that which I speak into question, let their several writings be exactly considered, and then tell me, whether any one of them all do understand by Demoniakes, any such persons as are essentially possessed with a Devil inherently in them, as yourself very fond imagine: and not such rather, as (by the extremity of those their actual torments) are become outrageously furious, cruel, and quite out of order. Thus then, by all the premises it is very apparent (you see) that, neither by a proper significant term, nor by any other word else equivalent therewith, neither yet by the translations of learned Interpreters, or the exquisite judgement of soundest Divines, you may from those your quoted scriptures, (in any possible or congruent order) undertake to conclude (as you do) the essential possession of spirits and Devils: but, must necessarily take them only for such demoniacs, or divellished persons, as are actually afflicted, tormented, or vexed by Satan. Lycanthropus. Why then should the translator so presumptuously put down the word possession: if no such thing be apparent in all the original? Orthodoxus. That there is no such matter there (as yourself supposeth) you have sufficiently heard before. Erasm, annot at. in Math. 4. 24. Neither did the translator himself (as it seems) intent any such essential possessions, but only an actual vexation by Satan: howsoever he did to carelessly put down the word possession: as a word more familiar amongst us. No surely, it is certain, the Evangelist himself, he never intended such essential possessions by the word Daemonizoménoi: but only an actual affliction, vexation or torment. And therefore the other two Evangelists Mark and Luke (reporting with Mathewe, those self-same stories, concerning the aforesaid Demoniakes) they use not the word possessed at all. But, Math. 8. 28. Marc. 5. 2. Luc. 8. 27. those whom Mathewe entituleth Demoniackes, Mark termeth, a man having an unclean spirit: and Luke, he saith there met Christ, a man who had a Devil a long time. Making it a matter merely indifferent, and alone in effect, to be a Demoniac, and to have a Devil, or an unclean spirit: as for the word possessed, they never use it, neither is the same found throughout the original, applied to Devils. And undoubtedly, these words (possession, or possessed) being carelessly thrust into the text hand over head by our English translators: is not the least occasion, that the whole world (by a common received error from hand to hand) hath been so universally possessed with many gross errors concerning the Devil his supposed possession in man. Moreover, whereas you boldly affirm, that the Evangelist Matthew, in every place else, where like occasion is offered, doth usually observe the self-same phrase; Math. 15. 22. that is not so. For (speaking of the woman of Canaan's Demoniac daughter) he saith not, have mercy on me, for my daughter is pitifully possessed: but, my daughter is miserably vexed with a Devil. Exorcists. What then I pray you, doth yourself understand by the Devil his power of possession? Orthodoxus. By the devil his power of possession, I understand, that his tyrannical dominion which (by a peculiar propriety, according to the purpose of God) he doth exercise over some special persons, in afflicting, tormenting, and tempting both inwardly, and outwardly: so farforth especially, as his commission permits him. Philologus. Give me leave (good sir) to interrupt you a little. For, either my wits are wild, or, Lycanthropus and yourself, have both (at unwares) concluded one and the self-same thing, concerning the devil his possession in man: surely, for my own part, I perceive in your speeches no difference at al. Orthodoxus. If your wits were wild, you would then imagine, as the drunken man doth, that, what one thing soever you behold at a blush, were undoubtedly twain: whereas you rather conclude, that, two distinct matters, are but one and the same. And therefore, your wits (it should seem) are, rather worn to the stumps, then wild: being unable to discern the difference between our two speeches, the difference itself, being so apparently evident. For, whereas Lycanthropus very confidently avoucheth a substantial entrance of the Devil into man, as it were with force and arms, to conquer and keep a possession: I (delivering briefly my mind, concerning the Devil his possession in man) spoke only of his afflicting, tormenting, and vexing of man. Howbeit, for further clearing the Question, we must here distinquish the Devil his supposed possession, thus: namely, it is either a real, or an actual possession. Lycanthropus. What is the real possession? Orthodoxus. The real possession, is supposed to be some essential, substantial, or personal entrance of the Devil into man, for a more effectual executing of that his tyrannical force and violence upon him. And, this supposed possession (how incredible soever) is thought to be twofold: namely, either a mental, or corporal possession. Lycanthropus. What mean you by mental possession? Orthodoxus. Some understand thereby, that self-same propriety, right or dominion whereby the Devil doth really, and essentially enter into, and inherently dwell in the possessed man's mind, during the whole term of that his tyrannical dominion. Now then, the matter of possession itself being thus far discovered, I would gladly learn of Lycanthropus, after what manner he imagineth the Devil to have a possession in man? Whether really, or actually? My meaning is, whether he holdeth the Devil to have a personal possession in man: or, a possession rather, by some powerful effect. Lycanthropus. I am confidently persuaded, that the Devil hath a very real, essential, substantial, or corporal possession in those whatsoever, whom he fully possesseth. Orthodoxus. I thought even so: and therefore, was driven to distinguish the supposed possession of Devils as I did. Notwithstanding sith you so confidently ascribe unto Devils such a real and personal possession: Do tell me yet further, whether you hold, that the Devils do really and substantially enter into the mind alone, or into the body alone, or into the body and mind together? Exorcists. Sir, let me freely afford my opinion (I pray you) concerning this special point. Orhodoxus. Speak freely, and spare not. Exorcists. I am verily persuaded, that the Devil (if he have any real possession at all) hath only mental possession: my meaning is, that he doth substantially possess the mind alone. Orthodoxus. What is your reason? Exorcists. My reason is this. Seeing the mind itself, and it only is that wherein motion consisteth, and seeing the body is but the minds organon or instrument, having naturally in itself no motion at all, or, no further motion at most, then for those only actions wherein the said mind (whose organon it is) employeth the same: Haec Ambrosius super Lucam. It seemeth reasonable, that therefore, the devil must really and substantially, first possess the mind itself, or ever he can possibly bring the body, unto any disordered actions, or, Luc. 22. 3. joh. 13. 27. cause it to accomplish any his devilish attempts. And, even so the Evangelist john, he expounds himself concerning the devil his possessing of judas. For, where he affirmeth that Satan (after the sop) did enter into judas: that possession or entrance into him he showeth before, to be nothing else in effect, joh. 13. 2. but, a putting into judas his heart, to betray his master. Demonstrating plainly unto us, that the devil himself, did first enter substantially into judas his heart or mind: before he could bring his body or tongue to attempt the intended treason. Orthodoxus. Your plain demonstration, doth plainly demonstrate the contrary to that which you seem to conclude: and the very text which you quote, doth even cut the throat of your childish opinion, or Cabalistical fantasy concerning Satan his sopposed substantial possession. For, joh. 13. 2. seeing that Satan (in possessing judas) did only but put the intended treason into judas his heart: it doth plainly appear, that, the devil had in him no substantial possession at all, but only, an actual, or powerful possession. Psalm. 41. 9 Act. 4. 28. By which said powerful possession, the devil (according to God his determinate council) did but actually suggest, and effectually thrust the intended treason into judas his heart. Besides that, if the devil (as yourself, doth imagine) must first, essentially enter into the mind of a man, before he can bring the body itself to accomplish any his enterprises: it followeth consequently, that every man then, is essentially possessed of the devil in his mind at the least, because every man (more or less) doth actually effect many devilish actions. And thus you may see your reason is too too absurd, or rather no reason at all, to conclude the mental possession of devils. Physiologus. Sir, as yourself have plainly satisfied Exorcists his place of scripture, and therewithal fully overthrown his supposed mental possession: so, let me now answer I pray you, that very point of his argument, from whence (though falsely) he would seem to enforce his dangerous inferrence. Thus he reasoneth. The body of man, is but a bare organon of the mind, to put only in action the minds conceit: therefore, the Devil must first conquer and fully possess the mind itself, before he can bring the body unto any disordered actions. This I suppose is his argument: and, from hence he would also implicatively conclude, that therefore, the Devil hath no power of himself, either to tempt, or torment any man outwardly in his body, before he hath first subdued and mastered his mind by a real possession. Exorcists. That in deed is my inferrence, and so I conclude. Physiologus. This than I must tell you for truth, that (howsoever you seem in show) you are nothing in substance: because neither is your inferrence sound, nor your conclusion currant. For, howsoever I do freely confess, there can be no actual accomplishment of the work of sin, before the mind itself (being first convict) be made to consent yet doth it not follow, but that (notwithstanding all this) a man may outwardly be tempted to sin, and tormented also of Satan, though inwardly, the mind itself be never subdued. And, although it be undoubtedly true, jam. 1. 14. August. super Genes. and Lyram. cap. 11. Lyra in Genes. cap. 3. 1. that every man (being tempted) is enticed and drawn by his own concupiscence, namely, by the concupiscible faculty of his proper mind: yet, this is also as certainly true, namely, that, even the concupiscible faculty also itself, is first set a work by means of the fantasy, or interior sensitive power. Which said sensitive power (receiving an impression of such sensible things as are offered unto her from the exterior objects of the exterior senses) doth forthwith set the concupiscible faculty a work, and makes it to lust after those sensible things in conceit. As for example, whensoever the devil intendeth to work man's mind to his mischeavous purpose, he first makes an assault upon that which we call the sensitive faculty; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. and (by offering some deceivable object unto the exterior senses) endeavoureth to cirumvent the senses themselves, Calvinus, in Gen. 3. 6. and, so he bewitcheth the mind. And, even after this sort he seduced the ears, and the eyes of Eva herself: telling her confidently, they should know good and evil, Gen. 3. 6. making her also believe, that the forbidden fruit was fair to behold, and thereby subdued her sensitive faculty. And, because the delight of the exterior senses, is to little or no purpose without the desire of the mind: the devil therefore proceedeth next to encounter with that which we call the concupiscible faculty, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. namely, that, by which we are earnestly allured to affect those sensible things, wherein the interior sensitive faculty so highly delighteth. And hereupon also (by a false persuasion of good) he enticed Eva to covet that fruit forbidden: Gen. 3. 5. and so conquered likewise, her concupiscible faculty. And, because it is to little or no purpose at all, that, the concupiscible faculty (being filthily deceived by a false persuasion of good) should affect the tentation, unless the understanding also approve of the same: the devil therefore, he laboureth next, to conquer that principal power of the mind, which we call the intellective faculty. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And, this also he endeavoureth to do, by discrediting that self-same truth whereupon the intellective faculty should fully and finally resolve itself, notwithstanding any the forenamed deceivable allurements from the sensitive or concupiscible faculty arising against it. And, even after this sort he also prevailed with Eva: Gen. 3. 4. falsifying that infallible truth of God, which told her they should die the death, & so overcame her intellective faculty. And, because it is to little or no purpose, though the sensitive, the concupiscible, and intellective faculties also be severally tainted, so long as the mind itself with a valorous power withstands the tentation: the devil therefore, he laboureth lastly, to levy his uttermost force against that which we call the irascible faculty, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. that I mean, wherewith we should mightily withstand any his mischievous purposes, according to the true direction of the intellective faculty itself. And therefore, this irascible faculty he eftsoons assaulteth afresh, by suggesting a false suspicion of some falsely supposed envy or malice of God, in giving that rule whereupon the understanding relieth. And, even by this self-same means, Gen. 3. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. he cunningly circumvented our Grandmother Eva: telling her confidently, that God forbade them not to taste of that fruit, as being evil in itself, but, of a purposed malice to withhold them both from a more happy estate, Calvinus, in Gen. 3. 5. and so, (having fully vanquished her irascible faculty) he then forthwith effected the sin to the full. Thus then, by all the premises it is very apparent, that, those sundry temptations wherewith satan assaulteth men's minds, they do ordinarily arise, first, from external allurements, and so proceed (by degrees) to the mind itself: and that therefore, we need not imagine any such mental possession for Satan, before he can bring the body of man to those disordered actions, which tend to the full accomplishment of any his mischievous purposes. For, Tho. Aquin. 2. 2. q. 35. art. 1. fol. 123. per modum appetibilis: non per modum suggerentis. by such mental possession, he might truly be said to tempt men rather by some appetible means, then by any suggesting manner at all: which were absurd to imagine, but very ridiculous for any one to avouch. Lycanthropus. This sets forth the subtle proceedings of Satan, in tempting men unto sin: but concludeth nothing against his mental possession. Orthodoxus. It fully concludes the point for which especially the same was propounded: namely, that Satan he needeth not first to enter essentially into the possessed man's mind, before he can possibly bring the body itself unto his slavish subjection. And in very deed, I see not to what purpose we should yield him any mental possession at all? Lycanthropus. Do you confidently hold; that the devil hath no mental possession in any? Orthododoxus. I hold this for an infallible truth; namely, that the devil doth not essentially enter into any man's mind. Pneumatomachus. What reasons have you for this your opinion? Orthodoxus. I have manifold reasons to induce me unto it. Philologus. Let us hear your reasons I pray you? Orthodoxus. With very good will. And for a plainer proceeding, I will first briefly put down the reasons themselves: and then prosecute them at large as occasion is offered. Lycanthropus. We like well your order: and therefore lay down your reasons. Orthodoxus. My reasons are these. 1. First, no such mental possession may possibly be proved from the written word. 2 The devil himself, as also man's mind, are every of them both, intellectual powers, created of God for other more special ends, then that supposed mental possession: it being no purposed end of God apparently revealed in all the scriptures. 3 They are both of them spiritual substances, the one not being (by nature) more subtle, more slender, or more thin than the other, neither yet, of more capability, or more apt to contain then the other: whereby it might of that other be made the more capable. 4 There is nothing in heaven or in hell of power to penetrate, Psalm. 7. 9 Act. 1. 24. or to enter into the spirits of men, save only the eternal creator of spirits. 5 By avouching the devil to be inherently in the possessed man's mind, we do fearfully derogate from the Deity of the holy Ghost, and very dangerously darken the miraculous operations of that sacred spirit: joh. 14. 16. 17. whose peculiar office it is, by an unspeakable and admirable action, (repletively) to inhabit and dwell in our hearts for ever. 6 If the devil doth essentially enter into the very substance itself of the possessed man's mind: then necessarily there must be, either a confusion of substances, which to hold were absurd, or else a rending and separation of substances at least, Diwlsio sive distinctio subctantiarum. called properly a vacuum, which were folly to imagine, but madness for any to avouch. 7 If the evil Angels (in the execution of judgements) do enter essentially into any man's mind: then also the good Angels (in the execution of mercies) they do enter essentially into some man's mind. But the latter is false, and therefore also the first. 8 If the mind be wholly in the whole body, Tota in toto, & tota in qualibet part. and wholly also in every part: also, if it alone be the first substantial form and act of a natural body: how then may the devil be possibly inherent. in the possessed man's mind, but either there must be a penetrating of spiritual dimensions, or two distinct substances together at once in one and the self-same subject, or, two substantial forms in one and the same natural body at least: all which are absurd. 9 If the devil be essentially inherent in the possessed man's mind: Penetratio dimensionum. Simul & semel. then is he so, either dimensively, or repletively, or definitively at the least, or not at all. But not dimensively, for, so only are corporal substances circumscribed in place: whereas the devil, he is only a spiritual essence, and therefore, not dimensively local, as are corporal substances. Neither can he be in the possessed man's mind repletively, for so only is God, who only is of infinite and incircumscriptible being: and therefore repletively filleth each place whatsoever, whereas the devil is only a finite and circumscriptible creature, comprehended after a sort, in one peculiar place. And therefore he must necessarily be in the possessed man's mind definitively, or not at all. Which although it be so, yet can we not thereby conclude any substantial inherency, but a being there determinately, and in an only conceit. 10 Lastly, if the possessed man's mind be essentially a place for the devil: then is it, either a common place, and so capable of many substances together, or, a proper place, and so, absolutely able to circumscribe the devil his essential being: for, a place is the circumscription of an essential substance. And then also the devil, he must needs be a movable body, yea and the possessed man's mind (in that self-same respect) must also become an immovable body: otherways, progressus in infinitum. there would be a progress in endlessness, which thing ever nature itself doth abhor. Or else, if neither a common, nor proper place, then necessarily an imaginary place, or no place, at all: which, though it be granted, doth not conclude any real possession. For, an imaginary place, is only a place in conceit: and so, by consequence, the devil he hath only in man an imaginary possession. Now then, all these the aforenamed reasons, do make me to hold for infallible truth; that the devil doth never essentially enter into any man's mind. Pneumatomachus. Your reasons I assure you, they satisfy me to the full: but, what saith Lycanthropus concerning this point? Lycanthropus I say and hold (as before) that the devil (in so many at least as are subjecteth unto him) hath undoubtedly an entire and absolute possession; yea, even in their very minds or hearts. Orthodoxus. No such mental possession, may possibly be proved from the written word. Lycanthropus. Yes, Math. 12. 45. the very scripitures themselves they plainly avouch, that the devil entereth and dwelleth in man: that he entered into the heart of judas: Luc. 11. 26. that he filled Ananiah his heart, and so forth. What other thing else may be collected from thence; but, Luc. 22. 3. joh. 13. 27. Act. 5. 3. that the devil hath really in man, a mental possession? Orthodoxus. You rely too much upon the bare letter itself, and that is the only thing which deceiveth your judgement. For, albeit the bare letter doth say that the devil entereth into, and dwelleth in man: Non formaliter, sed effectiuè. that he entered into judas his heart, and filled Ananiah his heart with guile: yet, that self same entrance, that dwelling, and that filling of the heart, Lyrain Lucam, cap. 9 15. joh. 13. 2. must not be formally, but effectively understood. As for example, the Devil (in very deed and in truth) may truly be said to enter into the very heart of a man: because, he powerfully suggesteth, and effectually worketh in man's mind, Act. 5. 3. his purposed mischiefs. Again, the devil may truly be said to dwell in the heart, because, by the efficacy of his working power, 2. Tim. 2. 28. he holdeth man's mind as a captivated prisoner at his own will and pleasure. Even as also, the Lord, he is said likewise to dwell in our hearts by faith: not that he essentially inhabiteth there, but, by reason of the effectual working of his mighty power. Lycanthropus. You may expound at your pleasure: but I verily believe that the devil hath essentially in some, a mental possession. Orthodoxus. Are not the devils, as also men's minds, intellectual powers, created of God for other special purposes, then that which yourself doth imagine? Prove by the word that the Lord in creating of them, did ever propound to himself such a mental possession, than you say something unto it. Philologus. Notwithstanding all this, if the devil hath in man any real possession at all: me thinks then, because he is a spirit, he should first really possess the spirit of man. Orthodoxus. The devil I confess is a spirit, & therefore he principally affecteth man's spirit: and yet doth it not follow, that therefore, he substantially entereth into the spirit of man, neither is there any sense in such sequel. johannes Ferus in Matheum, lib. 2. cap. 8. fol. 1 33. For the devil himself, as also man's spirit were either of them both created of God; and therefore, not uncreate, but created spirits of God. Neither is the one by nature, more subtle, more slender, or more thin than the other: neither yet, of more capability, or more apt to contain then the other, whereby it might of that other be made the more capable, August. de definite. ecclesiasticorum dogm. as was showed before. No surely that is a property, only peculiar to the divine substance itself. Neither is any thing else in heaven or in hell, of power to penetrate, or to enter into either an human, or Angelical spirit, but, that only eternal spirit, Psalm. 7. 9 Act. 1. 24. & almighty creator of all things of whom it is truly affirmed, that he alone searcheth out, trieth, understandeth, and knoweth the minds of all men. Moreover, if the devil doth substantially enter into, Zanch in Ephes, cap. 1. vers. 13. pag. 47. col. 1. joh. 14. 16. M. Perkins upon the Creed. fol. 405. and really possess the mind of a man: then, what difference concerning that point, between the holy Ghost and the devil? Or how is the deity of the holy Ghost himself, by such unspeakable, or admirable action made apparent unto us? For, even therefore is the holy Ghost declared to be true God: because he is able repletively and by special operation, job. 14. 17. to dwell in man's spirit for ever, according to the testimony of our Saviour saying, he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. By all which it is very apparent, that (unless you dare deify the Devil, & make him matchable with God himself in divine essence, operation, & knowledge) you cannot, nor may not affirm, that the devil doth substantially possess & inhabit the minds of men. Philologus. Nay sir, I am I assure you, so far of from, either deifying the devil, or making him in essence, operation, or knowledge any ways matcheable with God: as I had rather utterly to deny him all manner of possession, then avouch any thing at all that may import such an inferrence. Lycanthropus. Well yet, I cannot be persuaded, but, that the devil hath a mental possession in some respect. Orthodoxus. He hath so indeed. Isidor. de sum. bono, lib. 3. Otherways, it were to little or no purpose for him to deal with the body: unless he could therewithal accomplish (in some sort) the minds consent. Howbeit, that the devil doth substantially possess the mind, can never be proved: and the contrary, by me hath been plainly declared. Notwithstanding, I do freely confess, that the devil hath an actual, or powerful possession concerning man's mind: so far forth especially, as tends to the effectual tormenting and tempting thereof, other possession he hath none at all, as shall be showed hereafter. johannes Ferus in Matheum, lib. 2. cap. 8. fol. 133. Whereas therefore, the devil is said to enter into, or to possess the mind of a man; that is to be understood, only according to his effectual working with the body itself. And, in this self same respect, the possessed man's mind may truly be said to be silde with the devil; as the drunkards are said to be filled with wine. For, the very substance of the wine doth not substantially enter into the very substance itself of the drunken man's mind, Nic. Selneccer. in Act. cap. 17. fol. 234. because, than there would be a violent rending and separation of substances, as was showed before: but only the fuming efficacy or power of the wine, (binding the veins and sinews, and stopping up the secret passages of the vital spirits) is that which oppresseth the mind itself, being peculiarly seated in her proper place. The very self same thing may be said, concerning the devil his mental possession. For, the devil himself (touching his essential being) doth nor essentially enter into the very essence itself of the possessed man's mind, Nich. Selneccer. in Act. cap. 17. fol. 234. because, than there would be a penetrating of spiritual dimensions, and so, two distinct substances should be (together and at at once) in one and the self same place, which were absurd to affirm, johannes Bromyard, in summa predicat. A. 18. act. 1. as was showed before: but, the devil (by his only effectual power) tormenting and tempting the sensible parts of man, doth, so mightily disorder the sensitive faculties, and so maliciously forestall the true notions and passages to a found understanding, as even the mind itself, it cannot but be marvelously distracted, during the whole term of that his tyrannical dominion. And this is all in effect, that I yet see or can say concerning the devil his mental possession. Philologus. This sir, is enough I assure you, and that which doth satisfy me to the full: but what saith Lycanthropus concerning this point? Lycanthropus. Howsoever you seem to be satisfied, me think yet in all reason, that the devil should have essentially in some, a mental possession. Physiologus. Sith you rely so much upon natural reason, go to Lycanthropus, let me argue this point to the full? Lycanthropus. Take leave, and argue as pleaseth yourself. Physiologus. You remember (I hope) how Master Orthodoxus hath sufficiently showed before, Aug. de cognitverae vitae cap. 6. that angels and devils are substantial creatures, and not any fantastical imaginations, as was handled at large in our former discourse concerning that point. Lycanthropus. I remember it well: and do truly believe the same to be so. Physiologus. Well then, sith you hold spirits and devils for substantial creatures: do now tell me whether you take them for spiritual, or corporal substances? Lycanthropus. I know not what substances they are, whether spiritual or corporal: devils I am certain they be, very pestilent devils: yea, such dangerous devils as undoubtedly have a real possession in man. Physiologus. If you dare credit the Scriptures, I will tell you God willing, what creatures they are. Lycanthropus. I credit the Scriptures: or else it were shame. Physiologus. This than I avouch unto you for certain, Augustinus, in Psalm. 104. 4. that Angels and Devils are Spirits by nature: and Angels by office. That they are not creators, Andr. Hyperius de method Theol. lib. 2. pag. 273. Fulgent. in libro de fi●e, ad Petrum, cap. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non sunt: sed, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Aug. ad Orosium. Quest. 17. Basil. in psal. 44. Homil. 11. but creatures created by God. Neither did they all issue out of one, as all men by propagation were procreated from Adam: but were all jointly together, and forthwith created. Neither is one in another (as in the trinity, the father is in the son, and the holy Ghost in both) for then they should be of one and the self same substance: whereas they are only of like substance, one to another. Albeit, they were created I confess, in a most absolute estate of substance, but yet, only created. For, there is not one of them an infant, a young one, or an old one: neither come they to perfection by little and little, or grow up by nutriment and exercise: but, do continually retain that self same estate of subsistence which they ever enjoyed from their first creation. By this than you see what creatures they are. Lycanthropus. This proves them essential creatures, which was proved before: howeit, I have nothing as yet, from the sacred Scriptures, concerning their peculiar substance. Physiologus. Yes, Danaeus, in Enchir. Aug. cap. 6. fol. 202. I avouched them to be by nature, essential spirits. And this I say further, that Angels and devils are immortal and spiritual substances. That they are so, it is apparent in sundry places of scripture. 1. King. 22. 21. 22. Marc. 5. 2. 8. Math. 12. 43. Luc. 11. 24. Math. 12. 45. Luc. 11. 26. Eph. 2. 2. and 6. 12. I will saith the devil, be a lying spirit in the mouth of Achab his prophets, Again, Christ cast out an unclean spirit. Again, the unclean spirit walketh through dry places. Again, he taketh to him seven other spirits. Again, we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against spiritual wickednesses, and so forth. All these, and sundry such places do demonstrate unto us the truth of this matter. Now then, I reason thus. The scriptures deliver unto us, not corporal, but spiritual devils: therefore, devils are not corporal, but spiritual substances. I follow it thus. Danaeus, in Enchir. August. cap. 59 fol. 179. Luc. 24. 39 Bodies and spirits are opposed the one to the other: therefore they cannot possibly be one and the same, for, as a body is not a spirit: so, neither is a spirit, a body, because a spirit hath not flesh and bones as a body hath. Lycanthropus. This I hold for an infallible truth. Physiologus. You acknowledge (you say) the devils to be spiritual substances. Well, go to then, tell me whether you hold them not likewise for finite creatures: and therefore also, circumscriptible and local? Lycanthropus. I do: jul. Scaliger. Exercitat. 359. sect. 3. for none but God alone can be infinite and incircumscriptible. Physiologus. Seeing you do freely confess the devils to be spiritual substances, finite, and local, before we come to speak of their possession or placing, do tell me: whether you take not that man's mind, into the which (as you say) he doth really enter, to be for the time of his present possession, the very receptacle or place, that circumscribeth the devil: Greg. Magnus, lib. 2. Moral. and, whether the devil also himself (concerning his essence) be not for that time, wholly, and substantially comprehended therein? Lycanthropus. Yes, the very mind itself (for that present possession) must needs be the receptacle wherein the devil is wholly, and substantially contained. Philologus. Fie, fie Lycanthropus, this is too too absurd. For by this means you make the mind of a man to be greater in muchnes, in substance, or essential being, than the spirit of the devil: else, how should the devil be possibly comprehended therein? sith that which is less, can at no hand include or contain the greater. Lycanthropus. Nay, that is no necessary sequel: because, the devil for that present, may contract, diminish, or lessen his substantial being. Physiologus. This your imagined (may do) can conclude no certainty of doing at all. Neither do we dispute what the devil either may, or is able to do: but what in deed, and in truth he doth truly accomplish. Howbeit, to use few words in a long matter, and plain terms in a doubtful case, this I avouch for truth; that the devil neither can contract, nor possibly may diminish his substantial being at all. Eccles. 39 28. For, as he is a spiritual creature, created for vengeance: so hath he for that self-same respect, an essence and form especially proper unto himself alone, yea, and the same so peculiarly appointed unto him, as he himself cannot possibly augment, diminish, or any ways alter the same, but must needs be contented therewith, as with that which the only wise God hath in wisdom especially ordained and assigned unto him: Rom. 16. 27. yea, even as peculiarly, as he hath appointed to every of us our proper substances, without any power at all to alter the same. Lycanthropus. Tush, let man's mind be what may be, whether bigger, or less in proportion then the spirit of the devil, I pass not a pin: this I constantly hold, that the same is the very receptacle or place of abode for the devil, during all the whole time of his real possession. Physiologus. Sith you will needs have man's mind the very habitacle or place for the devil his real possession: go to then, tell me what kind of place you hold it to be? Whether do you take it to be a common, or proper place? Lycanthropus. What mean you by a common place? Physiologus. That, wherein many substances are, or may be at one and the self-same time. Such as is the heaven, the earth, a temple, an house and such like: all which may truly be said to be common places, for that, many substances may jointly be placed in them all at once. As for example. Some thing may truly be said to be contained within the celestial firmament, because it is in the fire: in the fire, because it is in the air: and in the air also, because it is in the earth. For, all and every of these, at one and the self-same time are jointly comprehended with in the firmament, or cope of heaven. Lycanthropus. Then, I do hold man's mind for no common; but, the devil his peculiar place of abode for the present. Physiologus. If you hold man's mind for the devil his peculiar place, then must his said mind be able, Greg. Magnus, lib. 2. Moral. absolutely and fully to circumscribe the devil his essential being. For, a place is the circumscription of an essential substance. And, by this you may plainly perceive, how (at unwares) you are grossly overtaken with that palpable absurdity, which Phylologus (not long since) enforced upon you. Namely, that the mind of man (it being as you falsely suppose, the peculiar place of the devil) must necessarily (if so we may speak) be larger in muchnes and proportion, than the spirit of the devil. For, howsoever, neither spirits nor devils (they being no corporal substances stretched out by Dimensions, or by any massy huge matter) may truly be said to be in a place commensurativelie, Danaeus, in Enchir. Aug. cap. 57 fol. 193. or dimensivelie: notwithstanding all this, both spirits and devils (they being finite and circumscriptible substances) may truly be said to be in a place definitivelie, or determinately. Spirits therefore and devils, being (as yourself doth suppose) definitivelie, (though not dimensivelie) in the possessed man's mind: his said mind (concerning the essential being thereof) must determinately and definitively exceed in proportion and muchnes, the spirit of the devil. Howbeit, sith (in any case) you will needs make the possessed man's mind, the peculiar place of the devil for the present: do tell me I pray you, Whether you account his said mind, to be a very corporal, or only an imaginary place? Lycanthropus. Even, a very corporal place for the present. Physiologus. If you account the possessed man's mind, Zanchius in Eph. cap. 4. 10. pag. 273. a very corporal place of the devil: the devil than himself, he must needs be a movable body: because, a corporal place is that wherein a movable body both moveth, and ceaseth to move. Augustinus. Howbeit, the devil (you have heard) he is only a spiritual essence, and no movable body: and therefore, it is very absurd you should affirm the possessed man's mind to be a corporal place for the devil. And, that (which is much more absurd) the possessed man's mind itself (it being properly in perpetual motion) should (by this means) be made also an immovable body: sith it is one special condition of a corporal place, to be of itself immovable. Because, a corporal place is none other thing else, but the interior superficies of a body, containing the thing placed therein: and the superficies is only an accident in the predicament of quantity. Howbeit accidents (we know) they are not moved of themselves, or by their proper motion: but only by accident. I mean, by the motion of some other: namely, by that self-same subjecteth movable body, whereunto it is peculiarly and properly inherent. Otherways, if a corporal place should (by any local motion) be moved of itself, then, of that self-same movable place, Quicquid per se movetur: in loco movetur. there must needs be another place: because, whatsoever is moved of itself, the same is moved in a place. Progressus in infinitum. And so, by consequence, there would be a progress in endlesnes: which thing even nature itself doth abhor. By all the premises then, you may plainly perceive, how gross and absurd a thing it is, for yourself to avouch that the possessed man's mind should be for the present, the corporal place of the devil: and therefore, you are necessarily enforced to make it an imaginary place, or no place at all. Lycanthropus. What mean you by an imaginary place? Physiologus. That self same receptacle, wherein any thing is understood to be imaginarily or spiritually, and not dimensively or corporally. As for example: Angels, spirits, devils, souls separate from bodies, as also immaterial accidents: all these we imagine to be in a place, whereas yet, they occupy no corporal place, neither do they supply or fulfil any place at all. Lycanthropus. An imaginary place then, I perceive by your speech, is (in deed and in truth) no place at all. Nay sir, I may at no hand avouch the possessed man's mind to be but an imaginary place of the devil: for, so should I utterly overthrow his real, and substantial being in man. Physiologus. And yet, even such a place you must assign him you see, concerning his real possession in man, or no place at all. For, besides those corporal places which we handled even now, there is ordinarily and naturally no place to be found. Lycanthropus. Why then do the scriptures avouch in plain terms, that, the devil entereth and dwelleth in man: if he have in man, no substantial or real possession? Physiologus. The meaning of those terms would be easily understood, if you were once thoroughly acquainted with that ordinary doctrine which respecteth those three manner of ways whereby any thing is said to be in a place. Lycanthropus. What manner of ways are those? Physiologus. First, Nich. Selnec. in Act. 17. 18. fol. 233. pag. 2. the manner of corporal substances, is to be in a place circumscriptively, Otho Casman. Angelographiae pars. 1. cap. 7. Quest. 2. commensuratively, dimensively, or locally: that is, even so, and in such sort, as the interior superficies, or parts of the place containing, do yield place to the magnitude, or exterior parts of the thing placed therein. Secondly, the manner of spiritual substances, is to be in a place imaginarily, determinately, or definitively. Danaeus. in Enchir. Aug. cap. 57 fol. 193. Aug. de spiritu, & anima▪ cap. 18. For, although spiritual essences are no corporal matters stretched out by dimensions: yet notwithstanding (being finite and circumscriptible substances) they may determinately or definitively, and by propriety of substance, be said to be so in a place, as, for that self-same instant they cannot possibly be said to be any where else. Because, one finite substance situate in sundry and divers places at once: cannot be one and the same. Thirdly, and lastly, the manner of God his being alone, is to be in every place indefinitively, repletively, or replenishingly. Both, because his almighty power is every where effectually working: and for that also his divine essence or substance is at all times, and for ever, in every place present. Now then, by all the premises you may plainly perceive, after what manner of sort the devil (if any at all) hath a possession or place in man. Not circumscriptively, commensuratively, dimensively, not locally: for, that manner of placing appertaineth especially to corporal substances, and the devil hath only a spiritual essence. Neither yet indefinitively, repletively, or replenishingly: for that, manner of placing doth properly and peculiarly belong unto God, who is only of an infinite and incomprehensible being, whereas the devil is a finite and circumscriptible creature. And therefore the devil himself (consisting of a circumscriptible and finite substance) must needs be but determinately or definitively in one only place at once: and so, by consequence must have only an imaginary possession, or place in man, and not any substantial possession in him at all. Physiologus. Lycanthropus? so far as I can perceive, this our conceited opinion concerning the supposed mental possession of devils, will fall flat to the ground. Lycanthropus. I fear me even so. Howbeit, good master Orthodoxus, let me ask you this question. If it be true indeed, that devils do not essentially enter into the possessed men's minds: how then should they possibly hurt them? Orthodoxus. I will answer this question, by ask you another thus. If it be certainly true, that good Angels do not essentially enter into godly men's minds; how then should they possibly help them? Lycanthropus. I know not what to answer I assure you. Orthodoxus. I think even so: and yet the reason of both, is one, and the same. For howsoever the good and evil Angels, Hortus sanitatis tract. de Animal. cap. 49. do propound to themselves quite contrary ends in all their operations: yet, their manner of working is always alike. Namely, whether they help us, or hurt us, they do evermore work after an invisible, insensible, and spiritual manner. Now then, that good Angels do undoubtedly help men, it is apparently evident: Hebr. 1. 14. For they are all ministering spirits: sent forth for their sakes who shall be heirs of salvation. Gen. 18. 2. That Abraham, Isaak, jaacob, Israel, the virgin Marie, Gen. 22. 11. and many others were sundry ways succoured by Angels, Gen. 28. 12. the scriptures record: but, that the Angels entered substantially into the minds of any one whom they helped, Exod. 12. 23. is nowhere to be found. Neither is it to be doubted at all, Luc. 1. 26. but that the Lord God as largely employeth the ministery of good Angels in comforting the godly, by the manifestation of his mercies: as he useth the ministery of evil Angels in afflicting the ungodly, by the declaration of his justice. And yet can it not be found throughout all the whole Bible, that the Lord ever helped any one of the godly, by the ministery of his good Angels essentially entering into their minds: and therefore it were mere madness to imagine that he should afflict any the ungodly, by the ministery of evil Angels, really and substantially inherent in their minds. Very true it is, Psal. 7. 9 that the almighty creator of spirits, Act. 1. 24. he being only of power to penetrate the spirits of men and of Angels, can, and doth himself, inwardly comfort the godly, even in that self-same eternal love wherewith he created them all, Act. 17. 18. and in whom alone they do live, move, and have also their being: but that therefore, any his Angels should be also invested with such an absolute internal power of helping or hurting, through an essential entering into the very hearts and minds of his people, that may justly be doubted, the same being no where revealed unto us throughout the scriptures. Lycanthropus. Yes, Aug. in Genes. ad literam, lib. 8. cap. 25. Augustine very flatly affirmeth that the good Angels of God (so oft as they are willing to help and to comfort the godly) they do essentially mingle then selves with their minds. And, Zach. 1. 9 and 2. 3. this also he proveth from Zacharie, saying, the Angel that spoke in me. Which argueth plainly, that, the good Angel was really in Zacharie: else, how should he speak in him at all? Orthodoxus. Augustine he affirmeth no such thing for certain: but only supposeth it so. Whereupon it is evident, that, this your affirmation, being builded upon bare supposals, supposeth no certainty in that which you say. And as for the place of zachary, your Augustine I assure you, he doth over curiously unfold the perspicious manner of speaking among the Hebrews themselves: who eftsoons for, Danaeus, in Enchir. Aug. cap. 59 fol. 200. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say in me, do translate it mecum, or add me: that is, with me, or to me. And therefore, for the Angel that spoke in me, they read it thus, the Angel that spoke with me, or to me. Howbeit, ignorance in the Hehrewe tongue, hath caused many of the old fathers very foully to err, and to decline from the true sense of the scriptures. Lycanthropus. If it be in the original, thus, the Angel that spoke in me: Why translate you it thus, the Angel that spoke with me, or to me? Orthodoxus. Because, as well the elegancy, as the propriety of the language itself must be duly respected. Although yet, such a provident respect must be used in both, as the true sense and purpose of the place (according to the proportion of faith) be warely and wisely observed. Otherwise, if you so strictly rely on the letter, how then understand you the Apostle Paul, speaking thus? you seek experience of Christ, that speaketh in me. 2. Cor. 13. 3. Dare you avouch that Christ spoke ever essentially in the person of Paul? Or, spoke he not rather ministeriallie in him? And therefore, whereas the Apostle saith, you seek experience of Christ who speaketh in me: that must be expounded thus, of Christ, who speaketh by me, or through me. So then, by this you may plainly perceive, that, Augustine (from that place of Zacharie,) hath little or no help to support your idle supposal. And, to the end you may the better consider how authentically he avoucheth that uncertain conceit: it shall not be amiss to answer Augustine, Aug. in Genes. ad literam, lib. 8. cap. 25. by Augustine himself, both in the very same book and else where beside. Wherein he flatly affirmeth, that, the angels do outwardly help us by certain visible apparitions or sights which they propose & offer before our eyes. Those self-same apparitions having not only an apt resemblance of natural bodies: Aug. libro de anima & spiritu, cap. 23. & 25. but which also are subjecteth under their Angelical authority and power. Thus the, Augustine (you see) is so variable in himself concerning this point: as, no certainty can be concluded of that which he speaks. Lycanthropus. By this one shift you may easily shift over what truth soever the holy fathers affirm. Ort●odoxus. I never yet sought to shake of any truth by shifts. Neither do I prejudice Augustine, or any of the fathers, by viewing, and rejecting their variable opinions: for so Augustine (in his latter Retractions) oft times rejecteth himself. Danaeus in Enchir. August. cap. 59 fol. 200. Cyprian, in prologo super sermon. And, howsoever Augustine, or yourself do dream in this point, very certain I am (as was showed before) that the good Angels of God (in their orderly execution of any peculiar office appointed by God) were never essentially mingled with the minds of the godly. No verily, but, in all their ambassages they do, either manifest themselves by seeing and hearing, or, assist us eftsoons by some other sensible means: howbeit, they at no hand do help us by any real commixture of their proper substances together with ours. No, Wisd. 11. 17. that God of order, who ordereth all things in number, in weight, and in measure, having decreed no such course at all: would at no hand permit such confusion of substances, nor endure such shameful disorder among any his creatures in heaven, or in earth. Lycanthropus. Tell me then, by what means they do hurt men? Orthodoxus. Not by any essential possession, Eph. 2. 2. 1. King. 22. 21. 1. Chro. 21. 1. 2. Thes. 2. 9 10. Revel. 16. 14. 2. Cor. 12. 8. Luc. 22. 31. 1. Pet. 5. 8. 2. Cor. 2. 11. or real commixture of themselves with men's minds: but, by that self-same effectual power, which even now worketh mightily in the disobedient children. By the efficacy also of which working power, they become lying spirits in the mouths of false prophets: they work lying wonders, in all deceiveableness of unrighteousness: they buffet men's minds with fearful temptations: they endeavour to sift, and to winnow men's souls as men winnow wheat: Math. 12. 43. Luc. 11. 26. Marc. 9 25. Math. 12. 22. Math. 9 32. job. 2. 7. 8. Act. 3. 2. Luc. 13. 16. Heb. 2. 4. job. 1. 7. & 2. 2. 1. Pet. 5. 8. they cirumvent them with wiles: they make men unclean: they possess them by deafness, they strike them with blindness: they subdue them through dumbnes: they overcome them by lameness: yea, and even bind them as it were with diseases, a long time together. Briefly, the devil having power over death, by the efficacy of that power, he doth vex and torment men within, and without; compassing over the earth; & running like a ramping & roaring lion, continually about to devour. Lycanthropus. Yea, but how should they possibly either hurt or devour; having in men no real possession? Orthodoxus. You do over-grosly conceive of the matter; and with as good reason might ask me, how an enemy should possibly hurt the captain which keepeth an hold: he having in the said captain, no real possession? Howbeit, this (me think) you might know by experience, that, notwithstanding the want of real possession, the enemy may many ways hurt the said captain: as, by giving him bribes to betray the hold: by assaulting, by battering, by undermyning, by pining, by wounding, yea, and by slaying some of his soldiers before his face. All these, and many more annoyances, the enemy may offer the captain, though not essentially inherent in the captain himself: yea, and by the dispatching of these, he cannot choose but vex and torment the captain himself, even as if he had really and substantially possessed his person. After the self-same manner dealeth Satan, with such as he is said to possess, For, albeit he doth not substantially enter into the possessed man's mind, which is as it were a grand-captain over the body: yet for all this, the devil, that sworn adversary of man, by devising, procuring, applying, and by ministering many strange sicknesses, diseases, and deaths to the body, he doth no less violently vex and torment the mind itself, then if he were essentially entered therein. Yea, and all these the forenamed annoyances he effecteth at his own will and pleasure. Partly, August. de divinat, daemonium. for that he is of long experience in mischief; having been a practitioner therein, from the beginning of the world. Partly through a more easy manner of knowing things, he being very sharp sighted, Aug. de civit. Dei, lib. 9 cap. 22. & thoroughly acute: not needing those means which earthly men need, to understand, and to find forth the natures, effects, and causes of things. And partly also, by reason of the excellency of their proper nature, they being most speedily carried from place to place: being of infinite power in comparison of us: and being also of such an exquisite knowledge, as, eftsoons they undertake (by observing events, and by conferring of causes) to conjecture the timely success of many their mischievous enterprises. By all the premises then, it is very apparent, that the devil, he hath such an effectual power permitted unto him, as he needs not essentially enter man's mind, to accomplish any his devilish enterprises. Lycanthropus. If devils enter not essentially into the possessed man's mind: how should they possibly incline, or bow his said mind to their purpose? Orthodoxus. Touching the inclining of minds, if we speak herein according to truth, God alone is properly said to work in the minds of men, and to incline their wills which ways he please: although yet, spirits and devils, they may also be considered as helpers herein, howbeit such helpers no doubt, as do rather move by external reasons, then incline at all by internal actions. And even so, 1. King, 22. 21. the lying spirit, in the mouth of Ahab his prophets: was after a sort, 1. Chro. 21. 1. an helper to God. Concerning therefore the inclining of minds, we must here distinguish between the interior efficient, who only is God: and the exterior agent, namely, spirits and devils. Again, the means whereby the exterior agent doth work, is twofold. The first is the external object of the mind, it being apprehended of the understanding for good, and effectually offered also unto the wil For, every faculty of the mind, is especially moved by his proper object: not only offered, but apprehended also effectually. The other external means inclining the mind, is seated in those affections and passions that are placed in the sensitive appetite, namely, lust, anger, love, and such like, by which also, the will (after a sort) is inclined to something. Now then, spirits and devils they are able by external objects, to stir up affections and passions in the sensitive appetite. Non simpliciter. Pro. 21. 1. Howbeit, not simply and absolutely as God, who is said to have the hearts of kings in his hand, and who also is able alone, Secundum quid. to incline man's will effectually, to whatsoever he please: but, after a sort, and so far forth also, as they by external reasons are able (like councillors) to persuade the will unto something. For, they cannot possibly compel the will, the same (by nature) rejecting all manner of compulsion: although yet, (by persuading and alluring) they may (after a sort) be said to incline and to move the mind. Now than this their inclining, you see it consists not in any essential possession, but only in an effectual operation, whereof we will discourse to the full, when we come to entreat of actual possession. In the mean time, do now cease for shame to avouch any longer the mental possession of devils. Lycanthropus. Well sir, howsoever you deny the mental possession of devils: I doubt not but they may have a corporal possession in men? Orthodoxus. This point will require a large discourse. And therefore let us here give over a time till after our supper: and then (if you please) we will confer thereof for an hour or two. Physiologus. Your motion is good: and we willingly yield. Orthodoxus. Then let us in God's name, arise and depart, to my house to a scholars repast. Philologus. The Lord be blessed, for that which he sends. Lycanthropus. We will willingly attend upon you. The end of the second Dialogue. The third Dialogue. THE ARGUMENT. Whether Spirits and Devils do essentially enter into the possessed man's body? And whether, for that purpose, they have peculiar to themselves, true natural bodies? The speakers names. PHILOLOGUS. LYCANTHROPUS. PNEVMATOM'ACHVS. PHYSIOLOGUS. ORTHODOXUS. EXORCISTS. Orthodoxus. Having seated ourselves in order, I would very willingly know what it is that Lycanthropus requireth-concerning the corporal possession of devils. Physiologus. Good sir, he is old enough to express his own mind: let him therefore speak for himself. Lycanthropus. Yea sir, I am of age I hope, to tell my own tale: howsoever, I mean not to make you my Proctor. Physiologus. If you would, I were like to speak very sparingly in so bad a cause; unless you could haply corrupt my conscience with a left-handed bribe. Lycanthropus. Howsoever yourself may haply stand in some need of a proctorly bribe: my cause, it stands in no need of bribe-pursing Proctor. Orthodoxus. I like not these girding quips: for howsoever they demonstrate some sharpness of wit: they argue much want of a charitable patience: Besides that, they are nothing to the purpose we come for: and therefore good Lycanthropus, go directly to work, and tell me what you desire to know, concerning the corporal possession of spirits and devils. Lycanthropus. My desire is to know, whether spirits and devils do essentially enter into the bodies of men? Orthodoxus. For answer hereunto, it shall not be greatly amiss, first, to show what the corporal possession of devils is supposed to be: and then next, to declare mine own opinion concerning that point. Lycanthropus. What I pray you, is the corporal possession? Orthodoxus. It is that whereby the devil is supposed of some, even really and essentially to enter into, and substantially, and inherently to dwell in the possessed man's body: during the whole term of that his tyrannical dominion over the man, whom he, so really, and personally possesseth. Lycanthropus. This supposed possession of devils, I suppose is undoubtedly sound: but what is your own opinion concerning this point. Orthodoxus. My opinion is this: namely, that the devils never had any such real possession in men: but only an actual possession. Lycanthropus. Conclude you then, that the devils have in men, no corporal possession at all? Orthodoxus. If by corporal possession, you do mean, that the devils essentially enter into, and inherently dwell in the possessed man's body: I see then, no reason at all, but, that I may boldly conclude it. Neither do I perceive, how yourself should ever be able to contradict the infallible truth thereof. For very certain I am, that no such essential possession; is any where extant in all the Bible. Lycanthropus. Oh, yes sir, in every place of the Bible almost, especially there, where those matters are handled: it is said, the devils entered into them: Math. 12. 45. that they enter in, and dwell there: that Christ charged the devil to come out of the child, Marc. 9 25. and to enter no more into him and so forth. All which places do plainly demonstrate, that the devils have really, a corporal possession in men at the least. Orthodoxus. I see no such matter, demonstrated from any of those places. Lycanthropus. No do? What I pray you can be more plain than this? come out, Marc. 9 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. and enter no more into him. Is there not a most plain opposition between entering into: and going out from? And, are not the words in the original: and enter no more into him? What can be more plain I beseech you? Orthodoxus. That there is an apparent opposition between entering into, and going out from, I freely confess, the words also in the original I plainly approve: Revel. 3. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. although yet, I grant from thence no real possession. Else, how understand you this place in the Apocalypse: where the Lord saith, and I will enter in unto him. What now? because the holy Ghost there useth the very self-same word of entering into: must we therefore thus grossly imagine, that the Lord God, he also essentially entereth into the hearts of so many as open unto him by faith and repentance? that were too too absurd. Also, where it is said, that, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. joh. 13. 27. after judas received the sop, than Satan entered into him. Albeit, the very self-same word of entering into, be used here also, yet may we at no hand conclude, that therefore, the devil had in him an essential possession: no, for the holy Ghost else where doth otherways expound himself, joh. 13. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. saying, that the devil had now darted, or thrust into judas his heart to betray his master. Making the entering of the devil into judas his heart, to be nothing else but a suggesting, or thrusting of the intended treason into him, as was showed before. Whereupon, it is very apparent you see, that, this going out, and this entering in of the devil, may not so grossly be understood of any real or substantial possession: but only of an effectual, and powerful operation. Lycanthropus. Nay sir by your patience there is more to be understood therein; Math. 12. 45. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. then only an effectual operation. For, the Evangelist saith thus: and, entering in, they do dwell there. Now then, dwelling in a place; you know it doth not only presuppose an essential entrance into that self-same place: but, concludeth withal, a real possession there, where the party possessing doth really inhabit. Orthododoxus. Howsoever you insist upon the bare words of entering, and dwelling: yet, no real possession, but only, an effectual operation must be understood thereby. Otherways, what think you of this place, joh. 14. 23. where our Saviour saith. If any man love me, he will keep my word, and my father will love him: and we will come unto him, and dwell with him. Now then, to use your own reason, dwelling in a place you know, it doth not only presuppose an essential entrance into that self-same place: but concludeth withal, a real possession there, where the party possessing doth really inhabit. And so, by consequence, if we strictly tie ourselves unto words: then, the father, and the son both do really and essentially inhabit in the hearts of so many as observe the word, which, how absurd it is to avouch, yourself may consider. Besides that, if you so strictly do tie yourself to the observation of words: how understand you this scripture? The good Spirit of the Lord departed from Saul: 1. Sam. 16. 14. and, an evil Spirit of the Lord came upon him. 1. Sam. 18. 10. Would you have us to imagine fromhence: that king Saul himself was really possessed with an evil spirit, or a devil? Lycanthropus. Yea, what other thing else? Orthodoxus. Then may we by the same reason conclude, that Saul also before that time, was really possessed with the good spirit of God. For, 1. Sam. 10. 6. 10. when Samuel anointed him king it was said in like sort, that the spirit of the Lord should come upon him: Again, that the spirit of the Lord it came upon Saul. Yea, then may we likewise conclude that David also himself, he was really possessed with the good spirit of God: 1. Sam. 16. 13. for it is said, that after David was anointed, the spirit of the Lord came upon him. Now then, tell me I pray you, whether you think that Saul and David were really possessed with the good spirit of God: and that the spirit did essentially enter into them? Lycanthropus. I understand it even so, I assure you. Orthodoxus. Why man (besides the absurdity arising thence) the very letter itself importeth a quite contrary sense to that which you seem to insert. For, the words of the text are not thus, the spirit of the Lord entered into them: but, the spirit of the Lord came upon them both. Howbeit, whether it had been, the spirit of the Lord entered into them, or came upon them, it is all one in effect: and may in no wise, be understood of any essential possession, but of an effectual operation of that spirit of God, whether good or evil. For, in every of those places, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I●siliuit, arri●iebat, requievit, irruens, prosperavit. the word, in the original, is tsalac. Which Jerome translates, leapt upon them: Lyra, he hath, entered forcibly upon them: Pagnine, he hath, rested upon them: Tremellius, he hath, rushing upon them: Montanus, he hath, prospered upon them. None of all these, howsoever they differ in terms: they dream not you see, of any real possession at al. Yea, and the word tsalac also itself (if we respect the native signification) is properly to be translated thus. johannes Auenarius. Lexic. Hebraic. The spirit of the Lord prevailed, had prosperous success, did happily proceed, or prospered greatly in Saul, and in David: all which, hath relation to the efficacy, and not to the essence of the spirit at all. Otherwise, if notwithstanding all this, yourself will needs understand in that place an essential entrance, or real possession: the gross absurdity thereof may more plainly appear, by the conference of this one, with some other places of scripture, where the self-same word is also in use. Gen. 14. 56. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As first, where Eleazar saith unto Laban, hinder you me not: sith the Lord bath prospered my journey. Would you expound it thus, hinder me not: sith the Lord hath caused my journey, Psalm. 1. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 very really, and essentially to enter into me? Again, where it is said, that whatsoever the godly man doth it shall prosper. Should we translate it thus: the godly men's ways shall substantially enter into him. Psalm. 25. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Again, where the holy ghost saith unto Solomon, prosper thou with thy glory. Should we expound it thus: let thy glory substantially and really possess thy person. Briefly, where jeremy complaineth thus, why do the ways of the wicked prosper: jerem. 12. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must we imagine, that the ways of the wicked do enter essentially into their bodies and souls? that were to to absurd. And yet, in such a strict tying of ourselves to the word we may (by as good reason) interpret these places thus, as those other of Saul and of David: the holy ghost using especially in every of them all, but one and the self-same word. Exorcists. If the scriptures be so intricate concerning these points: what ways were we best to take for the understanding of them aright? Orthodoxus. You must not be haled headlong an end with an inveterate opinion, received hand over head, from hand to hand, without further search or due trial of the truth of the matter: but, must very heartily pray, and most conscionably depend upon the holy spirit of God, for a true understanding and wisdom herein. For, seeing the proper nature of spirits and devils, is not (in the sacred scriptures) so exactly & so plainly set down, as that thereby we may certainly know them even as they are in their proper and essential being: we must therefore, most humbly endeavour ourselves, very faithfully to embrace, and constantly to believe the true sense of the scriptures concerning these points: yea, even in such simple sort as the holy spirit of God, Nomb. 27. 16. who is the Lord of all spirits, hath set down the same. Always remembering this; that spirits and devils, they are in the scriptures evermore spoken of, as of spiritual substances: howsoever, for the only help of our slender capacities, they be sometimes more grossly expressed by parables and metaphors, and, in a more sensible or corporal manner then otherways they are in themselves. Nomb. 24. 2. And therefore, whereas it is said, that the spirit of the Lord came upon Balaam, judg. 3. 10. Othoniel, Gedeon, judg. 10. 34. Iphthah, Samson, Saul, David, Azariah, Ezechiel and others. Moreover, judg. 11. 29. where it is said, judg. 14. 6. that the Lord separated the spirit of Moses, 1. Sam. 10. 6. and put in upon the seventy Elders: again, that the spirit of Eliah was double upon Elisha: 1. Sam. 16. 14. that Caleb had a spirit far differing from the rest of the Israelites: 1. Sam. 16. 13. and that Daniel, he had a more excellent spirit than all the rest: 2. Chro. 15. 1. yet, that self-same entrance into, Ezech. 11. 5. that resting upon, Nomb. 11. 17. 25. that multiplying, that doubling, and that excellency of the spirit is not to be understood of any real, 2. King. 2. 9 or essential possession; but of an effectual and powerful operation of that self-same spirit, Nomb. 14. 24. concerning the special work for which it was sent. Dan. 5. 11. 12. So as, although the spirits of the Lord (whether good or evil) are said to be given by proportion and number: yet, not the substance or quantity, but the condition or quality of the spirit itself must be always presupposed and meant thereby, which is a point that I would have you especially to consider throughout our whole conference concerning spirits and devils. Lycanthropus. This I confess is a very good caution concerning the condition, quality, and operation of spirits. Howbeit for any thing hitherto heard, I can at no hand be persuaded; but that the devil (albeit man's mind be free) doth really and essentially enter into the possessed man's body. Physiologus. Go to, imagine that this your supposal were every way sound; and then do tell me withal, what the devil doth in the possessed man's body. Lycanthropus. What doth he there? very untowardly I warrant you: for, even in that self-same body, and by the help of that body he doth effectually accomplish and execute those his preposterous actions, Physiologus. Preposterous actions indeed: for the devil to appropriate to himself, the peculiar organon of the possessed man's soul. Do you imagine, the Lord ever propounded any such end to himself in the creation of bodies? Or do you suppose the Lord ever granted so large a commission: or, that the devil himself ever received such an absolute power concerning the bodies of men? But, go to, what becomes of the soul or spirit, all the while the devil himself is really inherent in the possessed man's body? Remains the soul still in that body as in her proper habitation appointed of God, till the day of her utter dissolution by death? Or, is it for the whole time of the devil his being in that body, utterly exiled & thrust out from the same? Lycanthropus. Nay, the soul is not even then, secluded or shut out from the body at all, but continueth and lieth therein like a subdued prisoner, fast bound hand and foot: yielding over to the devil (for that present) his whole interest concerning the body, and endureth perforce his inexorable, and tyrannous cruelty. Physiologus. But, tell me I pray you, is not the soul or the mind of a man an incorporal substance, or a spirit equally diffused and spread throughout the whole body, and every part thereof according to powers and proportion not Arithmetical, but Geometrical: so as all the members of the body itself doth effectually fulfil their peculiar offices accordingly. They being the proper instruments of that self-same mind or spiritual substance, furthering freely the organical operation thereof, and excecuting readily whatsoever the mind shall give them in charge? And that therefore, this self-same body, being thus utterly deprived (as you say) for the present, jam. 2. 26. of the souls organical operation, is in effect, but dead to the soul: because wheresoever is an utter privation of the soul's operations, concerning the body, Phil. 1. 23. there, the life of that man is for the present dissolved. Hold you all this for a truth? Lycanthropus. Yea, I may not deny any part thereof. Physiologus. Seeing then you do flatly conclude, that the mind or spirit of man is the first substantial form or action in a living body, and the original or primary cause of all effects whatsoever performed duly therein, as being that only whereby we do live, perceive, desire, are moved in place, and do also understand: how is it possible, that the soul or mind of a man, being naturally in perpetual motion, should at any time lie idle in her body, it being the proper Organon of the soul, peculiarly appointed unto it by God, yea, even unto the very dissolution thereof? Or, how should the said soul or mind lie bound like a prisoner, in her proper body: and not execute effectually those self-same operations and powers, which are peculiarly appropriated unto it for the special service of that self-same body? Lycanthropus. What mean you by the proper operations of the soul or mind? Physiologus. I understand thereby, all those peculiar actions which do necessarily succeed the powers of the mind, as proper effects peculiarly appertaining unto it. Otherways, this peculiar power of the mind (it being a mean between the substance and operations of the mind, are the only efficient cause of the said minds operations) should be utterly in vain, and to no purpose at all; unless the peculiar effects of that self-same power, did undoubtedly, and immediately succeed the same. Howbeit, these self-same effects cannot possibly succeed the said power of the mind: so long at the least, as the Devil himself (really possessing the body) doth wholly and absolutely take up the said body with the members thereof, to accomplish his mischievous purposes. As for example, all the operations of the mind, are either organical, or animal. The organical operations, they are those several actions which the mind can in no wise accomplish but in the body itself, and by all the several members thereof, as by the proper instruments, for that purpose peculiarly appointed unto it. Namely, the nutritive, augmentative, and generative operations, appertaining especially to the vegetative life: also the faculty of seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, handling, and of common sense: moreover, the imaginative, the memorative, the concupiscible, irascible, and motive faculties, being all attendant upon the sensitive life. Now then, these, and every of these are the organical operations of the mind, yea and such also as the mind cannot possibly effect but in her own body, and by all the parts thereof, as by the peculiar instruments appointed of God. And therefore, how should the possessed man's mind, (his body itself being thoroughly surprised and taken up (as you say)▪ by the Devil) at any hand accomplish either all, or any one of these organical operations? Lycanthropus. As the mind herself cannot but be in perpetual motion: so surely (being forcibly restrained from these her organical operations) she must (for the present) be fain, to put in execution, and to practise as she may, her animal operations. Physiologus. The animal operations, they are such special actions, as the mind of itself both can, and may effectually accomplish without the body: namely, those three essential powers of the reasonable soul, called the understanding, affection, and will. Whereof, the two last are fitly termed the intellective appetite: whereas the organical affections (arising only from out of the heart, the liver, and entrails) are called the sensitive appetite. But, for as much as these animal operations, all the while the mind itself is seated in her proper body (are) by the order of God (appointed to be the directors) and moderators of all the organical operations: I ask you, by what means the mind may accomplish her appointed duty concerning the direction and moderation of those her organical actions, so long as the Devil himself doth really and wholly take up the said body, with her several parts, to become the unhappy instruments of his Devilish attempts? Lycanthropus. I see no possible help, but that the mind itself must give place to the Devil for a time. Physiologus. Give place for a time; for how long I beseech you? Put case this man be really possessed of the devil for seven years together, or more, and that in the mean time he should die before the devil be dispossessed of his body, which (for any thing known to the devil) he may very well do: for his days are determined which he cannot possibly pass. Now then, the soul itself being surprised by death, and so, separate from the body itself, before she recover her pristinate power concerning the said body, or any the organical actions appertaining unto it: to whom, must those the disordered actions (wrought in the body all the whole time of the devil his real possession therein) be imputed I pray you? Whether to the possessed man's mind, or to the devil himself, that possesseth his body? And whether of both must yield an account unto God, for those several actions of the sinful body? Lycanthropus. The very soul itself is answerable, I take it, for those sinful actions. Physiologus. But, seeing sin itself, is only a voluntary transgression of the law of God: how holds it with equity, that the soul should be answerable for those self-same organical actions, which she did never voluntarily assent unto, accomplish, affect, or approve? Lycanthropus. Because the animal operations of the soul, they being appointed by God to direct and to moderate the organical operations of the body: did fail in doing that duty. Physiologus. How should she possibly accomplish that her appointed duty concerning the direction and moderation of those organical operations: she being before very violently and absolutely dispossessed of the body itself, by whom those organical actions should have been wrought according to her proper, and only directions? Besides that, the peculiar actions of the understanding, affection, and will are mere animal, respecting either the mind itself: or the mind and body together. Touching the mind itself, her animal operations are only to understand, to affect, and to will. These animal operations, they are such as the mind herself both may, and doth effectually accomplish without the body, and being quite separate from it. And also, she hath her animal motions, whereby she is locally moved without the body: and being quite separate from it. joh. 11. 35. 44. For, so the soul of Lazarus (his body being dead four days in the grave) did locally move, and return, yea, by such a non organical or animal motion, the very souls of the saved, & damned: are (at this present) continually moved. The animal operations respecting the mind and body together, they are the dutiful applying of the understanding, affection, and will to an orderly direction, and circumspect moderation of all the organical actions. To the timely discharge of which duty, the mind especially is bound; so long as she is naturally inherent, or peculiarly predominant over the body. Else, she is freely exempt from all charge of the body: and hath then her animal operations wherein her office doth wholly and only consist. And, even as in the mind, so also in the body there be some such mere corporal actions and motions: as the body itself both may, and doth also accomplish without any direction or moderation of the mind. As for example. The dead carcase of a man being quite separate from the soul, it hath notwithstanding her corporal dimensions, figure, situation, and habit: yea, and is locally moved, either downwards by a natural motion, or else upwards, or overthwart by a violent motion. Yea, and all these corporal operations and motions the body hath, and may also accomplish by herself alone, without any her soul's direction, moderation, or guidance: they being especially such actions and motions, as appertain not to the mind at all. Now then, as the soul hath some such animal operations peculiarly appropriate to it, as it may well, and doth effectually accomplish without the body, being freely separate from it, and therefore, no reason the body itself should any ways be answerable for those peculiar actions of the mind, whereunto she was no ways assistant: so surely, the body it hath, and may have some such corporal actions and motions peculiarly appropriated, or violently enforced upon it, as it may, and doth also effect without any the direction, moderation, or consent of the soul, it being quite separate from it, or from any the directions thereof at the least, and therefore, it is absurd to imagine that the soul should be brought to account for any those peculiar actions or motions of the body which it never directed the body unto, nor never gave consent to the same in any respect. Lycanthropus. I know not which ways to answer your speech: howbeit, very certain I am the devil hath really in man a corporal possession at least. Physiologus. How do you know it for certain, sith the devil is only a spirit, of a spiritual substance, simply and absolutely without all mixture of corporal matter: and therefore, he needeth no such real possession in any man's body. Lycanthropus. He needeth no such real possession in any man's body I confess, in regard of his own essential being: Howbeit, respecting more especially, the timely execution of his tyrannical tormenting of bodies, there is necessarily required in the parties possessed, an essential possession at least. Physiologus. Why man, as the Lord God in the very first creation did constitute spirits and devils, essentially absolute in their own proper beings, without any apparent necessity of such an essential mixture with human bodies: so surely, you are never able to prove from the word, that the infinite wise God, did ever propound to himself in the creation of bodies, any one purpose at all concerning such essential possession of spirits and devils. Neither are you able to show by the scriptures, that, the devil did ever receive so large a commission from God, concerning men's bodies. For, very certain it is that the devil did earnestly entreat, and the Lord (for many respects) did purposely permit as much scope to the devil, concerning jobs body, as any man's body beside, either before him, or after him: and yet did the devil never beg, job. 1. 11. 12. nor the Lord never grant any further power at all concerning the body of job, job. 2. 5. 6. then only an actual afflicting, but not any essential possessing at al. Besides that, the whole man (body and soul) was preordained by the secret purpose of God, to be for ever, the lively image of his absolute majesty, respecting especially the perfection and holiness thereof, yea, and (which more is) to be also a perpetual habitacle, and glorious temple for his sacred spirit: and therefore it is incredible that the foreseeing wisdom of God, would ever permit any such essential possession to spirits and devils as should not only, most beastly pollute and deface his own image, but (which more is) even really (as it were) transform the habitation of his holy spirit, into a filthy cage of unclean spirits, a most stinking sty for satan himself, and a most horrible dungeon for damned devils. Lycanthropus. Why sir? this metamorphosis or change, was primarily effected in the persons of Adam, Gen. 2. 27. and Eva, who being both created according to the image of God concerning body and soul, did, not only quite loose the said image of God: but (which more is) did presently put upon them, Math. 12. 29. the very image of the devil, Luc. 11. 21. who is called the strong armed man; and they are now become that dwelling house of his, which he possesseth and keepeth in peace. Physiologus. The image of God, Eph. 4. 24. it was not lost in Adam and Eva as touching the essence; but concerning only the perfection, the sanctity, and holiness thereof. Neither did they essentially, but only actually put upon themselves the image of satan. Neither did that strong armed man the devil at any time, essentially, but only effectively possess or keep them in peaceable possession, as an house for himself. And therefore, either you must necessarily acknowledge the devil to have an essential possession not only in some few, but, even in Adam himself, and all his posterity: or else, you must grant, that, that possession which the devil hath in any, it is only an actual possession. Howsoever the latter be true, the first you may never acknowledge for shame. Because, if the Lord created the members of our bodies for these two only respects, namely, that they should be for ever, the lively organa of our own proper souls, and the express images of him their Lord & creator: it is unlikely, that satan should ever have power (through the permission of God) to frustrate those former effects, by assuming our bodies essentially unto himself, and by applying them so forcibly to his slavish service in an unvoluntary action, whether they will themselves, or not. Lycanthropus. Why may not the Devil for a time, essentially usurp the possessed man's body, to accomplish therein his Devilish actions? Physiologus. The question is not, what the Devil may do, but whether he doth so essentially usurp upon the possessed man's body; as yourself doth absurdly imagine. Hermes Trismegistus, in suo●periandro. For, if an human soul, be only made capable of an human body: then also, an human body, it is only made capable of an human soul. But, the first (in all reason) is undoubtedly true: and therefore also the latter, and so (by consequence) there can be no essential possession of spirits and Devils. Lycanthropus. Why sir, Math. 12. 29. Luc. 11. 21. the scripture saith, that the strong armed man possesseth his house in peace. Physiologus. That must only be understood of an actual, and of no essential possession at all. I prove it thus. Satan so possesseth, as Christ invadeth his house: Luc. 11. 22. But, Christ invadeth only effectively, and not essentially: therefore, Satan, he possesseth only effectively, and not essentially. Besides that, if Satan essentially and inherently dwelleth in the possessed man's body: what then (for the present) becomes of the soul? and, who must become accountable to God, for those corporal actions which are wrought in the possessed man's body, as was showed you before, the man, or the Devil? If the man, how can it stand with the justice of God to punish those things in a man, whereunto he was violently enforced and drawn against his own will? If the Devil: then should something be effected in the possessed man's body which nothing concerneth himself. Briefly, you cannot possibly propound to yourself, any one necessary use or end for such an essential entering of Devils into the bodies of men. Lycanthropus. Oh yes sir, it is needful for this special end; namely, that they might thereby, the more fitly afflict and torment such persons as the Lord in judgement, hath committed unto them. Physiologus. All this, may as fitly, as fully, and as effectually be effected by an only actual possession, as shall be showed hereafter: in the mean time you shall never be able to prove your imagined real possession of Devils while you have any breath. For, if Spirits and Devils, be (in deed and in truth) in the possessed man's body, then are they so, either as the part in the whole: or as the whole in the part: or as the special in the general; or as the general, in the special: or as the accident in the subject: and form in the matter: or, as the efficient, in the effect: or, as the intention in the end: or as the thing placed, in the place at the least. But, he is not in the possessed man's body, according to any of these respects: therefore, not essentially or personally in the possessed man's body at all. Lycanthropus. Though not according to any the former respects: yet are they in the possessed man's body (as we say) autoprosopos; I mean, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 even personally: not putting any other quality in the body which it had not before, but only moving and stirring the said body (with the several parts) to such extraordinary operations, as (by the provident disposing of God) are permitted them to accomplish thereby. Physiologus. He is in the possessed man's body you say, Sidicimus eos revera, atque adeò 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 adesse, & inesse: esset hoc, vel hypostaticè, vel formaliter, quod est absurdum. only as a mover, and stirrer up of the same to some extraordinary operations: this is too too absurd. For than he must be in that body either as one hypostatically joined with that man in his essence, which hypostatical union is only proper to Christ: or else, formaliter (as the Schoolmen do call it) to give an essential form to those the intended operations: and so, there should be in the self-same subject, two essential forms at once, which is too too absurd. For devils being incorporal spirits, are also invisible, impalpable, insensible: yea, such spiritual creatures as cannot possibly be discerned by corporal sense: such a substance I mean, as can neither be seen, nor felt, nor handled, nor possibly perceived by corporal or sensible means? And therefore, how should yourself be able to judge, or the possessed man certainly know when the devil is really, and substantially inherent within his body, as a mover to such operations, Lycanthropus. The same is very apparently perceived, by the devil his violent rending and tearing: Math. 8. 28. Marc. 9 18. Luc. 8. 29. and such other unnatural and preposterous actions. Physiologus. This perceivance or knowledge is given neither to you, nor the possessed himself by any means of the devil his essential being within him; but by reason of his effectual working in the possessed man's body. By which said effectual working, that self-same rending and tearing, with other like unnatural and preposterous actions may effectually be wrought in the man: though the devil doth never essentially enter into the possessed man's body, or any part thereof. Even as also, the efficacy and heat of the sun may effectually be perceived and felt both outwardly and inwardly: and yet, the very substance of the sun itself never essentially inherent in any man's body. And thus, at unawares you do fully overthrow you idle supposal of an essential and real possession: concluding withal, that the devil hath only an actual or powerful possession, whereof also hereafter we will confer to the full. Lycanthropus. Stay here a while I beseech you: me think you are somewhat overswift in gathering upon me. For, albeit I do freely confess that spirits and devils are spiritual substances, and therefore, not sensibly perceived or felt of us by any corporal or sensible means: yet do I not hold them for such absolute and simple substances, but that they have also their proper bodies peculiarly appropriate to them, though of another nature, and far different also from ours. And therefore, the devils entering into the possessed man's body with those their own bodies: they may (by means of their said bodies) so violently work in the possessed maus body, as that, their essential being therein, may easily be discerned of others, and very sensibly also perceived of the possessed himself. Physiologus. A man had need to be swift in gathering: when he lighteth upon one so lavish in laying abroad. For besides your conclusion here, against your own cause, you do flatly descent a fresh from that we concluded before in our first conference concerning the essence of spirits and devils. Where I telling you that the Scriptures deliver unto us not corporal, but spiritual devils: that spirits and bodies are opposed the one to the other, and therefore cannot possibly be one and the same: thereupon we concluded, that spirits and devils are not corporal, but spiritual substances, all which you held then for an infallible truth. Howbeit, being here driven to a strait, you do now either ignorantly forget: or purposely pervert the very truth you affirmed before. For, now you say plainly that devils have also their proper bodies: peculiarly appropriated unto them. What is this else, but to say, and unsay: and to turn with every wind, not unlike to the wavering Weathercock? Lycanthropus. I denied them to be corporal substances, in comparison of our gross and elementary bodies: when yet notwithstanding, I do simply hold, and confidently avouch them to have also their bodies. Physiologus. Make plain your meaning; and tell us whether you hold them to have their proper, or assumed bodies? Lycanthropus. Even proper and peculiar bodies, created for them. Physiologus. Go to then, every created body, is either celestial: or elementary. Whether of both these think you, is proper to Devils? Lycanthropus. Surely I think they have celestial bodies. Physiologus. Very well. But I pray you consider this also, that the devils, if they have corporal bodies: then also, they have their corporal motions. Now, every natural motion, we do know is either circular, or elementary: The circular motion for celestial bodies; the elementary motion, for elementary bodies. Whereupon it followeth, that, if devils (as you say) be endued with celestial bodies: then also, those their celestial bodies, must naturally follow the circular motion. On the other side, the possessed man (you know) he hath an elementary body: and therefore, his said body it must and will naturally follow the motion of that element, whereof it doth chiefly consist. Pneumatomachus. What infer you hereof, I beseech you. Physiologus. Thus much I infer: namely, that Lycanthropus his opinion, concerning the real possession of devils, doth draw after it, many gross and palpable absurdities. As for example. If the devil (as you yourself do confidently hold) hath a celestial body, then, how should he really and essentially enter into the elementary body of an earthly man, or possibly make any personal abode in the possessed man's belly: sith the devil, having as you say, a celestial body naturally attending and following the circular motion, he cannot be long from that natural motion, but must eftsoons mount aloft to that celestial heaven whereon his supposed body consists, to follow his circular motion, and then, what will become I beseech you, of the possessed man's body? Again, if a spirit or devil, having as you hold a celestial body, should essentially enter into the elementary body of a terrestrial man: then surely, for the whole time of that real possession, there must be both in the devil, and the man, either no motion at all, which were absurd to imagine, or else, in the one, or in both a supernatural motion, and so, by consequence, that real possession should be very miraculous, which were now in these days of the Gospel, incredible to hear. For, the devil, he being (as you say) really, essentially, yea, and corporally also in man, that man having an elementary body which naturally attends the elementary motion; and the devil he having a celestial body, which must naturally follow the circular motion: how can the body of man converse with the body of the devil, it following naturally the circular motion, but that self-same circular motion must needs be in the possessed man's body a supernatural motion? Or, how should the body of the devil be really inherent in the possessed man's body, and so follow therein the elementary motion; but that self-same elementary motion also, must needs be a supernatural motion in the devil his body? And so, by consequence: a miracle in the one, or in both. Again, job. 1. 7. if the devils (what bodies soever they have, whether celestial or elementary) do (as appears in the word) move every way, job. 2. 2. 1. upward and downward, on the right hand and left, before and behind Pet. 5. 8. us: If the devils (as the Platonists affirm) can very easily stretch out their bodies into what bigness they please, Theupolus, in Academic, contemplate. lib. 6. or contract them into what smallness they list, and can vary in them (as their pleasures) whatsoever colour or figure they fancy: Mich. Psellus, de operatione daemonuum, cap. 8. Marsilio Ficino interpret, tom. 2. pag. 19 39 briefly, if the devils (as Psellus reporteth) have such bodies as are every day tortured with griefs, & tormented with material fires: surely, it were very absurd, to suppose that a celestial body, is (in any sort) fit for any the precedent matters, but far opposite to them, and therefore much more absurd to imagine that devils have celestial bodies. Philologus. Surely Lycanthropus, Eph. 2. 2. if devils be endued as you say with their peculiar bodies, Eph. 6. 12. I would rather imagine them to have airy, then celestial bodies: Chrysost. in 1. ad Thessaly. homil. 11. because the Apostle, he calls them airy spirits, and, as chrysostom saith, the whole air is replenished throughout with devils. Physiologus. Howsoever Paul or chrysostom affirm there be devils in the air, that doth not conclude, that therefore, the devils they have airy bodies: which opinion is much more absurd than the other before. Petr. Martyr. loc. come. 9 sect. 13. Corpus homogenium. For first, that the devils should have airy bodies: it is utterly impossible. Because the air is (as we commonly say) a body of one and the self-same kind; so as, every part of air, is air: neither can any reason be rendered, why this part of the air should be more the body of a devil, than another, and so, the whole air should be a continued body of devils. Besides that, an organical body consisting jointly of distinct members, must have bones, sinews, veins, arteries, flesh, and must also receive some proportion, shape, or figure: all which are impossible to be made of the air. Again, the air is inconstant, and continueth not long in a place: and therefore, by ascribing to the devil an airy body, Omne alterabile, est corruptibile, 1. de generatione. we might rather conclude him a runagate land-leaper, than an inherent landlord in any man's body. Briefly, if the devil hath an airy body, than also, his said body is subject to corruption, and dissolution, for, the air is a corrupt and dissoluble body: and so, by consequence the devils should be mortal as touching their airy bodies. And thereupon, either they must have new bodies made them a fresh, when those other be dissolved: or we must else believe also a resurrection of the bodies of devils, all which you may see, is very absurd. Lycanthropus. But Augustine he holdeth the contrary. For, therefore saith he, Aug. Genes. ad literam, lib. 3. is the body of a Devil incortuptible, because, in the air and fire there is an active force, as also in the water and earth, a passive force: and so by consequence, the body of a Devil being airy, is rather active, then passive. Physiologus. By Augustine's leave, this acordeth neither with sound Philosophy, Otho Casman, Angelograph, part prima, cap. 3. pag. 66. nor yet with common experience. For, with the Philosophers, the air is rather passive then active; because his proper quality is thought to be liquid. Howbeit, heat and cold are said to be active: but dryness and humidity, passive qualities. Morever, it hath been proved by manifest and daily experiments: that the air is both passable, and corruptible, and may easily be corrupted and changed. And therefore, if the Devils have airy bodies, they are subject to corruption and dissolution: and so by consequence, the Devils, they should be endued with mortal bodies, as was affirmed before. Lycanthropus. But, Mich. Psellus, de operatione Daemonum cap. 11. ibid. cap. 8. many (for all this) do flatly avouch that the Devils have either fiery, or airy, or watery, or earthly bodies: yea, such bodies as can feel, and be felt, both hurt, and be hurt, in so much as they lament when they are stricken, and being put to the fire, are burnt. And that, they themselves continually burn in such sort, ibidem cap. 9 as they leave ashes behind them: as hath been manifestly proved in the borders of Italy. Physiologus. If you lend you ears to the opinion of the Platonists, or but listen a while to the dotages of dreaming Psellus, they will fill your head full of these and such other Italian tales: wherein, it were more ease for a man to believe them, then to run into the borders of Italy, to reprove them of falsehood. Howbeit, 2. Pet. 3. 10. 11. 12. if Devils in deed, Petr. Martyr. loc. come. 9 sect. 13. should have elementary bodies, they could not be eternal. For, the elements, they have in them both heat and cold, dryness, and moisture: yea, such active and passive qualities both, as, by contending together continually, must needs (in the end) be utterly dissolved. And therefore these toys which the Platonistes and Psellus do tattle abroad, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. are matters that cleave together like thombe-roppes of sand: having in them no soundness of truth. Besides that, their Philosophy herein, Regivald Skolt in his discovery of Witches. lib. 17. cap. 3. fol. 494. is very improbable: for, if the Devil be earthy, he must needs be palpable; if he be palpable, he must needs kill the man into whom he really entereth. Also, if he be of earth created, then must he be visible, and untransformable concerning that point: for, God's creation cannot be annihilated by any devise of the creature. So as, although it were granted, that the Devils might add to their being, either matter or form: yet, very certain it is, they cannot possibly diminish or alter the substance whereof they consist. As, not to be spiritual: or, to relinquish and leave earth, water, fire, air, or this or that element whereof they were first created and made. But, howsoever they imagine of water, of air, or of fire: very certain I am, that the earth must always be visible and palpable, yea, and the air must be always invisible, and fire must be hot, and water must be moist. And, of these three latter bodies, especially of water and air: no shape nor form can naturally be exhibited to mortal men's eyes, by any possible means of the creature. Lycanthropus. Well yet, for any thing heard, I can hardly be persuaded, but, that Devils have their proper and peculiar bodies. Orthodoxus. I have forborn a long time to speak; in hope that Physiologus and yourself would have grown to some issue concerning this point. But, sith you persist in your fond opinion: do tell me what it is that makes you imagine the Devils to have also their bodies? Lycanthropus. This especially persuades me unto it: Bernard. in cant. cantic. serm. 5. I find in the scriptures four sorts of spirits. Namely, first a divine spirit, which only is God: who, although he be a spirit: yet hath he no need of a body, Petr. Martyr. loc. come. 9 sect. 14. touching either his being, or his working. The second are Angelical spirits, namely Angels and Devils, who, albeit they need no bodies at all, Oth. Casman. Angelograph. par. 1. cap. 3. pag. 72. in respect either of their being, or of their proper actions, yet need they their bodies, in communicating their actions unto us. The third are human spirits: who, in regard of their essential being do need no bodies, for, they really exist and live, being disjoined asunder from their bodies. Although yet, concerning their organical actions appertaining especially to the vegetative & sensitive life, they at no hand may want their proper bodies. The fourth and last sort, are brutish spirits: which, neither can be, nor do any thing at all without their bodies. By all which it is clear, that of these four sorts of spirits, the divine spirit alone (the omnipotent God I mean) he needeth no body: all the rest, they have all need of, and do also enjoy their own bodies, for the use of themselves and of others, and this, either to help, or to hurt. And, for these self-same respects; the very devils also themselves do stand in need of their bodies. Orthodoxus. By this your distribution of spirits it doth plainly appear, Petr. Martyr, loc. come. 9▪ sect. 14. that spirits and devils they need no bodies at all, touching either their being, or working. For first, they have their essential being, without any body, in as much as they are spiritual substances: and then next, they need also no bodies concerning their proper actions, for, they love, they hate, they affect, they do will, and understand without any help of bodies at al. Lycanthropus. I speak not now of their proper, but of their ministerial actions: which they cannot possibly accomplish without their peculiar bodies. Orthodoxus. And, I understand it also of their ministerial actions; which they may and do eftsoons accomplish by assumed bodies: without any their peculiar bodies at all. And herein also I speak only of good Angels: but go to, proceed in framing your argument. Lycanthropus. I frame it thus. Ministers, Bernard. in cant. cantic. serm. 5. Heb. 1. 14. they cannot possibly accomplish their appointed ministery to those that live in the body, without having a body. But, the Angels are all ministering spirits for such saved ones as live in the body: therefore, they cannot possibly accomplish their ministery to them, without having a body. Orthodoxus. I unframe it thus. The truth of your proposition, is only particular, having special relation to some certain kind of ministery: and therefore, it doth not, nor cannot so generally conclude as you would have it to do. Because Angels or spirits they may, and do eftsoons undergo some certain offices without any assistance of an external body: yea, even all their offices whatsoever, they might and could well undertake without any body at all, if it so seemed good to the Lord. Howbeit, some other offices again, they do execute in bodies: not because there is otherways in themselves a defect for that work, but, for their sakes only to whom they are sent. Neither is it of any necessity, that the Angels (for some special respects) should always consist upon, and have peculiarly unto them their own proper bodies: because (for such special respects) they may, and have eftsoons assumed to themselves some other bodies from else where. Howbeit, what need of assuming of bodies at all, if Angels and spirits be always endued with their proper and peculiar bodies? No surely, then to assume, where no assuming of bodies in deed: but rather a stretching out, a rending, and dissolving of substances, which is too too absurd, as was told you before. Lycanthropus. I wonder you are so peremptory in denying this point: I having not only the Philosophers (as you heard even now) but ecclesiastical fathers both old, and new on my side? Orthodoxus. Your philosophers, they shoot fair and far off, as you also have heard even now. You say you have fathers both old and new on your side: let us see first whether your old fathers do come any nearer the mark. Lycanthropus. First, Origen, in libro, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Origen, he flatly affirmeth that spirits and devils are endued with their proper bodies. Orthodoxus. Origen (if that book be his own) is not to be regarded concerning this question: because, therein he doth nothing but play the Platonist, iumpingfull pat with Psellus in every point. And therefore he deserveth none other answer then that which was given to those other before. Let us hear more authentical fathers, or end the discourse. Lycanthropus. Hilary, Hilarius, in Math. cap. 5. he saith there is nothing which in it own substance and in respect of creation is not corporal. And therefore spirits and devils, they having their substance, and (being created) are also corporal. Orthodoxus. Hilary, he saith so indeed; but gives no one reason of saying so. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ipse dixit. It is not enough for yourself to cry out and say, Hilary, he speaks it: unless Hilary also doth prove what he speak, which he doth not in the place you allege. He only propoundeth the matter without any proof: and may easily be answered thus. The soul of man it hath her substance, and was also created and yet incorporal. For, or ever it was infused into the body, and after the dissolution thereof, it doth substantially exist, and is also immortal: accomplishing continually her animal operations. Neither needs she an human body in any respect of her proper essential being: but only in regard of her organical operations, as was showed before. And therefore Hilary he helps you nothing at all. Lycanthropus. Tertullian very plainly affirmeth Angels and spirits to have their peculiar bodies. Tertul. in libro decarne Christi. Orthodoxus. Whatsoever Tertullian saith there, concerning this question, the Schoolmen, they do excuse and qualify his speech on this sort. They say that Tertullian by the name of body, understandeth only the spiritual substance of Angels and nothing else: And this he doth (say they) in an only regard of the simplicity of that people with whom he dealt: who held, that nothing could possibly exist in nature, without a body. Tertullian therefore, in that only regard, did purposely call the substances of spirits and devils by the name of a body. Lycanthropus. Yea, Tertul. contra Prax. pag. 409. but Tertullian avoucheth further, that God himself is also a body: and therefore, much more that spirits and devils they have their bodies. His words be these. Who will deny God himself to be a body: although God (indeed) be a spirit? Orthodoxus. This is so far from confuting, as it rather confirms that qualification which the Schoolmen do make. Namely, that by the word (body) Tertullian understandeth nothing but the spiritual and simple substance of spirits and devils. Besides that, Hieron. Zanchius de operibus Dei, lib. 2. cap. 3. pag. 62. it is one thing to be a body: and another to have a body. Tertullian saith only that God is a body: he saith not there, that God hath a body. Lycanthropus. Notwithstanding all this, he saith elsewhere, Tertul. libro De anima. that spirits and devils are corporal: his reason is because the souls of men are also corporal. Orthodoxus. Herein his poverty bewrayeth itself, being constrained as you see, idem, per idem. to beg his cause: wherein also he would prove, the same by the same, namely, corporal spirits, by corporal souls. Howbeit, we have proved before, & do here affirm it a fresh: that the souls of men, they are incorporal, and therefore by consequence, spirits and devils they are not corporal, but spiritual substances. Besides all this, Aug. Genes, ad literam, lib. 7. cap. 9 & 12. & 21. Augustine very flatly affirmeth, that the incorporal, do differ fully from corporal substances, and denieth withal, that whatsoever is created, the same is a body: yea, he sharply reprehendeth and derideth Tertullian, Et lib. 10. ibid. cap. 24 & 25. for avouching the souls of men to be corporal. And, in the end he thinks it too too absurd, Danaeus, Enchir. August. cap. 59 pag. 179 to hold that a reasonable soul should be a body in any respect: because the same is only and altogether incorporal. And thus you may plainly perceive by Augustine: how unfitly Tertullian doth fit your turn. Exorcists. But Augustine himself elsewhere very flatly affirmeth, Aug. de trinit. lib. 2. cap. 7. Ibidem lib. 3. cap. 1. that all reasonable creatures are corporal substances: yea, and that even the intellectual creatures, namely, Angels, spirits, and devils, Et in Genes, ad lit. lib. 11. cap. 30. are every of them also corporal powers; howsoever they subsist not of flesh and blood. Orthodoxus. How Augustine agreeth with Augustine, yourself may plainly perceive: and therein also may wisely consider what credit consists in such variety. But that your Augustine may also receive his answer: let us hear his argument whereby he would prove spirits and devils to be corporal substances. Lycanthropus. He reasoneth thus. We do therefore affirm the intellectual powers to be corporal substances, Aug. de spiritu, & anima, libr. 18. only because they are circumscribed with place: even as human souls are also enclosed with bodies. Orthodoxus. This is his argument. Whatsoever is circumscribed with place, that same is corporal: but spirits and devils they are circumscribed with place, therefore, spirits and devils they are corporal. I answer, the proposition is faulty, and halteth down right. For, jul. Scaliger. Exercit. 359. sect. 5. the locality of spirits and devils doth not simply depend upon a body which after it own manner, I mean circumscriptively and sensibly is (no doubt) in a place: but it ariseth properly, from the finitovesse, and dimensivenesse of the angelical nature itself. Which said angelical nature being created of God, is therefore but finite, and circumscribed also with those her own terms which are competent and proper unto her. And therefore, the intellectual powers, they are in a place, because they be finite substances: although yet, they are in a place but definitively or determinately. So then, spirits and devils you see, they are undoubtedly in a place, because they be local: but, they are therefore said to be local, not because they be corporal as Augustine imagineth, but for that, being finite, they have their muchness or quantity after a sort, I mean, no predicamental, but an intelligible quantity. And therefore Augustine he speaketh sound you see, against Tertullian: but proveth your purpose nothing at al. Exorcists. But, Author de Ecclesiasticis dogmatibus, qui extat in tom. 3. Aug. the author of the Ecclesiastical opinions writeth plainly, that we must believe nothing to be incorporal or invisible but only God. Who alone is truly said to be incorporal, because he is every where present, replenishing all things: and therefore also invisible to every creature, because he is incorporal. His first argument is framed thus. Whatsoever is incorporal, that same is every where, because ubiquity is the cause of incorporality. But, spirits and devils, they are not every where: therefore, spirits and devils they are not incorporal. Orthodoxus. The proposition with his prosyllogisme halteth down right, the same being a deceivable Elench: making that the cause, which is not properly the cause in deed. a non causa, ut causa. For, neither is infiniteness, nor the ubiquity depending thereon, the only proper cause that any thing is incorporal: but some other thing else. As for example, an omnipresence, or (if so I may speak) an incorporiety, is truly in God: howbeit, God is incorporal, not so much in regard of his ubiquity, as because he is a simple spirit. Angels in like sort, are therefore incorporal in their proper degree, because they be spirits, but yet created spirits: and they are therefore local, because they be finite substances. Thus then, your said author his first argument, afordeth small force (you see) to your present purpose. Lycanthropus. But, he argueth secondly thus. Whatsoever is incorporal, that also is invisible: spirits and devils, they are not invisible, therefore also, not incorporal. Orthodoxus. First, the assumption is merely false, because it maketh spirits and devils naturally visible: which all men do know to be otherways by common experience. For, Luc. 24. 39 who ever hath hitherto seen, or could possibly perceive a spirit or devil as they are in their proper nature. Again, in the proposition he fails as before, by pretending a cause, a non causa, ut causa. which is not the cause. For the denying of a corporal or bodily being, is not the proper cause of invisibility: but, the absence, the viciousness, the deprivation or fault of some other thing else which are necessarily required in the action of seeing. Besides that, by this argument, a man might also deny the airy element to be a body or corporal substance: for, who can possibly behold, or sensibly see the purity of the air itself? Thus then, your old fathers (you see) they (in deed and in truth) are not interessed at all in that misbegotten offspring which yourself so desirously (but yet falsely) would father upon them: and therefore, let us now here what better hap with the new? Lycanthropus. With a very good will. Caelius Rhodig. antiquar. lect. lib. 1. cap. 20. First, Rhodiginus he affirmeth confidently, that spirits and devils have their proper bodies. Orthodoxus. How should he so confidently affirm his opinion, not having the conformity and concord of truth consorting therewith? Besides that, Rhodiginus he proves his assertion by the bare and only authority of Augustine: the which authority and opinion of his, as you have heard it disproved before: so surely Rhodiginus himself, he doth dangerously cross and annihilate it, by opposing many unavoidable exceptions of schoolmen against the same. And therefore, Rhodiginus his authority, is nothing authentical or currant concerning your question. Lycanthropus. But Caietanus explaining these the Apostles words, Cateianus de verbis Apostol●. Eph. 2. 2. (according to the prince of the airy spirits or powers) he is not afraid to affirm: that it holdeth best with reason and sound Philosophy, to believe that spirits and devils are constituted naturally of airy bodies. Orthodoxus. Doth Caietanus say so indeed? Oh the wit that abounds in a Cardinal's hat? But, what is his reason I pray you? Lycanthropus. He hath a reason that knocks it dead, namely this. Even as (saith he) the vegetative substance, is found without the sensitive, and the sensitive without the motive, and an intellective without either sensitive, or motive according to place: so is it credible, that an intellective, may be found without a sensitive, with a motive only according to place, and such (saith he) are spirits and devils. Orthodoxus. Doth Caietanus conclude as you say? Now fair fall his good heart for his cunning conclusion: surely, he himself alone hath stricken the Popingay dead. This I confess, is an admirable argument. Howbeit, this I must tell you, that such manner of arguments, howsoever they may seem at a blush to give a glimmering show of conveniency: they have in them, very small force to convince. And without doubt, if Caietanus his conclusion be canonised currant: it might in like manner be granted, that the sensitive substance is to be found without the vegetative, and the intellective with the sensitive, without the motive according to place: and so, no one thing shall be wanting, which may tend to the generality and absoluteness of such kind of couple together. Which, when all is done, your opinion (for any thing Caietanus concludes) is like to lie in the dust. Exorcists. Yea, Francisc. Georg. tom. 1. problem. 5474. & 75. Et tom. 6. probl. 330. & 331. Item, Malleus mallefic. Item, Benedictus Pererius. but Georgius he affirmeth plainly, that spirits and devils are not only corporal and airy substances: but that they have in them also the power of generation, and can shed forth seed for that purpose. Howbeit, when they come to a woman (saith he) than they do contract, gather together, or thicken their airy bodies: fashioning them fit for the purpose which they presently affect, Item, Gryllandus. yea, and that also their offsprings are properly Giants. Item, jacobus Wickerus. Orthodoxus. Notwithstanding Georgius his impudent and shameless affirmation of a matter so shameful, jacobus Wierus, de praefligijs, ●ib. 2. cap. 39 Sienchus Eugu●inus, de pereni●hilosoph. lib. 6. cap. 32. I will at no hand be drawn any longer to hear it, much less do I give credit unto it: and which more is, I will neither defile my tongue, nor infect your chaste ears with the filthy contagion thereof, it being so impossible in nature, and so incredible in all sound Divinity. Howbeit, if any of the learned be further desirous to hear this his gross impudency and foolery more fully confuted: Otho Casman. Angelograph. par. 2. cap. 21. pag. 605. I refer them over to the learned Treatises of such as have sifted that offensive argument unto the bran. More especially, Arist. degener animal.. lib. 2. cap. 3. to the several works of Wierus, Engubinus, Casmannus, Aristotle, Frisiuss, Scaliger, Cassianus and others: who do every of them so sound beat down this your Georgius his gross assertion, Paulus Frisius, jul. Scaliger. Cassianus. as I myself shall not need to deal in it at all. Lycanthropus. But yet Zanchius, Hyperius, in method. Theol. lib. 2. pag. 304. a man of excellent learning, he not only inclineth that way: but holdeth withal, this my opinion of corporal spirits. Orthodoxus. Zanchius, Hieron. Zanch. de operibh. Dei. lib. 2. cap. 3. pag. 62. embraceth the same I confess as the more probable opinion in his conceit: but what manner of bodies, spirits, and devils should have, he doth not determine. That they have airy bodies: he seeth not (he saith) how the same should be proved. But he verily supposeth, spirits and devils to have other manner of bodies than either airy, or celestial bodies: and that the substance of their bodies is more like to the substance of that heaven of the blessed, which is properly called the Empyrial or fiery heaven. Thus this excellent learned man; he doth give (among others) his conjectural opinion concerning the bodies of spirits and devils. A coniectural opinion I say, very purposely consonant to that other opinion which himself and some others do hold about the creation of Angels in that the forenamed, heaven of the blessed. Howbeit, neither Zanchius, nor any of the rest, do certainly determine this matter in question. Lycanthropus. Well, yet Zanchius and the other, they purposely incline to this my opinion; concerning corporal spirits and devils. Orthodoxus. Not so. For whereas yourself do certainly hold that spirits and devils are endued with gross and airy bodies: Zanchius, and some others suppose, they do rather consist of empyriall or fiery bodies as was showed before, where also I have purposely put down the special reason of this their conjectural opinion. Howbeit, for a further declaration hereof, I do answer with Gregory, Greg. Nazian, sermone 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Greg. 1. Roman. tem. 1. moral. In Iob. lib. 2. cap. 2. Bed a, tom. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, lib. 2▪ pag. 314. Damascenus, cap. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Alexander Aphrodisaeus, 12. Metaph. 12. jul. Scaliger. Exercitat. 6. & alibi. Item exercit. 359 sect. 2. Otho Casman. Angelograph. par. 1. cap. 3. pag. 75. Beda, Damascene, the Schoolmen, and others: who do all jointly affirm, that even as the knowledge of spirits and devils (in comparison of our knowledge) is very excellent and wonderful large, although yet (in comparison of God) the same is but shallow and short: so surely, those the supposed bodies of spirits and devils in comparison of our earthly and palpable bodies, may fitly be said to be spiritual, whereas yet (in comparison of the omnisufficient, and incircumscriptible spirit of spirits) they may after a sort, be said to be corporal. And this our censure concerning corporal spirits; being rightly understood, as it ought to be (that is, being granted comparatively) may very well stand with the truth. For certain it is that Angels are not spirits purely simple, as God is most simple: neither are they infinite and incircumscriptible spirits, as God alone is, but are marshaled within their proper dimensions and bounds. All which being granted, it doth not thereupon necessarily follow, that therefore Angels, they are not created incorporal & finite spirits, and such as (after their manner) are limited definitively within their proper dimensions: but this rather follows thereof, namely, that therefore spirits and devils they are not most simple, most infinite, illocal, nor omnipotent powers. For, the specials do always retain the common nature of their general, and therein they fitly accord: howsoever, by reason of some repugnant forms, they do otherways dissent among themselves. And thus, your Fathers (you see) both old and new, they are fully answered, concerning their supposed managing of this your opinion of corporal spirits or devils. Philologus. Are you able Lycanthropus, to reply to his answer? Lycanthropus. I am utterly unable. But sir, sith you so confidently do hold that spirits and devils are incorporal: let us hear your reasons, and authorities concerning this point. Orthodoxus. With very good will my reasons are these. Luc. 24. 39 First, spirits and devils have not flesh and bones (saith Christ) as you see me to have. Wherein it is very apparent, that, there is one substance of human bodies, and another of spiritual powers. Spirits, they have neither flesh nor bones: therefore, they cannot be comprehended with the sight of the eye, nor handled by the sense of feeling, both which are proper to the sensible perceiving of human bodies. Again, Heb. 1. 7. the Lord (saith the Apostle) hath made his spirits his messengers: Psal. 204. 4. and his ministers a flame of fire. The which place, albeit David doth properly understand of the operation of winds: yet, for as much as the Apostle applieth the same to the Angels, it is not to be doubted at all, but as the name Spirit, so likewise a spiritual essence appertaineth unto them. Again, we read that a legion of devils, Marc. 5. 9 Luc. 8. 30. namely, six thousand, six hundred, sixty and six possessed the man in the Gospel, whom Christ delivered. But, if devils be corporal substances, and do essentially enter into the body of man, it is utterly impossible that there should so many be crowded together, and all contained at once within the narrow corners of an human body. Exorcists. Some do hold, there was (in deed) but one only devil in the possessed: whose name was Legion. Orthodoxus. As though it were possible, Math. 8. 28. that one only devil could be really inherent in two several persons at once? Besides that, it is very apparent in Mark and in Luke, Marc. 5. 9 12. Luc. 8. 30. 33. that, there was not one but many devils: yea, and Matthew also (exchanging the name of one into many) he saith, the devils besought Christ that they might go into the heard of swine. Math. 8. 31. Exorcists. Sir, I only have showed you what some others do hold: but, proceed in your purpose. Orthodoxus. I proceed thus; The spirits or souls of men are incorporal: Aug. Genes. ad literam, lib. 7. cap. 9 & 12. & 21. therefore spirits and devils are also incorporal. For, if the reasonable soul or spirit of a man, be not corporal in any respect, I mean, if it be neither solid nor palpable as are the earthy and terrestrial bodies, neither yet subtle or slender as are the airy and celestial bodies: then without doubt, spirits and devils they are likewise incorporal, Danaeus, in Enchir. Aug. cap. 59 pag. 179. because they also are spirits. For, the nature, and definitions of a spirit and a body, do altogether, and in every respect differ between themselves. And thus (besides those Philosophical reasons which Physiologus propounded before) you have hitherto heard from the Scriptures, such several arguments as do very plainly conclude the non being of corporal spirits or devils. Pneumatomachus. Believe me Lycanthropus, before we began this our conference, I doubted greatly of the essential being of spirits and devils: Howbeit now I am clear in that point, and by this discourse do farther perceive them to be admirable and wonderful powers. Lycanthropus. Very true as you say. But sir, let us hear I beseech you, your authorities also concerning this point? Orthodoxus. With very good will. Wherein I assure you, that this our opinion concerning incorporal spirits and devils, is generally received in the church of God: approved by the consent of many Divines: and confirmed fully from the Lateran Council. Lycanthropus. For the general receipt thereof in the Church I make little doubt: but let us hear now your several authorities. Orthodoxus. Content. First, Dionysius writeth thus. Dionysius, de caelesti hyerarchia, cap. 2. We account not (saith he) the celestial and deified powers or spirits, to consist of innumerable feet, or to have a manifold countenance, neither yet, to be like unto living and corporal creatures: albeit the sacred Scriptures (in speaking of them) do use these Poetical and feigned forms. chrysostom, he saith, the Seraphimes are called spirits, Chrysost. in Isa. cap. 6. that is, incorporal, and supernatural powers. And a little after, he saith, they be called fiery or flaming creatures; because their substance is most pure. Augustine be defineth them thus, Aug. de cognit, verae vitae cap. 6. Angels and devils are spiritual powers, incorporal substances, invisible, insensible, reasonable, intellectual, and immortal: the good ones, they are shining and impassable, the evil ones black and passable. Theodoret, Theodoretus, in Genes. Quest. 36. he saith that God created the universal nature of incorporal substances: constituting, decreeing, and ordaining their said nature to be intellectual and also immortal. Andrea's of jerusalem, Andrea's Hierosolymitanus. he saith, that Angels and spirits are all without their bodies. Gregory also, he saith in like sort, Greg. in Ezech. lib. 1. hom. 12. that spirits and devils they have no flesh. Isidore, Isidor. de sum. bono lib. 1. cap. 3 he saith that Angels and devils, according to their nature: are called spirits. Damascene, Damascenus, de orthodoxa fide, lib. 2. cap. 3. he saith that Angels and spirits are intellectual substances, evermore movable and free, by the arbitrement of their proper power, incorporal, the ministers of God, obtaining immortality by grace, not by nature: the portraiture & bounds of whose substantial being, only the creator of spirits, he knoweth himself. Carolus magnus, Carolus magnus de imag. lib. 3. cap. 20. Marc. Vigerius Saonensis, Decachordi, ●horda, 1. ca 18. he saith the essential substance of Angels and devils is immortal: because they be spirits by nature. Vigerius Saonensis, he saith, that Angels are all of them spiritual substances without any bodies at all, consisting of understanding and will: and therefore, they are every of them called Angels as it were by a Christian name. Culmannus he saith, Leonard. Culmannus in disputat. Theolog. par. 1. fol. 15. Heb. 1. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Bernardus, in capite Missus est, homil. 3. that Angels are not corporal but spiritual substances: because they be spirits. For a spirit is not a substance consicting of elements, or having flesh and bones: in which only respect, the Scriptures do call them ministering spirits. Briefly, Bernard he saith, the very walls are unable to withstand the Angelical spirits: but that all bodies, (how solid or palpable soever) they are unto them very penetrable, Lo, here we have summoned a grand-jury, of ancient Fathers: who have all (with one general consent) given up their verdict, concerning the non being of corporal spirits and devils. Go to therefore Lycanthropus, what say you them? Lycanthropus. I say they are all good men and true. Orthodoxus. Waell, than I hope you will yield this question, namely, that spirits and devils, they have not material bodies, peculiar to their essential being: but are altogether simple, and incorporal substances: and that therefore, their essential being in men, (if the same should be granted) can never be perceived by corporal sense, and so by consequence, no corporal possession at all. Lycanthropus. I yield no such matter unto you. Orthodoxus. Why man, it was the determination, of that grand-jury of Fathers, whom you acknowledge for good men and true. Whereupon, their verdict was forthwith authentically recorded: and may not now (by any orderly course) be reversed. Lycanthropus. It may be, they were to inconsiderate and rash in giving their verdict: and therefore, let us hear your Lateran Council concerning this matter in question. Orthodoxus. What man, must the credit of a grand-jury of Catholic Fathers be made to depend upon the approbation of a general Council? Well then, Conc. Lateran. magnum. Can. 1. the Lateran Council doth flatly confirm, that Angels or spirits, they are incorporal, created of God: and, were not eternal before all beginnings, but, created only in time. By all the premises then, you may plainly perceive by sway of argument, by plain evidence of Scripture, by authority of Fathers, yea, and by the whole consent of a general Council, that spirits and devils are incorporal substances: and, that therefore, if devils do essentially enter into the bodies of men, as yourself do fond imagine, they enter not so by any bodies of their own, because they have no bodies at all. Lycanthropus. Whether devils have bodies, or no bodies, it makes no great matter: very certain I am, they have a real possession in men, and I prove it thus. Spirits and devils, they can essentially assume to themselves, true natural bodies: therefore they can essentially enter into the possessed man's body. Orthodoxus. Are you fled on the sudden from the devil his real possessing of bodies, to his essential assuming of bodies? Can you find no fast footing to settle yourself upon: that you thus plod hither and thither from point to point, as a man fearfully distracted, or suddenly fallen in a maze? Lycanthropus. Yes sir, I have fast footing (I warrant you) for whatsoever I hold: although yet now, I rather desire to hear what you are able to say, concerning the devil his essential assuming of true natural bodies. Orthodoxus. Well, than I perceive your store is not great: being thus constrained to spend on the stock. Howbeit, because this matter will crave a longer discourse, than the present time will afford: let us therefore go take our natural rest, and meet here again betimes in the morning, to discourse this point to the full. Physiologus. Your motion is good for us all. Philologus. Very true as you say. And therefore, we three will repair to our Inns, to take our rest: and meet you (God willing) to morrow, by six of the clock. Orthodoxus. Well then, let us forthwith arise, and depart. The end of the third Dialogue. The fourth Dialogue. THE ARGUMENT. Whether Spirits and Devils can assume to themselves true natural bodies? What bodies they are said to assume? and how those Scriptures are to be understood, which be for this purpose produced. The speakers names. PHILOLOGUS. LYCANTHROPUS. PNEUMATOMACHUS. PHYSIOLOGUS. ORTHODOXUS. EXORCISTS. Philologus. LYcanthropus? I have this night in my sleep, been so strangely troubled about thy last argument: as, if thou take heed to thyself, I verily believe thou wilt give them the foil. Lycanthropus. I am so persuaded myself: howbeit, if I be conquered therein, I have another in store that will trouble them more than that by a thousand fold. Pneumatomachus. Make much of your arguments against the intended skirmish, and all little enough: for, you are to encounter with sharp sighted adversaries. Lycanthropus. Be as sharp as they will: they shall be sure to receive as hot as they bring. But, behold where they come? Orthodoxus. What sirs? God give you good morrow. You have prevented our purpose: which was, to have perused an author or twain before your coming. Howbeit, sith you are all so ready: Go to Lycanthropus, propound your argument to us. Lycanthropus. I propound it thus. Spirits and Devils, they can essentially assume to themselves true natural bodies: therefore, they can essentially enter into the possessed man's body. Physiologus. We have hitherto denied, and yourself was unable to prove any real or substantial possession at all: and would you now thus cunningly insinuate some essential entrance of devils, under the pretence of assumed bodies? Which assuming of bodies if it should be denied; would perhaps, be as hard to prove as any the points before. Philologus. What sir? would you bear us in hand, it were hard to prove that the devil can assume to himself a body? That was never yet doubted of any: and dare yourself undertake to deny the same? Physiologus. I undertake no absolute denial thereof: but only do here make it a Question. Howbeit, sith yourselves are so resolute concerning this point: do tell me what body the devil doth assume to himself. Whether, a true natural: or fantastical body? Pneumatomachus. Surely, a true natural body: or none at all. Physiologus. If a true natural body, then tell me further, whether it be a body created before: or, to be newly created? Lycanthropus. It is a body created before. Physiologus. If you hold it a body created before, then tell me yet further, whether you take it to be a living: or dead man's body? Exorcists. I take it to be some living man's body, if any at all: else, how should it possibly serve the devils purpose? Physiologus. I wonder, you should so grossly imagine an impossible matter. For, where hath the devil received power from the Lord: to dispossess living souls of their organical bodies? And, what must become of that living man's soul: all the while the devil assumeth his body itself, to serve his mischievous purpose? Moreover, it is very absurd: to suppose that the devil can possibly assume to himself any living man's body. Because the Lord hath so unchangeably established such an inseparable union between the soul and body of a living man: as, unless the body and soul be substantially united together, that man may not truly be termed a living man. And which more is, the soul and body are so inseparably conjoined by the creation of God: as, no one creature in heaven or in earth may possibly disjoin them, before the final separation of life, according to the determinate council & appointment of God. Briefly, be it supposed that the devil could in deed assume to himself some living man's body, and could also for the present, extenuate the same, and transform the substance thereof into spiritual congellations, Tatianus contra graecos. 4. physic. & 2. de anima. simul, & semel, as Tatianus affirmeth: yet, this is very certain and a general rule, that, two substantial forms cannot possibly be inherent together and at once, in one and the self same subject. And therefore, to bring the substantial form of a devil without feeling, into the substantial body of a man without either kill or hurting, and which more is, to transform the same into such a slender and impalpable substance as cannot of the possessed himself be sensibly perceived or felt, no not at the first entrance into him: it may well be unlikely, but very certain I am, the same is utterly impossible for all the devils in hell to accomplish, such hard hap they have, in assuming a living man's body. Pneumatomachus. For my part, I rather suppose that the Devil doth assume to himself some deads' man's body. Physiologus. This your supposal is no less absurd than the other before. For first, if that body which the Devil doth assume, be the body of a dead man departed long since, then surely, it is an hundred to one, that, that self-same assumed body is either eaten with worms, joh. 11. 39 and so, unfit for the service: or is else so putrefied with filthy corruption, as the Devil (by entering into any therewith) must needs poison the possessed man unto death. Again, if that assumed body, be the body of a dead man but lately departed this life: the Devil then, by assuming such a newly departed body, must be supposed to appear in a white winding sheet, as he was heretofore thought to appear unto Saul, 1. Sam. 28. 14. in samuel's supposed body with a mantle about him, & must so (for the present) forsake that his supposed form, which the Poets and Painters do hold to be grisly and black. Besides that, in supposing the Devil can assume to himself the body of a man, you do therein very grossly oppose yourself to the blessed Apostle: 1. Cor. 6. 13. who saith most confidently that men's bodies are created for the Lord himself, and not for infernal Spirits. That, they are the members of Christ, 1. Cor. 6. 15. not the mansions of Belial: the temples of the holy Ghost, 1. Cor. 6. 19 not a dungeon for Devils, a sty for Satan, not an habitation for Hellhounds. Briefly, if the Devil doth assume to himself, some dead man's body, whether long since, or but lately departed: Otho Casman. Augelograph. par. 2. cap. 18. pag. 528. we must (by this your supposal) imagine a resurrection of bodies before to the general judgement, and therein also, must attribute to the Devil, that absolute power of raising the dead, which only is due and proper to God, and so, by consequence conclude, that the Devil can accomplish and work true miracles. Deut. 32. 39 Whereas the Lord only is able to take life from the dead, 1. Sam. 26. Psal. 36. 9 joh. 5. 21. Act. 17. 28. Rom. 4. 17. and to restore them again unto life: which is such a miraculous work of the omnipotent God, as by an infallible consequence approveth the Deity. Seeing therefore that by this your supposal you do in effect but Deify the Devil: be forthwith ashamed to hold, that Spirits have power to assume to themselves the body of a man already created, whether dead, or alive. Lycanthropus. You grant then, that the Devils do assume to themselves some uncreated body? Physiologus. I grant no such thing. For, how is it possible, either Devil or Angel should assume that which is not at all: or that they should take to themselves, a body not yet existing in nature? Philologus. Very true. But after the creation of such an essential body: you do then confess, the Devil may assume such a body? Physiologus. I confess no such matter: unless you first show me by whom those self-same supposed bodies should be essentially created: whether by God: or the Devil? Exorcists. They are surely created by God, or not at all: for the Lord only alone is the creator of all things. Physiologus. Though the Lord in deed, be the Creator of all things, yet doth it not necessarily follow, and yourself shall never be able to prove, that he is also the Creator of these things: And, how dare you then so confidently avouch: that these your supposed bodies for the service of devils, are essentially created by God? Exorcists. God is of infinite power: and therefore may do it. Physiologus. Your may be, concludeth nothing at all. Neither do we dispute what God either may, or is able to do? but what (in deed and in truth) he doth certainly accomplish. And, albeit the Lord (I confess) be of infinite power, yet is his said power restrained to his will: Psal. 133. 6. for whatsoever the Lord willeth, that doth he in heaven and in earth. So then, unless you can show the Lords word to witness his will concerning such extraordinary creation of bodies for the service of Satan: whatsoever yourself shall haply imagine that God may do, therein, you must yet give us leave to doubt of the doing there of in deed. Lycanthropus. But, why may not the Lord for the execution of justice: create them such bodies? Physiologus. First, because the Lord hath infinite means beside, and those also of more excellent majesty for the execution of justice: and therefore, he stands in no manner of need to have such a patched supply. Secondly, for that the Lord will never do that; Gen. 2. 2. 3. Exod. 20. 11. and 30. 17. Deut. 5. 14. Heb. 4. 4. which may any ways witness against himself. But, for him to create such essential bodies afresh at the pleasure of the devil, and so oft as he pleaseth: doth derogate greatly from the certainty of that sacred truth which sealeth unto us, the certain accomplishment of all his works whatsoever in six days space, and the undoubted ceasing from all his labours the following day. Moreover, to hold for infallible truth, that those your supposed bodies for the service of Satan must in any case be created of God: what do you else in effect, but thereby conclude the Lord himself to be slavishly subject unto Satan his accursed command, Math. 4. 3. in creating him bodies afresh, and so oft as seemeth him good? Pro. 16. 4. Rom. 11. 36. Col. 1. 16. Briefly sith the glory of God is the main end of all his creation: what one glory may possibly redound to the Lord, by creating such your supposed bodies as (being altogether by Satan abused) are prepared neither to destruction nor glory? And therefore, it is gross impiety, or rather an horrible blasphemy for any to hold, that the Lord alone must be the Creator of any such essential bodies, as yourself and some others suppose the devil doth assume to his service. Lycanthropus. It is certain then, that those assumed bodies are created by Satan himself. Physiologus. It is even as certainly so, In legenda aurea. as that S. Donston did hold the devil fast by the nose with a pair of pincers, the very first day he appeared unto him in such an assumed body: wherein Donston served the Devil of trust, and according to his due deserts: to teach him to be meddling with the work of creation, before he had got a Commission from God. But, alas, Lycanthropus, are you not highly ashamed, to hold so main absurd and horrible impieties, or rather such execrable and intolerable blasphemies? For, be you thoroughly assured of this, that yourself husbandmaning the devil a creator of bodies, Magist. sentent. lib. 2. dist. 7. you do thereby ascribe unto him a supernatural power: Lucas Lossius, In evangelia dominic. fol. 421. Act. 17. 28. Col. 1. 16. Lucas Lossius, in evangelia dominic. fol. 505. and therein also do attribute that unto devils, which only is due unto God, because creation of substances was never yet granted to man or Angel, much less unto devils. Besides that, if it were in the power of devils either to create, or assume to themselves essential bodies at pleasure: it is not then to be doubted, but that (such and so endless is their malice towards men) we should shortly have the whole world replenished with corporal devils, yea, and their number would far surmount the number of men, Reginald Skot, in his discovery of witchcraft, lib. 16. cap. 2. pag. 377. if all be true that is set down in Salomon's notes of conjuration. Wherein are named seventy nine principal devils: having every of them under them and at their command, some ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, sixty, seventy, yea, and some of them eighty legions of devils at the least. So then howsoever yourself shall otherways dream of a power in Satan for assuming of bodies: sith they can be no such bodies as are newly created either by God or the devil: sith they can be no bodies created before: sith they can be no bodies of men either dead, or alive: it must necessarily follow, that those imagined bodies which the devils are supposed to assume to themselves, they are (in deed and in truth) no true natural bodies. Lycanthropus. It is like then, that the devils, they do only assume to themselves but a fantastical body. Physiologus. And it is like then, that the devils, they have only in men, but a fantastical possession: which is the very same issue you were brought unto before, when we discoursed of the mental possession of devils. Philologus. How now Lycanthropus, are you brought to a nonplus before you well wist? Lycanthropus. I wot not I assure you, which ways to wind myself out from these windings and turnings: howbeit, for any thing hitherto heard, I will never believe but that the devil can assume to himself a true natural body. Orthodoxus. What man? will you with such settled pertinacy dwell in your opinion: not having sound reason therefore? Lycanthropus. Yes sir, I have reasons and authorities both support me therein. Orthodoxus. Let us first hear your reasons? Lycanthropus. With very good will: wherein first from the like, I do reason thus. The good Angels of God, they have appeared to men in assumed bodies: therefore spirits and devils, they may also appear unto men in assumed bodies. Orthodoxus. Your argument is faulty; the same not consisting of things essentially alike in every respect. Tob. 8. 3. 2. Pet. 2. 4. Jude, 6. Revel. 20. 1. 2. Otho Casman, Angelograph. par. 2. cap. 5. Quest. 1. pag. 272. For, neither have the infernal devils▪ those heavenly privileges which the celestial Angels enjoy: neither yet are they equal with them in knowledge and power. So as, although the good Angels do sometimes assume to themselves essential bodies: yet doth it not necessarily follow, that therefore, the evil Angels or devils are able to do the like. Again, howsoever the good Angels have (at some time) assumed essential bodies: yet doth it not appear, and yourself cannot prove, that they created those bodies themselves, but by the provident power and appointment of God, they had them from else where for that special service whereunto they were sent. Moreover, there is no sound consequence in this, viz. Good Angels, they do visible appear unto men in assumed bodies: therefore evil Angels they do the like. This I say doth not follow: because of the good Angels appearing in visible bodies, we have had often and manifest experience, but of the evil Angels appearing so, no example or instance at all can be given. Briefly, your argument is but a deceivable Elench, Aposse, ad esse. from a may be, to the being indeed: whereof no certain conclusion can follow. For thus you reason. Good Angels have appeared to men in assumed bodies: therefore spirits and Devils they may also appear unto men in assumed bodies. This your (may be) concludeth nothing for certain. Whereas you should have argued thus. Good Angels appear in assumed bodies, therefore spirits and devils do appear unto men in assumed bodies: but then your consequent would have been overhard to prove, and besides that, it is the very question itself. By the premises than it is very apparent, that this your first reason hath in it no reason at all to support your opinion. Lycanthropus. But, sith it is certain that the good Angels do oftentimes appear in assumed bodies: why should not spirits and devils be able to do the like? Orthodoxus. As though, because the omnipotent God doth furnish and endow his heavenly messengers with sensible bodies, when and so oft as seemeth good to himself: therefore, every impotent and infernal spirit or devil is able also, to do the like at their pleasures? Lycanthropus. Why may not the Lord do as much for spirits and devils? Orthodoxus. The Lord may do whatsoever he please: that it will be his good pleasure to do this which you dream of, who can certainly say? His pleasure in the one hath been made apparent unto us by often experience: for the other we have neither word nor promise, nor example, to my remembrance. Exorcists. Yes, Psal. 78. 49. there is a plain proof hereof in the Psalms: where David saith plainly that the Lord powered forth the fierceness of his wrath upon the Egyptians, by sending his evil Angels among them. Orthodoxus. What understand you by the evil Angel there? Exorcists. Those spirits and devils wherewith they were daily tormented. Orthodoxus. Consider diligently the story concerning the Egyptian plagues, Exod. 7. etc. and 8. etc. and 9 etc. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mittendo nuncios malorum. Psal. 78. 49. Tremel. ibid. and tell me where you find any one devil afflicting them: nay, tell me what one plague was among them, which was not inflicted upon them by the message and ministry of Moses and Aaron. And therefore, you are deeply deceived in mistaking these words, by sending the Angels or messengers of evils. Which place, Tremellius understands not of spirits and Devils sent among them: but of Moses and Aaron rather: whom the Lord sent to the Egyptians as his only Angels, that is, the only messengers and executioners of all those his evils which were cast upon Egypt. And, this sense is (in my opinion) according to the purpose, coherence, and scope of the Psalm itself. Lycanthropus. But, it is as Exorcists saith, in the vulgar translation? Orthodoxus. It is true, and therefore let it so stand as he saith, for evil Angels: I mean, for spirits and devils. But, now tell me withal, how much this place doth make for the assuming of bodies by spirits and devils? Thus you reason. The Lord sent his evil Angels among the Egyptians: therefore, spirits and devils they assume to themselves what bodies they please. This consequent hath in it no sequel at all: and it is quite contrary to the words of the text. For David saith not that the Lord sent his evil Angels essentially into them, but among them, I mean the Egyptians: which proveth nothing for Satan his assuming of bodies. Exorcists. But yet, Genes. 3. 1. we have a notable example concerning this point, from the devil his tempting of Eva in the serpent. Orthodoxus. Well, go to, frame your argument. Exorcists. I frame it thus. Satan he did put upon him the body of the serpent, and spoke very sensibly in that self-same serpent therefore, spirits and devils they can and are able to do the like with any body else whatsoever. Philologus. Master Orthodoxus? this argument I believe will set you hard? Orthodoxus. Not so hard as you think, by then the ambiguous terms are opened more plainly. And therefore, do tell me here, what you mean by satan his putting the serpent's body upon him? Exorcists. I mean this: namely, that he did really and essentially enter into the very essence and substance of the serpent itself. Orthodoxus. Then it must follow by necessary consequence, that the devil himself did essentially become the serpent in deed: or the serpent essentially the devil at least, during the whole time of that action. Lycanthropus. Yea, what else? Orthodoxus. Do you ask me what else? I ask you for answer, whether your heart be so deeply bewitched with blindness, as you cannot perceive the absurdity hereof: it being so apparently evident to all the world? For, is it possible think you, that the devil should be able utterly to annihilate the essential being either of himself, or of any other creature under the heavens? Or, is it likely that satan can cause himself to be a devil or no devil: and the serpent to be a serpent or no serpent, when, and so oft as it pleaseth himself? If this were certainly so, what one creature in all the world could any long time continue in that proper estate wherein it was first created of God? For, the devil hath will and malice enough to do mischief, if he had but that absolute power to accomplish the same. Moreover, from satan his assuming of the serpent's body alone, you do plainly conclude an absolute power in devils over all other bodies else whatsoever: and so, from one particular example you do cunningly gather a general conclusion thus. Satan, he did essentially assume the body of the serpent: therefore, spirits and devils can essentially assume what bodies they please. This argument is utterly untrue in every part. For first, whereas I plainly deny that the devil can so essentially assume a body, the which thing you should prove: Petitio principij yourself by a pitiful begging of the cause in question, do take it as granted, and thereupon, would prove the same by the same, Idem, per idem. attributing also to the devil such an absolute power therein as is utterly impertinent to any creature, and thereby also you do highly derogate from the divinity and power of God. Secondly, your argument also is faulty, in that it concludeth more largely than was put down in the premises: namely, from one particular practise of satan it concludes an absolute power (as was said) over all bodies whatsoever, which is a deceivable kind of reasoning. For, albeit we should grant (which will never be proved) that satan had for that once, some special previledge granted from God, and did thereby also, essentially enter into the very essence of the serpent as yourself suppose: yet doth it not follow, that therefore spirits and devils they can also essentially assume to themselves what bodies they please. Howbeit, to the end we may the more directly and plainly proceed, do tell me whether it was the devil alone, or the serpent alone, or the devil and serpent together, that gave the onset upon Eva in that temptation? Philologus. It could not be the devil alone: for he is not named at all in the action. Orthodoxus. If he be not named at all in the action: how comes he then to be charged for the principal author in that self-same action? Exorcists. In other places of scripture, Wised. 2. 24. joh. 8. 44. his malice that way is mightily tainted, and himself accused for a murderer from the beginning: although in the history of Euahs' tentation he be not precisely named any author at all. Orthodoxus. Yea, but how can those places of Scripture, in any sound reason impose the blame of the action upon satan himself: if neither absolutely, nor properly nor historically, nor Allegorically, nor metaphorically, nor any ways else he be specially named in that very history of Euahs' tentation, wherein the action itself with the several circumstances is fully and plainly expressed? Exorcists. Moses (you know) doth not set down the story of the Bible at large: but only compiles the same in a summary abridgement. Orthodoxus. But, that action especially being so weighty a matter, was necessary to be known in every point: and therefore it is not to be doubted, but that the history concerning the same is so exactly set forth with every circumstance, as that any man may be able to judge of the principal actors therein at the least. So then, although the devil in that history be neither absolutely, nor historically, nor properly expressed by name: yet must we acknowledge him to be therein allegorically and metaphorically set forth at the least, or otherways impose no blame upon him at all concerning the action. Lycanthropus. Yes, even by that self-same story he is allegorically or metaphorically set forth in the serpent. Orthodoxus. Then was it no natural serpent, but the devil himself metaphorically set forth by the name of a serpent: who gave the onset upon Eva in that tentation. For, by allegories and metaphors there is evermore some other thing meant; then that which is literally expressed. Lycanthropus. But yet for all that, the serpent is said to have tempted Eva. Orthodoxus. That is, the devil alone metaphorically set forth (as you say) by the name of a serpent: was he that tempted our grandmother Eva. I prove it thus. If in that action, the devil himself be not historically and properly, but allegorically and metaphorically called a serpent, because he is most crafty and subtle, then undoubtedly, the objection of a serpent is very inconvenient: but, the antecedent is true, and therefore also the consequent. Exorcists. Prove your antecedent. Orthodoxus. I wil Isa. 11. 6. Am. 4. 1. Math. 3. 7. Luc. 13. 32. Apoc. 12. 3. 4. 5. and 13. 1. 4. 11. and 20. 2. First (besides that which you grant yourself) it is an accustomed thing in the sacred scriptures to use the names of other creatures in setting forth to our sense, the intellectual creatures themselves. Hereupon it is, that (in the Apocalypse) the (devil by a perpetual allegory) is called a dragon or serpent: and therefore in this history of Euahs' tentation by the like perpetual allegory he is also called a serpent. Secondly Moses (in that action) doth purposely entitle the devil by the name of a serpent: 2. Cor. 11. 3. because (by his effectual creeping into the interior senses, as also, by infecting men's minds with venomous persuasions) he doth very lively represent the nature, disposition, and qualities of the venomous serpent. Genes. 3. 1. Thirdly, the serpent that tempted Eva in paradise, is there said to be more subtle than every beast of the field: the which (if Philosophers writings be true) cannot be truly avouched of the natural serpent. For there are many other creatures more subtle than she: & therefore, it must needs be meant of the spiritual serpent. Gen. 3. 1. 3. Fourthly, Moses doth therefore purposely attribute speech to the serpent which tempted Eva: to the end we (knowing by experience, that speech cannot properly accord with a natural serpent) might the rather be induced to believe that the same must metaphorically be understood of the spiritual serpent, Fiftly, Gen. 3. 14. 15. the punishment inflicted by God, hath no conveniency at all with the natural; but with that infernal figured serpent the devil. For, neither can the going upon her belly, nor the eating of dust be any punishment at all to the natural serpent; because (before the tentation) both those properties were peculiarly allotted unto her, Serpens, a serpendo, Isidor. de summo bono. lib. 3. she taking her name from her creeping condition. Neither yet may we imagine that the said serpent (being of some better form before the tentation) was then (by the just judgement of God) transformed into a viler proportion, Gen. 1. 25. 26. property, or shape: she being in the history of the creation accounted among the creeping creatures. Lastly, Moses he makes no mention at all of the serpents coming to Eva about that business, nor of her departure after the action, nor of any one special property whereby she might be essentially discerned to be (in deed) a true natural serpent, no nor of any manner amaze, or sudden fear in Eva at her sudden approach & extraordinary speech: Exod. 4. 3. whereas yet Moses himself, was afterwards horribly afraid at the only sight of a serpent. So then, by all the premises it is very apparent, that it was the devil himself and no natural serpent, who set upon Eva in that tentation, he being only metaphorically set forth by the name of a serpent: and therefore had no need in that action, essentially to assume to himself the body of a natural serpent, for the better accomplishment of the intended business. Exorcists. Sir? if by the only name of a serpent, you will needs metaphorically understand the devil: Gen. 3. 1. 14. how then should some of the words in that story accord with the nature of satan? As, where it is said that the serpent was more subtle, and was cursed above all the beasts in the field: and that she should go upon her belly, and eat the dust of the earth all the days of her life. Can any of these things be properly applied to the devil? Was the devil before this, of an Angelical nature: and must he be marshaled now, with the brute beasts of the field? Hath satan a belly to go upon now: being but lately an incorporal creature? Feedeth the devil now upon the dust of the earth like a creature that lives by natural nourishment? or, hath he the days of his life determined now: being not long since an immortal substance? These speeches you see, they cannot be properly applied to the devil: and therefore absurd to say it was satan, metaphorically let forth by the serpent, who set upon Eva alone in that tentation. Orthodoxus. You gallop away with the matter as if you were certainly sure to get the goal: Tho. Aquin. in 1. part. summa, 1. quest. art. 10. Amand. polanus in Syllog. Thess. de verbo Dei Didascalia, pag. 54. Aug. ad Gen. lib. 11. cap. 1. but, take heed to your footings for fear of a fall. And seeing you urge me so strictly with the literal sense, do here tell me I pray you, whether all things set down in that history, can (in any literal sense) be possibly applied to a natural serpent? If not, why them should it seem strange unto any, that the most points in that action be allegorically expounded? Howbeit, to be silent myself; you shall hear what Augustine and some others do say concerning these matters. judg. 9 8. 9 etc. When any thing (saith he) is found in the Scriptures which cannot (without an absurdity) be possibly interpreted literally: that thing without doubt, is spoken figuratively, and must receive some other signification than the bare letter doth seem to import. Gregorius in moralibus. For (saith Gregory,) when the order of the history becometh defective of itself in the literal sense, G. Alley in his poor man's library, 189. Pet. Martyr, in Gen. 3. 1. then, some mystical sense as it were with wide open doors, doth offer itself: yea, and that mystical sense must be received in steed of the literal sense itself. And therefore (saith Peter Martyr,) that malediction or curse which the Lord did cast on the serpent, must be allegorically understood of the devil: and those things which seem properly to accord to the serpent in deed, must metaphorically be transferred to satan understood in the serpent. Aug. ad Genes. lib. 11. cap. 9 And according to this infallible rule, Augustine himself he putteth a plain difference between the Lord's speech to Adam and Eva, and that which he gave to the serpent, affirming the first to be literal, and the other allegorical: because else (saith he) it should seem absurd to offer a vocal speech unto a bruit beast without understanding. Aug. lib. in Gen. contra Manich. And accordingly he gives an allegorical sense concerning that action, saying: Only, that temporary punishment of Satan is here set down, Tho. Aquinas 2. 2. quest. 165. artic. 2. which ought to be a watchword and terror unto us: and not that eternal vengeance which is reserved for him in Hell against the general judgement. And therefore, where it is said. Thou art cursed above all the beasts in the field, there the very bruit beasts (to the horrible confusion of satan) are preferred before him; not in absolute power, but in an especial regard of that happy continuance and timely conservation of their original nature. For, the beasts of the field they do not forego any heavenly happiness which they never yet had: but they continue forth their course in that self-same primary estate which they took at the first. Again, whereas it is said, upon thy belly shalt thou go: Gregor. moral. lib. 20. the meaning is, that Satan should creepingly prevail against such as are carried headlong with carnal affections, which is meant by the belly. Again, where it is said, thou shalt eat the dust of the earth all the days of thy life: the meaning is, that such only as delight in earthly desires, should become an appointed pray for the devil, while the world doth endure, which is termed the days of his life. By this than you see, that those things in the story which are thought properly to appertain to the serpent: may yet (in an allegorical sense) be fitly transferred to the devil understood by the serpent. The rest of the matters are so pertinent to satan himself, Genes. 3. 1. 4. 5. 15. as (without great violence done to the text) they may (at no hand be applied to the natural serpent: and therefore, for any thing hitherto heard, the devil (in giving the onset upon Eva) he had no need at all, essentially to insinuate himself into the body of a serpent, sith he might by himself alone, very sufficiently accomplish that work. Pneumatomachus. Do you hold it for truth, that the devil (in that action) did not use the ministery of the serpent at all. Orthodoxus. What I do hold therein, shall hereafter be heard. Only, (because yourself do so confidently insist upon satan his essential assuming of the serpent's body at his tempting of Eva) I have here (as it were by the way) very apparently proved, that (for any thing you are able to propound to the contrary) the devil he might easily effect that work by himself alone, without any help of the serpent, as you have heard by the former authorities, and may yet have the same further confirmed by Cyril himself. Cyril. lib. 3. contra lulian. Apostate. Who doth flatly affirm, that the serpent was no true and natural serpent in deed, but only the form and shape of a serpent: under which the devil himself did talk with the woman, and wherein also he did undergo the curse of God denounced upon him. And I pray you, what absurdity, impiety, offence, or inconvenience were it at all for any to hold that Moses (under the person of a poisoning serpent) did metaphorically set forth the devil himself who poisoned Eva? Apoc. 12. 9 Math. 3. 7. and 12. 34. From whence comes it else that the devil is called a viper or serpent, and his children the generation of vipers? but from that first description which Moses makes of him in this self-same action? There are none so gross (I suppose) as to dream that the devil is a material serpent: nor any so mad, as to imagine that the wicked are the the generations of snakes and vipers according to the literal sense? Briefly, let this action concerning Euahs' tentation be conferred exactly with that description and dealing of satan set down in the Apocalypse; Apoc. 12. 3. 4. 7. 10. 12. 15. 17. and tell me who will not conclude, but that it was the devil himself metaphorically set forth by the serpent that tempted Eva. And in consideration hereof, he is there purposely called not simply a serpent, Apoc. 12. 9 and. 20. 2. but that old serpent: which name itself is afterwards exegetically expounded by the devil and satan, who deceived the world, and was a murderer from the beginning. Philologus. If it was no serpent (as you say) but the very devil himself that tempted Eva: why then is he not called by his proper name in some part of the history concerning that action. Orthodoxus. It was undoubtedly the devil himself that tempted Eva: Tremel. in Gen. 3. 1. joh. Calvin. in Gen. 3. 1. Reginald Skot, in his discovery of witchcraft, lib. 17. pag. 537. whose name (saith Tremellius and others) was purposely concealed by Moses, in an especial regard of the simplicity and rudeness, of that present people, to whose slender capacities he sets forth the matter in form of a Tragedy: producing the Lord, the serpent, the man, and the woman, as actors therein, to the end our weak understandings might be the more sensibly informed concerning that matter. Howbeit, because in the history of the creation there is no particular mention of Angels or spirits: therefore the proper name of the devil is here especially concealed, Pet. Mart. in Gen. 1. 1. and himself is metaphorically described under the serpent, lest, they (hearing in that action, of some spiritual substance unheard off before) might happily have a window set open to profane curiosity; Tremel. in Gen. cap. 3. 1. and so, either fall into gross Idolatry, or run with the Manichees, into the palpable error concerning two sundry beginnings, or creators of things. By all the premises than it is very apparent, that (notwithstanding the contrary opinions of some) I should commit no absurdity at all, in avouching that Satan himself alone gave the onset upon Eva: In Reginald. Skot his discovery of witchcraft. having some special reasons, the testimonies of fathers, yea, and the opinion also itself very authentically privileged in our English church by public authority. Lycanthropus. Notwithstanding your authorities and reasons whatsoever, I will never be persuaded that the devil alone did set upon Eva. Exorcists. And surely (whether the devil alone or not) I will never believe it was the serpent alone that did it: both, because serpents and snakes could never properly speak, joh. Calvin. in Gen. 3. 15. and for that the enmity which was put between them two and their seed, may not possibly be understood of the snake and her brood. Orthodoxus. The common received opinion is, Magist. sentent. lib. 2. distinct. 21. that it was the devil and serpent together: whereunto also I do willingly subscribe: Partly, in an especial regard of two other places of Scripture, which seem to incline to that sense: Isa. 65. 25. and partly also, 2. Cor. 11. 3. for that (in the original) the very name of the serpent importeth so much, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 she being called, nachash, of nachash, or nichesh, that is, to divine, or to charm, Signifying thereby, that the devil (according to the very purport of the name itself) did (as it were) so bewitch, Aug. lib. 14. de civitat. Dei, cap. 11. and so charm the serpent, as that (through his crafty suggestion) she was very well able to propound such a divination or soothsaying, Moses Barcephas, de paradis. lib. cap. 27. as did presently cirumvent and deceive our grandmother Eva. But go to, let it be granted that the devil and the serpent together gave the onset upon Eva: & now tell me in what manner they wrought? Lycanthropus. In this manner. First, the devil he entered essentially into the serpent: and then after, he used the serpent's tongue, to set the temptation an end. Orthodoxus. But, how do you certainly know that the devil did essentially enter into the serpent? Lycanthropus. How do I know it? even by the apparent effects thereof: for, how came it to pass that the serpent did speakeunto Eva? Orthodoxus. Could not the devil apply the serpent's tongue to his purpose; unless he did first essentially enter into her? Lycanthropus. No, how is it possible he should? Orthodoxus. Why? how doth a minstrel make his pipes to sound what he please? doth he essentially creep first into the bag itself, and then tune the pipes to his purpose: or doth he only dispose the sound by his breath? Philologus. What, how now Lycanthropus? I believe you have heard such a fit of mirth, as if you dance after the same but a while: your opinion concerning the essential assuming of bodies will be driven out of doors. Lycanthropus. Not so, For howsoever a minstrel might (by his breath alone) be able to cause the pipes to squeak, yet could he never distinguish the notes unless with his fingers he kept the several stops: howbeit, spirits and devils are incorporal creatures, having neither fingers nor hands, nor any member else to frame the words. Orthodoxus. Well then, thus much yet you confess by the way, that a minstrel by his only breath may cause the instrument to give forth some sound: howsoever unable to distinguish the tunes. Go to, what say you to the trumpeter: 1. Cor. 14. 7. he useth no help of any one member at all to distinguish the sounds save only his breath: and yet, only therewith he causeth so certain a sound, as every one that hears him, can tell what is played or sounded. Now then, if it be possible for a reasonable man, thus to apply a dead instrument at his pleasure to serve his turn without any essential creeping into it: why should it be deemed impossible for an intellectual power or devil, to apply to his purpose the tongue of his living instrument, (the serpent I mean) in the tempting of Eva, without any essential entering into her at all? And therefore, let us hear other reasons of more weighty importance or otherwise, put an end to this present discourse, Lycanthropus. The Angel he assumed essentially the body of baalam's Ass, Numb. 22. 28. and did sensibly speak in that self same body: therefore, spirits and devils they can also assume essentially such natural bodies, and work in them the like natural actions. Orthodoxus. How know you it was an Angel that spoke in the Ass? Exorcists. There needs no manner of doubt to be made thereof: for Lyra, Martyr, Zanchius, Casmannus and many other beside do jointly affirm it. Orthodoxus. Because those learned men do jointly affirm it, you therefore imagine their said affirmation to be such a threefold cord as cannot possibly be pulled a sunder. Eccle. 4. 12. We are not sworn unto men, but unto the infallible truth of lesus Christ: and therefore (seeing no one warrant for that their affirmation) I am greatly induced to doubt of the truth thereof. The reasons why I differ from them, are these. First, by the very text it is plain, that the Lord himself he opened the mouth of the ass. Numb. 22. 28. Secondly, Moses (in that place) putteth not down the word Elohim, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which although it signifies God, yet sometimes also it is used for Angels: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but he hath only the word jehovah there, which word (throughout the scriptures) is never attributed to any but the Lord himself. And therefore, sith the text doth avouch that only jehovah himself did open the mouth of the Ass: I see not how any man should dare to affirm that the same was done by the Angel. Besides that, the very coherence and course of the history doth plainly conclude that the Angel (spoken of there) could not possible do it in such sort as yourself doth imagine. Num. ●2. 22. 24. 26. For, that Angel (standing thrice in the way with a sword drawn in his hand, to encounter with Balaam who road on the ass.) could not essentially speak in the Ass, and essentially also stand in the way, at one, and the self-same instant: unless haply you imagine that the Angels they have a peculiar power to be in sundry places at once. And therefore (whatsoever yourself, or those learned men may affirm to the contrary) I perceive not as yet, how it should be an Angel that spoke in the Ass: but rather the Lord himself by an immediate power, Numb. 22. 31. by which power he opened also the eyes of Balaam himself, before the face of the Angel. Exorcists. Though the Lord himself was the efficient cause of opening the Ass' mouth, yet might he effect that work by the Angel's means: and so the Angel (notwithstanding all this) he might ministeriallie speak in the Ass. Orthodoxus. What the Lord might have done therein, we all do know: what he certainly did therein, neither you yourself nor any are able to say. In like manner, the Lord might also by the Angel's means have opened the eyes of▪ Numb. 22. 31. Balaam: but he did not that, as the text doth plainly declare, & therefore neither the other. Besides this, the Lord (at that very instant) did otherways employ the Angel three several times in the way, with a sword drawn in his hand to encounter with Balaam: and therefore, he would not use his ministery this ways which yourself doth imagine, neither could the Angel at that instant time, be essentially inherent in the Ass' belly, unless haply you do hold an ubiquity in Angels, which only is proper to God. But, be it granted that the Lord, (not immediately) but by means of the Angel did speak in the Ass: and then, do tell me withal, how and after what sort the Angel effected that speech. Lycanthropus. Even by entering essentially, first into the very essence of the Ass' body: and then next, by disposing and tempering her tongue to that special purpose. Orthodoxus. If you confidently hold that the Angel did essentially enter into the very essence of the Ass' body: then do you likewise conclude that the Angel also was essentially converted into the Ass, and that Baalam withal did ride, and gallop, and spur, and strike, and brawl with the Angel all the while he was upon the Ass' back, which were absurd to imagine. But tell me Lycanthropus, are you still in this mind, that the Angels cannot possibly speak by the tongue of a brute beast: unless they be before essentially inherent within their bellies? Lycanthropus. So do I verily think. Neither may we imagine that the Ass herself could possibly either frame, or understand such a sensible speech as was uttered there; because a reasonable speech cannot possibly be framed or understood of any but of a mind having understanding & reason. Whereupon it followeth necessarily, that the self-same speech (being so sensible and reasonable) could not possibly be framed by the Ass: but by the Angel essentially inherent within the Ass. Orthodoxus. Well, sith you will needs transfer this miraculous and immediate work from the Lord himself to the means, I mean, to the ministery of the Angel as yourself doth suppose: Let it be freely granted that the Angel (indeed) did frame that sensible speech in the mouth of the senseless Ass, as by a fit instrument appointed of God for that special purpose: and yet this I avouch withal, that the Angel did not ministerially effect that sensible speech by any such essential insinuation as yourself doth imagine: but by an only effectual operation, as I have showed before. Briefly, this sensible speech (if you will needs attribute the same to the Angel) might, and was also effectively accomplished by some powerful operation of the Angel, without any such needless essential entrance into the Ass: as by the simile of a minstrel or trumpeter we did illustrate before. And hereunto also acordeth the judgement of Lyra: Lyra in Glos. or ordinar. super. Num. 22. 28. whom yourself alleged of late, saying. Those sensible words were framed, neither by the Ass alone, nor by the Angel himself essentially inherent within the Ass: but by an effectual operation or power of the Angel, directing and disposing the tongue of the Ass to deliver such sensible speech, for the further confusion of Baalam himself. And therefore, this reason (you see) is of little, or no force at all: to fortify your fond opinion of the devil his essential assuming of true natural bodies. Exorcists. Though this place doth not directly prove, that the devils may assume and essentially enter into a true natural body, because no such thing is apparent in this action of the Angel, from whence the proof itself should be brought: yet doth it plainly conclude, that the devil (by means of a true natural body) may deliver a sensible speech, because some such thing we find here effected by the good Angel of God. Orthodoxus. If I should tie you strictly to the words of the text, you could find no such speech delivered by the Angel at all, but only by the immediate power of the Lord, who himself alone, did open the mouth of the ass, as was showed before. Howbeit, you yourself (foisting in here by the way this cunning conceit) do covertly go about (I perceive) to alter the state of our question which consisteth only of the devil his essential assuming and entering into bodies. Pretermitting therefore to discourse here, of the devil his sensible speaking by the means of a true natural body until we come to entreat of actual possession: Do now say what you can for the question in hand, or presently give over the same. Lycanthropus. Satan he essentially assumed the dead body of Samuel departed, 1. Sam. 28. 14. yea and appeared and spoke sensibly in that self-same body: therefore spirits and devils they can also assume to themselves some natural bodies, and perform in them such natural actions. Philologus. Well said Lycanthropus, this argument I verily suppose, will hold Master Orthodoxus very hard to his pings. Those other before were drawn from the good angels of God, who are able to do more than the devils by much: and therefore, no sound reason may be concluded from them to the devils, who wanting like privileges, are also far unequal to them in wisdom and power. But, this argument which you make now from the person of satan himself I believe is a toucher, and such a one as is able to drive Master Orthodoxus to all his shifts. Pneumatomachus. Believe me sir, it is a soaker in deed: and therefore, what say you unto it? Orthodoxus. Being such a toucher as Philologus affirmeth; I would not willingly touch it, for fear of being defiled with the folly thereof. And therefore (letting it lie soaking a while in the suds of your idle conceits till the main force thereof be wasted away with the wetting) I do here tell you by the way for an answer: It is generally and judicially determined by the whole church of God, yea and the marginal note in your bible doth likewise avouch, that it was not Samuel himself that appeared, but the devil forsooth in samuel's likeness. Which being certainly so, do now tell me what substantial consequent can possibly arise from your antecedent, it being so false and unsound? Lycanthropus. Let the church and marginal notes conclude what they please: I have the plain text on my side which saith it was Samuel, and unto that will I stick. Orthodoxus. You say you will stick to the text. Very well said, hold you fast to the words of the text: and then tell me which way you will prove it the devil himself essentially in samuel's body who appeared to Saul? There is no mention of the devil in all that story: neither doth the text say it was samuel's body, but Samuel himself that appeared. Exorcists. Though the devil be not nominally expressed in the story, yet there be many things in the story itself which do implicatively unfold his nature unto us, 1. Sam. 28. 6. and which can have relation to none but himself. Exod. 22. 18. Namely, first the Lord having refused before to give answer to Saul by living Prophets: Leuit. 19 31. & 20. 27. it is unlikely he would answer him now by the dead, Deut. 18. 10. having especially forbidden the same by his word. And therefore, not Samuel himself: 1. Sam. 28. 14. but the devil in samuel's body appeared to Saul. Act. 14. 15. Again, he that appeared did suffer himself to be worshipped of Saul, Apoc. 19 10. and 1. 22. 9 which thing neither Samuel, nor any good Angel in heaven would have permitted, and therefore it was the devil in samuel's body. 1. Sam. 28. 19 and 31. 6. Moreover he which appeared told Saul that, the next day (being slain) he should be with him: 1. Chro. 10. 13. 14. but Saul was a reprobate, and could not be with Samuel in heaven, M. Perkins in his treatise entitled, How far a reprobate may go. and therefore by all the premises it is very apparent that it could not be Samuel himself, but must needs be the devil in samuel's body who appeared to Saul. Orthodoxus. As though, because some things in the story are hardly correspondent to Samuel: therefore forsooth it must needs be the Devil and none other. There be as many other things in that story which at no hand may be applied to the Devil, but do more fitly accord unto Samuel: and yet dare I not from thence, so confidently conclude, that therefore it was Samuel himself that appeared. 1. Sam. 28. 11. 12. 14. 15. 16. 20. As first, the scriptures throughout that whole story do say it was Samuel himself, not the Devil in samuel's body: but if it were not Samuel in deed, the text should report an untruth, and offer great injury to Samuel in naming the Devil so oft by his name. 1. Sam. 28. 15. Again, he that appeared, complains unto Saul for being wakened: but Devils (being spirits) do never sleep, and therefore not the Devil, but Samuel himself appeared to Saul. 1. Sam. 28. 19 Again, he that appeared, did truly prophesy the death of Saul and his sons the very next day: but this the Devil could not do, he having no sound foreknowledge of things: neither would he have done it, for he is a liar and the father of lying, joh. 8. 44. and therefore, not the Devil but Samuel himself did appear. 1. Sam. 28. 16. 17. 18. 19 Briefly, he that appeared, told such a tale unto Saul, as the Devil himself (unless he were mad, or had purposed utterly to overthrow his own kingdom) would never have told: and therefore, by all the premises it is very apparent that it was not the Devil, but must needs be Samuel that appeared to Saul. Exorcists. Notwithstanding all this, some of the old fathers suppose it was the Devil that appeared to Saul. Orthodoxus. They do so: but let them, or some of you show me how he appeared to Saul? Lycanthropus. He appeared essentially in samuel's body. Orthodoxus. The text declareth no such thing at all: and it tells us plainly, it was Samuel himself, not the Devil in samuel's body. Lycanthropus. You yourself alleged even now, the consent of the Church and the marginal note, to prove it the Devil in samuel's likeness. Orthodoxus. The likeness of a thing is not the thing itself: and therefore, if it was the Devil, only in the likeness of Samuel, than not the Devil essentially in Samuel his body. And so, this example (you see) concludeth no essential assuming of bodies by either spirits or Devils: which was the very main point for the which you produced the same. Lycanthropus. Howsoever you press me with the sway of reason, I do yet confidently hold it to be the very devil himself in samuel's body. Orthodoxus. I wonder you will be so confident in impossibilities. 1. Sam. 25. 1. For Samuel he died in the year of the world's creation, In Chronograph, Laurentij Codmanni. three thousand, sixty, eight, and Saul he was slain in the year three thousand and seventy: so that there were full two years and better between samuel's death, 1. Sam. 31. 4. and these desperate dealings of Saul. joh. 11. 39 Now then, if Lazarus body (lying but four days dead in the grave) was subject to stinking: the body of Samuel lying dead three hundred and thirty days at the least, must much more be subject to corruption and rottenness. And therefore, how is it possible the devil should essentially assume to himself the body of Samuel: Math. 24. 31. it being before consumed in the earth? 1. Thes. 4. 16. Surely, this your opinion as it avoucheth a resurrection of bodies before the general judgement: joh. 5. 21. 28. so it ascribes to the devil an absolute power of raising dead bodies which only is proper to God as was showed before, 1. Cor. 15. 22. 38 and the marginal note may tell you withal, that the devil hath no power over the dead. Besides that, if it were samuel's body in deed: than it was so either with, or against the Lords will. Against the Lords will it could not be, because he is omnipotent, Rom. 16. 20. and able even to tread down satan under our feet: and with his will, it would never be, for it is unlikely the Lord should suffer the body of so blessed a Saint, jude. 9 to be defiled at all by the devil especially after his death. August. ad Simplicianum. Moreover, how should the death of the godly be justly termed that long lasting sleep wherein (by the ordinance of God) their bodies must rest till the general judgement: Item, ad dulcitij quest. if the devil hath power to awaken, Tertul. lib. de anima. Chrysost. in Math. and to raise them up at his pleasure? yea, and how can the faith of the godly (concerning the continuance of their bodies in the dust of the earth) be a certain faith: job. 19 25. 26. if the devil can essentially assume their said bodies from the earth at his pleasure: Phil. 3. 20. 21. Briefly how is it certain that death doth dissolve our bodies from s●ne and corruption, Phil. 1. 23. and that the blessed which die in the Lord do cease from their labours: Apoc. 14. 13. if the devil hath power to raise up our bodies at pleasure, and can cause them to labour afresh, and use them as fit instruments in his devilish and sinful proceedings? And therefore do cease for shame, to hold any longer that it was the devil in samuel's body who appeared to Saul. Lycanthropus. If it was not the very true and essential body of Samuel in deed: what was it I pray you that appeared to Saul? Orthodoxus. I will tell you what some fathers affirm concerning this matter. Eccle. 46. 20. lesus Syrach, lustinus Martyr, justin. Martyr. contra Trypho●em. Tertullian, Tertul. in lib. de anima. Ambrose, Ambr. in Lu●. I. lib. cap. 1. and Jerome Hieron. in Isa. cap. 7. they do every of them very confidently conclude that it was not the very true body of Samuel in deed which appeared to Saul: Decretal. quest. 26. cap. 6. but only a mere fantasy, deceit and illusion of satan, for the better effecting of his tyrannous purpose intended to Saul, whom he knew the Lord had rejected. Yea, the very decretals also, do flatly determine, that it was not samuel's body at all: but some ghost or fantasy, deceitfully offered to Saul by satan his devilish devise. Nec mirum. Lavaterus, of walking spirits There be others again who do as confidently hold that it was Samuel himself miraculously raised up by the power of God, of very purpose to intercept the witch's intent; Aug. ad Simplic. quest. 3. Item, in epistola ad Felicianus. who went about to raise up a devil in samuel's likeness, by such means to satisfy Saul his importunate and earnest desire. But this her purpose (say they) was prevented by God: Lyranus in 1. Sam. 28. who (refusing to have the truth of that accident delivered by satan,) did therefore extra ordinarily and miraculously raise up Samuel, Burgensis, in Replieator. ad Lyram, ibid. to discover the truth of the matter to Saul. Briefly, there be others who do verily think it was neither the devil alone, nor Samuel alone, neither yet the devil and Samuel together: Reginald Skot in his discovery of witchcraft. nor any fantasy, ghost or other illusion of Satan, but a mere cozenage and a cosining trick of the witch at Endor. 1. Sam. 28. 11. Who (pretending an absolute power to have raised up whomsoever Saul should have named unto her) neither did, nor possible could cause any visible apparition at all: but only juggled with Saul himself, he being without, and she close in her Celestina, or playing some legerdemain at the least behind a cloth, no sensible vision appearing at all to the King. Thus then, having briefly delivered men's several opinions concerning this point: you may deliberately confer them with that which is spoken before, and thereupon embrace which pleaseth you best. Pneumatomachus. Good sir? give us your own censure concerning these sundry opinions of men. Orthodoxus. I neither dare, nor will undertake the censuring of any. Only, if you simply desire to hear what myself (in an only regard of our question) do esteem of their judgements: then this I must tell you concerning the first opinion. Namely, that (howsoever it be granted for truth) it serves not your turn; for, it denies the apparition to be Samuel in deed, but rather a mere illusion of Satan. Touching the second, it is that (you know) which I argue against: and therefore (by their leaves) I descent from the same, till that which I have said, be considerately answered. As for the last, howsoever it be new, and therefore may haply seem strange unto some, yet if yourselves (without prejudice, and with a single respect to the truth) would but deliberately peruse that privileged discourse to the full: you might happily perceive it a very probable opinion, how pregnant soever in proof. Philologus. Nay, that opinion I disclaim above all the rest, for it denieth there was any apparition at all: whereas the text saith plainly that Saul knew it was Samuel, and bowed himself. Is it likely that Saul would bow unto nothing? Orthodoxus. He bowed to as much as he saw, which was nothing at all: as may easily appear if you but carefully examine the confused conference between him and the Witch. For saith she (being labouring alone in her Cell, 1. Sam. 28. 12. ) oh, thou hast surely deceived me, 1. Sam. 9 2. for thou art Saul: which she might and did know very well, howsoever she dissembled the same for the present. Well, 1. Sam. 28. 13. go to (saith Saul) be not afraid: for what seest thou? As if he should say, I myself do see nothing as yet, that thou needest to fear. 1. Sam. 28. 13. O yes saith the Witch, I see Gods ascending up out of the earth: as though she had brought up a number of dead saints. 1. Sam. 28. 14. I do not yet behold any saith Saul: but go to, what fashion is he of, for I myself see no fashion of any appearance: Yes (saith the Witch) an old man cometh up leapt in a mantel. 1. Sam. 28. 14. As though either Samuel had been buried before in his mantle: or the devil he had had his Weavers and Tailors at hand to have wrought him a new one upon the sudden. Well, now (saith the text) Saul knew it was Samuel: 1. Sam. 28. 14. that is (by this her description) he thought Samuel had appeared to her, although he saw nothing himself, and thereupon he bowed to a phantasied Samuel. Lycanthropus. But sir? if nothing appeared in truth, how then was the conference afterwards performed to Saul? Orthodoxus. That was cunningly delivered by the Witch alone in her Cell, Hippocrates, Epidem, lib. 5. sentent. 58. joh. Goraeus, in definite, medicine. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. she being a cunning Ventriloquist, as all Pythonistes are: who can very hideously speak in the bottom of their bellies with an hollow counterfeit voice, and therein by practice she was very expert. Philologus. Lycanthropus? we verily thought this last reason would have stricken all dead: but now being come to the rifling) I perceive it is not worth a rush. Believe me, I wot not what to say in the matter. Lycanthropus. Neither do I myself I assure thee. Orthodoxus. Well then, having answered your arguments concerning the devil his essential assuming of bodies: Let us now hear your several authorities if you have any. Lycanthropus. I have authorities some. Howbeit, either such as are answered before: or such as do but barely propound without any proof: or such at the least as yourself by your subtle new coined distinction of essentially and effectively, will easily shift over. And therefore, I had as leave they lay still: as rise up and fall. Orthodoxus. Let them rise up, or lie still at your pleasure for me. Howbeit, to the end yourself and the rest do not unjustly surmise that I seek to shift over your forces by subtle distinctions, yea, and those also, such as I have newly coined myself: I am therefore very well willing the master of sentences determine this point if it please you to hear him, and so may you see, the distinction is not new, but renewed. Exorcists. You shall do us all a very great favour therein. Orthodoxus. Mark then, Magister sentent, lib. 2. dist. 8. quest. 4. and you shall hear him at large. This also saith he, is worthy due consideration: namely, Whether spirits and Devils corporal or incorporal, do substantially enter into the bodies of men, and essentially slip into their minds: or whether only they are therefore said to enter into men, for that (by the permission of God) they do exercise in them, the force and effect of their malice by oppressing and vexing them, or by haling them headlong into sin at their pleasures. Math. 8. 28. Marc. 5. 1. Luc. 8. 28. That they enter into men, and (being expelled perforce) go out of them again, the Gospel doth plainly declare: affirming, that Devils (being entered into some) were cast forth by our Saviour Christ. Howbeit, whether they entered into them substantially, or rather, were said to be in them effectively, there lieth the point, Gennadius in definite. Ecclesdogmatum. Aug. de definite. Orthodox. fidei cap. 46. and the same is not yet apparent unto us. Gennadius entreating hereof, saith thus. We believe not that the Devils by an effectual operation, do substantially or essentially enter into the mind: but rather, by an effectual application, and by a violent oppression are nearly united unto them. For, essentially to slip into the mind, is only possible for him who alone created the mind: who (subsisting of his own nature, and being also incorporal) is capable alone of his creature. Lo hereby (saith he) is insinuated unto us, that serpents and Devils do not essentially slip or enter into the minds of men. Beda in like manner, Beda in Act. 5. 3. upon that in the Acts, where Peter said to Ananias, why hath Satan filled thy heart, writeth thus: It would be thoroughly considered that nothing can replenish or fill up the mind of a man substantially, save only the creating Trinity, who (according to the operation and instinct of his own will) doth alone replenish, and satisfy the mind with all things created. Aug. de spiritu de anima, cap. 27. Howbeit, Satan also, he filleth the heart of a man, not by entering substantially into the man, or into any his senses, neither yet by insinuating himself essentially into his heart: for that power, (if any such be) appertaineth only to God: but, by crafty and fraudulent guile, he draweth the mind (through a malicious effect, and by his sugared charms) into a whirlpool of evils, and by that means he filleth the heart. Thus far he. Wherein you may plainly perceive, that this Distinction was not newly coined by me, but concluded of old: and that also I avouch no more in this matter, than others have affirmed before me. Philologus. Believe me sir, this jumpeth in every respect so pat with your proper opinion: as a man might justly imagine the one had begotten the other. But, are there any more of this mind? Orthodoxus. Yea, Chrysost. in Math. 4. 6. chrysostom, he saith, the Devil compelleth not by force, nor essentially toucheth any, but saith only, cast down thyself backward. For suggest he may, but compel he cannot. And therefore saith Lyra, Nich. Lyra, in Marc. 9 15. the Devil he is called a deaf and a dumb spirit: not formally, but effectively, in that by a powerful operation, he maketh men deaf and dumb. For, Torment or vengeance saith Musculus, Muscul. in Psal. 23. 4. is only in God's hand, and not in the hand of the Devil. The Devil hath in deed a ministery: but no arbitrary power. Now then, the ministery, it consists not of an absolute authority: but of a subjecteth servitude. Gregorius Moral. llib. 2. And albeit saith Gregory, the depraved will of Satan be ever unjust, yet his deputed power is never unjust: because, although he hath a will of himself, yet hath he his power only from God. And therefore whatsoever he desireth to work unjustly, that (if at any time he effect it) God permitteth most justly. So then the Devil ought never to be unjustly feared: because he is unable any further to deal than he himself is permitted. Briefly, Hermes Trismegistus, in suo periandro. Hermes Trismegistus very confidently avoucheth, that, an human soul cannot receive any other than an human body: neither yet can it light into a body that wanteth reason of mind. From whence we may argue thus. If an human soul be capable only of an human body: then also an human body is capable only of an human soul, and so by consequence uncapable of an essential Devil: but the first is true, by Trismegistus his judgement, Reginald Skot in his discovery of witchcraft pag. 508. and therefore also the latter. And in very deed (seeing Satan's assaults are spiritual) why should we imagine (saith Skot) that the Devil who is a spirit (and therefore invisible and insensible) can be sensibly seen, known, perceived or felt essentially of a natural man? Or that he should (contrary to his nature) become corporal: being by God's appointment, ordained and created to a spiritual proportion? They that do thus understand things spoken of the Devil according only to the literal sense; they may as well conclude, judg. 9 7. etc. that trees (in times past) did call a parliament, speak one to another, and choose them a king by mutual consent. Thus then, these and many others (you see) do jointly conclude concerning this point. Physiologus. These are sufficient to satisfy such as are not wilfully wedded to their wills. Pneumatomachus. Surely, for my own part, I rest fully satisfied. Philologus. And for my part also I am quite out of doubt. But Lycanthropus, you told Pneumatomachus & me (in the beginning of this our present discourse) that, if this argument (taken from the devil his assuming of bodies) would not suffice to prove an essential possession of devils: you had another in store that would trouble Master Orthodoxus more than this doth, by a thousand fold. It were good you propounded the same. Orthodoxus. Very true. And therefore, if you imagine you have something in store which may make more for your purpose: propound it and spare not. Lycanthropus. This than it is. Spirits and devils they can essentially transform themselves into any true natural body: and therefore they can also essentially enter into the possessed man's body. Orthodoxus. What? are you fled on the sudden from assuming of bodies, to the transforming of bodies? your store than I perceive is not great, and it seems you are almost drawn dry. Howbeit, because the handling of this point will crave a large discourse: Let us therefore break off for the present. And having with some small pittance refreshed ourselves: then will we confer hereof to the full till dinner be ready, if you like of the offer. Pneumatomachus. Sir, we like whatsoever you feel best for yourself, and therefore respect your own health: and we three in the mean time will repair to our Inns: and after will meet you afresh. Orthodoxus. Nay surely, as we have jointly joined together in spiritual repast: so will we not sunder ourselves, in our corporal sustenance all the while our controversy continueth. And therefore, if you do like the thin diet of scholars; let us in God's name, go all together. Philologus. It is much to troublesome unto you and chargeable both: but, sith you will have it so, we will all iontly attend on your person. Orthodoxus. Let us then arise and depart. The end of the fourth Dialogue. The fifth Dialogue. THE ARGUMENT. Whether Spirits and Devils can essentially transform themselves into any true natural body? And how those places of Scripture are to be taken, which many produce for that purpose? The speakers names. PHILOLOGUS. LYCANTHROPUS. PNEUMATOMACHUS. PHYSIOLOGUS. ORTHODOXUS. EXORCISTS. Orthodoxus. Sigh nature (by the good blessing of God) is something refreshed, let us now (for a while) keep close in my parlour, with full purpose to proceed in our conference till dinner be ready: and then after, walk forth in the air, to recreate our spirits. Physiologus. With very good will: and therefore linger not the time, but, go an end in your purpose. Orthodoxus. Go to then Lycanthropus: repeat your argument. Lycanthropus. I repeat it thus. Spirits and devils, they can essentially transform themselves into any true natural body: therefore, they can also essentially enter into the possessed man's body. Orthodoxus. Prove your antecedent. Lycanthropus. What sir? do you flatly deny, that the devil can essentially transform himself into what body he please? I am fully resolved to hold this point, whatsoever be said to the contrary. Orthodoxus. Your unreasonable resolution, is unto us no reasonable conclusion: neither is the question between us, what you will hold, but what you are able to prove concerning this point. And albeit I doubt nothing at all, but that you (for your own part) will hold very much till it comes to the pinch: yet, we hope you will change your purpose, if once you be made to perceive, that none but yourself are of this opinion. Lycanthropus. Yes sir, all the world (I am sure) jumps pat with me in this point: and very certain I am, I shall gain your consent to the same in the end. Orthodoxus. Howsoever you seem confident in the common consent of the world; your gain (I assure you) is not like to be great, by any such a supposed grant, as you haply imagine from me. Lycanthropus. Will you not grant, that devils may essentially transform themselves into what bodies they please? Physiologus. Master Orthodoxus? let me answer this point if you please. Come on Lycanthropus, what is the thing you would have granted unto you? Lycanthropus. Why this, namely, that devils may essentially transform themselves into a true natural body. Physiologus. Such a grant, we may yield you at no hand, because, even Philosophy herself is flat opposite to it: who will never admit any such a confused participation of essential forms. For, as essence itself is impartible, and undevidable, or rather a certain incommunicable, and singular matter: so surely (the essence and unity of things being preserved entire) essential forms, they cannot possibly be cnumonicated, transferred, or passed over from that substance itself whereof they are forms, into any other substance or matter, to give the same also, an essential form. Because, not only the constituting, forming, or framing: but even also, the destruction of substances, doth essentially arise from the form itself. And look whereunto there is given a form convenient, and proportionable to one only essence: thereunto also must necessarily be given, an undoubted true essence. Because, a proper form is the principal part of essence. yea, ●orma dat esse. (and as some learned Philosophers do flatly affirm) it is the whole essence or nature of the thing itself. And therefore if spirits and devils be (at any time) essentially transformed into men: then do they forthwith cease (for that time) to be spirits and devils, and may truly be said to be men. Lycanthropus. I do not well conceive your meaning. Physiologus. I will further explain it thus. If there be any such essential transforming of spirits and devils into men, as yourself doth imagine: then undoubtedly, that self same essential transformation, it is, either according to the body alone, or according to the body and soul together. If, according to the body alone, than that self same transformed body, it should (at one, and the self same time) become, both the body of a man, and the body of a devil: which were to to absurd to imagine. If, according to the body and soul together, then either the whole man (both body & soul) must be essentially transformed into the very essence and nature of a devil: or, the devil, he must needs be essentially transformed into the very natural body and soul of a man at the least, which none but madmen will ever affirm. Again, if that essential transformation be effected according to the body alone, then, howsoever that self same body be not (for the present) the body of a man, but is wholly transformed into the very essence and nature of a devil: yet, the soul of that man must either be forced to forsake his own body, and so bring present death to the body itself, because death, is nothing else but the dissolution of soul and body; or else, the same soul, it must necessarily pass from out of it own body, into the very essence of a devil, and so by consequence, there must needs be a mere confusion of spiritual substances: or, two essential forms in one and the self same body at once, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. which were absurd to avouch, and utterly impossible by any created power to be ever effected. Lycanthropus. Let Philosophy be opposite, or what she will, very certain I am, the devil can essentially transform himself into any true natural body. Physiologus. What man, will you (in deed) oppose yourself to true Philosophy? then I perceive, you respect not at all the operations and powers of nature. But go to, let master Orthodoxus hear what one reason you have (in true divinity) to manage your said resolution. Lycanthropus. What one reason quoth you? why man, the devil, he can essentially transform himself into an Angel of light: 2. Cor. 11. 14. therefore, how much more into any true natural body? Orthodoxus. You are mightily misled herein, by mistaking the word metaschemarizetai: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theophil. in ●. Cor. 11. 14. johannes Calvin ibidem. johannes Calvin in job. 1. 10. Danaeus, in Enchir, Aug. cap. 60. pag. 202. That is to say, he transmuted, transfashioned, transfigured, transformed, or metamorphozed himself into an angel of light. Wherein the Apostle purposeth nothing less, then to prove that the devil is really, essentially, or substantially incorporated or changed into an Angel of light: for then, he could (in deed and in truth) be no longer a devil, but must necessarily become (in deed) an Angel of light. Howbeit, the Apostle he laboureth (by that self same word) to shadow forth unto us after a sort, the wily practises, and cunning proceedings of satan. Who, when he intendeth most deeply to cirumvent and deceive the sons of men: then he pretendeth the most religious, and the holiest shows of all. Exposing in all outward appearance, the holy affections, sincerity, and zeal of the holiest Angels of light. For, Aug. de civit. Dei lib. 2. cap. 26. unless the malignity of satan be slightly and cunningly covered his deceivable purpose, is seldom, or never effected, This, (I assure you) is the very true natural sense of the Apostles speech. Exorcists. Men may surmise a sense to themselves, and therewithal, may writhe the Scriptures which way they lust, like a nose of wax. We stick fast to the plain words of the text, which do tell us plainly, that satan is transformed into an Angel of light. Orthodoxus. Barren brained fellows (having nought to say for themselves) they eftsoons are enforced to writhe the scriptures like a nose of wax, for salving their credits. As for myself, I seek no windings or turnings at all, but (by God's grace) am ready so sound to establish the sense I have given: as yourself (with all your endeavour) shall never be able to wrench or to writhe the same from our purpose, the breadth of one hair. And herein (by the way) I must thoroughly advise you of the Apostles main scope concerning that scripture: which was, to display the crafty preposterous pack of those counterfeit Apostles, who laboured to bring the Apostle his ministry into public contempt among the Corinthians. And this they endeavoured to do, by preaching freely among the Corinthians without any maintenance at all. Intending thereby (if Paul likewise continued his former course, of preaching freely among them) either to weary him out quite for want of maintenance: or, to make his ministery odious among them at least, if (being driven by necessity) he should afterwards receive a maintenance from them, for the necessary supply of his present wants. The Apostle (perceivisg this their pestilent purpose) he laboureth very carefully with his own hands, Act. 20. 34. and (receiving the supply of his wants from other Churches) he accepteth of the Corinthians, 1. Cor. 9 15. no penny maintenance. Not because he loved them not, 2. Cor. 11. 13. 14. 15. but for that he would cut away occasion from those false Apostles who desired occasion: that they might be found like unto him, in that wherein they rejoice. As if he should say, these false Apostles who preach freely among you, they go about (by a wonderful show of holiness) to insinuate themselves into your favours: and to discredit my ministery by what means they may. Notwithstanding (howsoever they dissemble their devilish pretence) this I dare show you for certain, 2. Cor. 11. 13. 14. 15. that they are (in deed) but deceivable workers, and do cunningly transform themselves into the Apostles of Christ, Neither, let this thing seem strange in your eyes, for Satan their master, he also is transformed into an Angel of light: and therefore, no marvel at all though his ministers do transform themselves, as though they were the minist●●● of righteousness. This (I assure you) is the Apostles main purpose, and the very apt coherence of all his speech: from whence I do reason thus: Satan is so transformed into an Angel of light, as his ministers are transformed into the Apostles of Christ. But, his ministers are not essentially transformed into the Apostles of Christ: therefore, neither is Satan essentially transformed into an Angel of light. Exorcists. Howsoever you argue the case, we cleave fast to the words of the text: which flatly avoucheth unto us the transformation of Satan. Orthodoxus. Who ever denied him a transformation? the question is only about the manner thereof. You hold that Satan is essentially transformed: and I affirm that he is only transformed effectively. Now, whether of both have the truth on their side, that will better appear by the conference of this one, with some other places of scripture, where the self same word (or a word to the like effect) is also used. As for example. The Evangelist he saith that Christ in the mount, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Math. 17. 2. Marc. 9 2. was transfigured among his Disciples: must we hereupon (in an only regard of that word) very absurdly and grossly imagine that Christ was essentially changed into some other substance or nature? No, but that he was rather made there most resplendent in glory. Again, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 12. 2. the Apostle forbids the Romans to fashion themselves to this world: and wills them withal, to be transformed. But how, essentially into any other substance, or natural being? Nay not so, but effectively into some other more sacred qualities, by the renovation of their inward mind. Again, we behold (saith he) in a mirror, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. Cor. 3. 18. the glory of the Lord with open face: and are transformed into the same image from glory to glory, as by the spirit of the Lord. Wherein, his meaning is not, that we are essentially transformed into the very image of God: for, so should he very shrewdly confirm that folly of the family of love, which holdeth that men are deified in God, and that God also, is hominified in men. But his purpose is, that we (by the operation of the holy spirit) should proceed and grow (by degrees) from glory to glory, until we be truly conformed unto the similitude of that same glorious image of God wherein we were first created. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Neither is the particle (as) purposely put down by Paul, to note the impropriety: but rather, to express unto us the manner of that transformation, as if he should say thus. Even as in times past, Moses his face (through that conference which he had with the Lord in the mount) became resplendent in glory, like to the shining of a glass by the object of the sun: so surely, our minds also, they are affected every day with secret grothes of grace, and do proceed from glory to glory, through the inward familiarity of the holy Ghost, who worketh invisibly in every of us, that self-same glory, which in process of time, will be made apparently evident. Briefly, in another place, and to very like purpose, he useth the self-same word, saying thus. Now, these things (brethren) I have transferred, or figuratively put over to myself and Apollos. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. Cor. 4. 6. Not meaning that he and Apollo's were essentially transformed into the very substance of those schismatical teachers who troubled the Church of Corinth: but, that be only (concealing the schismalikes names) did figuratively apply and put upon himself and Apollos, their persons rather: that so lie might the more in offensively censure their schismatical courses. Now then, by all these places it is more than apparent, that the words in the text cannot possibly conclude any essential transforming of Satan, into an Angel of light. Lycanthropus. Conclude what you please: yet will I at no hand be persuaded, but that the devil can essentially transform himself into the very substance of an Angel of light. Orthodoxus. Even as readily (I warrant you) as the priest can transubstantiate bread and wine into the very natural body and blood of Christ. If you be able thoroughly to prove this transformation of devils, you may pleasure the papists with an unanswerable argument for their popish transubstantiations: and surely, they should therein be highly beholding unto you. But, until yourself and they do sensibly demonstrate unto us, how two substantial forms may possibly be inherent (together and at once) in one and the self-same subject, Simul, & semel and that also, without confusion of substances: say what you can for your matters, we will believe you alike. In the mean time, let us hear some sounder reasons concerning this point: or put an end to our speech. Lycanthropus. Whether the reasons be sound, or unsound, it makes no great matter. It hath been taught for an infallible truth from age to age, that devils can transform themselves essentially into what substance they please: and therefore (for my part) I unfeignedly believe and subscribe to the same. Orthodoxus. Antiquity (how gray-headed soever) hath no authority at all to privilege error: Veritati non preiudicet antiquitas. and therefore, you are over rashly to resolute in settling your faith upon such an inveterate dottage. Physiologus. Master Orthodoxus, do rest you a while, and let me argue this point a little. Come on Lycanthropus, you do believe (you say) that Devils can transform themselves into what substance they please: what is your reason hereof? Lycanthropus. My reason is this. They can form bodies: therefore also they can transform bodies. To deny them an absolute power herein; were to yield less unto devils, than we do unto men. For a Tailor (we see) he is able of a piece of cloth, to form a gown: and able also to transform the same into, either a cloak, or a coat. Physiologus. You have forgot (I perceive) what was taught you of late. Aug. lib. 3. de trinit. cap. 8. Namely, Danaeus physical christiana, cap. 18. that the work of creation is only proper to God, and beyond the power of devil or angel: pag. 94. and yet now again, you will have the devil if not a creator of substances, Psal. 33. yet an Artist at least, job. 26. very skilful in forming and transforming of gowns and cloaks: Isa, 45. which I believe would trouble both him and the Tailor, if they had neither cloth, Act. 17. 24. nor other stuff to form them upon. But, go to, prove that the devils are able, essentially to form, or transform true natural bodies. Lycanthropus. I prove it thus. Exod. 7. 11. 12. and 8. 7. The devil was able (by the Egyptian sorcerours) to transform their rods into serpents: and therefore, he is much more able to do the same by himself. Physiologus. Forbearing a while to answer directly the very point of your argument, I must tell you this by the way that (through such an inconsiderate reasoning) you dangerously make the devil, a very free agent, in forming and transforming of bodies. Howbeit (letting these oversights slip) do tell me whether those your supposed serpents (made by the sorcerours) were true serpents in deed: or serpents only in outward appearance? Philologus. They were true serpents no doubt. Physiologus. If serpents without doubt, as you say, then were they such, either necessarily: or contingently. Pneumatomachus. Nay, not contingently, but necessarily such: or no serpents at all. Physiologus. If necessarily serpents in deed, then, tell me whether they were such by a natural: or supernatural necessity? Lycanthropus. What mean you by a natural necessity? Physiologus. By a natural necessity, I do here understand the necessary beginning or cause of motion and rest, in every such natural thing as nature itself is especially inherent in by itself alone, and not by accident. So that, this natural necessity, is (you see) some certain secret power, not perceivable by sense, but by understanding alone: yea, and the same is so thoroughly instructed of God by a secret instinct, as, it is able (of itself) to supply an essential being (with other natural faculties) to every corporal substance: whether element, stone, herb, tree, lion, horse, eagle, woolhe, man, beast, or any other like natural essence. Now then, do tell me whether they were true serpents in deed, by such a natural necessity? Lycanthropus. Yea, even by that self same natural necessity. Physiologus. Then undoubtedly, they were such, either by the orderly or the unorderly course of nature? Lycanthropus. Such they were, even by an orderly course of nature. Physiologus. Then did they also consist upon true and orderly beginnigs: namely, upon true matter, and form. Lycanthropus. They consisted of true matter, and form I warrant you. Physiologus. Do you warrant me? A wise man would even blush for shame, to avouch such palpable and gross absurdities. Know you not, that the orderly course of nature in her ordinary producing of living creatures, is only and altogether by generation? And, dare you then thus boldly affirm, that a sorry twig or rod of a tree, was such a true natural matter, as that, from thence might possibly have been produced some natural serpent; in any orderly course of nature? Again, could any true lively form of a natural serpent, be possibly given to the twig of a tree: by any possible power of either angel, or devil? Indeed, the devil, and those his Egyptian sorcerers (if they had so much spare time at that present (they might then I confess) have cunningly carved or cut out from a piece of wood, Aug. contra ●elicianum cap. 7. some lineament all fashion, figure, Damaeus physica christiana, cap. pag 58. proportion, or shape of serpents, and very skilfully have cast the same into a serpentine colour: howbeit, such a form kind of serpents (both for matter and form) had only been artificial, and accidentary, but neither might that matter nor form of theirs, have truly been said to be natural. Lycanthropus. Let matter and form be whatsoever it will: true serpents I am certain they were. Physiologus. How certain soever you are, they could not possibly be true serpents indeed, in any orderly course of nature: as you have hitherto heard. For then also they must necessarily have had their true matter and form very certain within themselves: and the same also, very absolute and constant by nature. Even as we see the self-same matter and form of a dog, an horse, a bird, a man, or a serpent, which was at the first creation: the same continueth (in an orderly course of nature) certain and constant now at this present, to the end of the world. But, these your supposed serpents, they had no such true matter and form at all in themselves: and therefore no true serpents indeed, in any orderly course of nature. Lycanthropus. Then were they such in an unorderly course of nature: for, true serpents I am sure they were. Physiologus. True serpents (you say) you are sure they were, and yet can you not possibly show how they should be such, except (as you now confess) by an unorderly course of nature: which unorderly course is nothing else in effect, but an error in nature declining from the true matter and form itself in producing her work. Thus then, you conclude at unwares, that they were no true serpents indeed, by any orderly course of nature: but, either miracles, or monsters in nature, preposterously, produced in an unorderly course of nature itself. Howbeit, miracles you may at no hand avouch them to be: because neither sorcerer not devil could ever work miracles. And, even in that very point also appeared the difference between Moses his serpent, and theirs: it being supernaturally effected by the miraculous power of God: theirs being subtly exhibited by some crafty legerdemain between them, and the devil. Neither yet may you justly affirm them any monsters in nature. For then (howsoever nature herself had failed in producing the work) they should yet have had in them naturally, their true matter and form of true natural serpents which they never had: and therefore no monsters at all in nature. So then, sith those your supposed serpents could not possibly be true serpents indeed, neither by any orderly nor unorderly course of nature: it followeth consequently, that they were not serpents by any natural necessity. Lycanthropus. Then were they such by some supernatural necessity. Physiologus. What mean you by that? Lycanthropus. My meaning is, that they were form true natural serpents, by some supernatural and secret work of the devil himself. Physiologus. You are grossly deceived, for the devil never had supernatural power: neither could he ever have form true natural serpents, Aug. de trinit, lib. 3. by any supernatural skill whatsoever. Because, a corporal substance (such as true serpents are) was never at any time so much subjecteth under the power of the devil, as that he was absolutely able (of himself) to transpose the said corporal matter to any true natural form: no surely, such an absolute power is only, and altogether reserved to God. That the devil himself hath no such supernatural power, I prove it thus. In all such natural bodies as are compounded of matter and form, neither is the matter by itself, nor the form by itself, but the whole composition is wholly form together: and therefore, the whole is whol●e transformed into the whole. As for example, the whole air is wholly made fire: Philosophus in libro de generatione. so soon as the said airs is converted to fire. Besides that, the effect is evermore like to the agent, and in that self-same agent, doth effectually preexist at the least. And therefore a natural body compounded of true matter and form, cannot possibly be produced, but by such an agent, as is, either itself compounded of the self-same matter and form: or hath otherways, that whole composition in his own proper power. But, a Spirit, or Devil is only a simple form, not having in himself, Lucas Lassius, in evangelia dominicalia, fol. 505. any material part of such a bodily substance, neither hath he (at any hand) the same in his proper power: for, the Lord only, and he alone hath an absolute ability of producing such matter and form. And therefore, by any operation of the Devil there cannot possibly be form any such a natural body as is compounded of true matter and form: no, although every thing in nature, continued entire and sound. But the essential transforming of a rod, into a very true serpent, doth implicatively include an essential body compounded of true matter and form by a natural production: and therefore, impossible the same should be truly accomplished by any operation of the Devil whatsoever. And so by consequence, those your supposed serpents compounded of rods, they are (in deed and in truth) no true serpents at all, but sleights of legerdemain. Licanthropus. If they were not true serpents in deed: why then doth the scripture term them serpents? Physiologus. Because, howsoever no serpents in substance, yet being undoubtedly such in an outward appearance: the scriptures do purposely term them according to the acceptation of Phaaroh and all the Egyptians. Lycanthropus. Yea, but how could they possibly be seen such in appearance, not existing at all in a true bodily substance: or how could Aaron his rod devour them, they having no essential being at all? Physiologus. I do freely confess there might (at that present) be seen true serpents in deed, but withal, I do flatly deny, that the sorcerers rods were essentially transformed to serpents: which is the very point itself, that we argue upon. Those rods I say, were not essentially changed into true natural serpents: but only they seemed such in an outward appearance. Lycanthropus. How should there be wrought a transformation in outward appearance: and no change in substance at all? Physiologus. Yes, such an appearance might easily be performed of Satan, by sundry means. First, Philosophus de anima, lib. 2. because (notwithstanding the present removing of sensible things, there might still remain fantasies and imaginations within the head) it may be, that the very sensible and earnest beholding of Aaron his rod, essentially transformed to a serpent before, did (by reason of the undoubtednes) take in the beholders so deep an impression, as that thereby only (through some local motion of sensible things remaining in the imaginative faculty, together with the humours themselves wherein they were seated as in their proper subject) there might still be existing in fantasy, a very lively appearance of some such bodily substance as was not subsisting in nature at all. For, much blood descending before into the sensitive faculty, Philosophus in lib. de som. & rigil. there descends withal, many imagined forms, whereby there is forthwith procured a very lively resemblance of some such things as are not existing at all. By this means therefore (there being beforehand procured a commotion of humours, Hyperius, in method, theolog, lib. 2. pag. 311. as well in the interior, as exterior senses of all the beholders) the Devil might both inwardly and outwardly also, apply certain apparent forms to the very organa of all the senses; even as effectually, as if they had risen only from outward sensible objects: and (by such a legerdemain) might cause the sorcerers rods to seem in appearance, as though they had been true serpents in deed. A notable experiment of such deceiving of senses, may fitly be found forth in a candle of Adder's grease: which (all the while it be burning alone in the night) will cause all the rushes strawed in the parlour, to seem as if they were crawling snakes. Lycanthropus. It is incredible, that the external senses of all the beholders, should (by any such legerdemain of the Devil) have been so grossly deluded. Physiologus. Why not they, as well as the senses of all in the parlour aforesaid? Secondly, the devil might not only delude them thus by some false resemblance of serpents: but might give them withal, an appearance of true serpents in deed. For, Lyra in 1. Sanm cap. 16. 23. howsoever a corporal matter is not so freely and so fully subjecteth to the power of the devil, as that he either may, or can possibly transform the same to some other form from that which essentially it is of itself: yet notwithstanding, such a corporal matter, Magister sentent. lib. 2. dist. 7. fol. 87. both may be, and is also so farfoorth in the power of the devil as appertains to a local motion, this all men do hold. And therefore, M. Perkins in his order of the causes, 2. come. pag. 80. the devils (by their own proper power, and without any perceivance at all to human sense) they might (through some such local motion) take away with a trice, the sorcerers rods from the ground: and put in their place true natural serpents, Hyperius, in method. theolog. lib. 2. pag. 310. taken by them from else where. And, this undoubtedly they might do in a moment: through the agility and nimbleness of their own proper nature. For, even as the mind of a man (it being a spiritual substance) can easily accomplish her animal operations, and as it were with a thought: so surely, the devil (he being also a spiritual essence) he is able much more speedily to accomplish his spiritual actions, and in far shorter time. Lycanthropus. As though the devils (so covertly, and with such unspeakable speed) could convey true natural serpents in place of the rods: but some must needs have perceived the same? Physiologus. The devil (you know) he is an invisible creature. Besides that, this we see plain in our own experience, that a juggler (by means of such local motion, and through the nimble conveyance of his only hand) he can so slightly, and so cunningly convey one thing in place of another, as the beholders themselves, they do not only not perceive the legerdemain: but (which more is) they are undoubtedly persuaded, that the juggler, he hath essentially transformed the first matter in sight, into some other substantial form. Now then, if a mere mortalman (by the only nimbleness of hand) can so easily effect such admirable matters: why should we imagine the same impossible for spirits and devils? Pneumatomachus. Well sir: proceed in the pursuit of your purpose. Physiologus. Lastly, Otho Casman. par. 2. Angelog. cap. 18. pag. 533 spirits and devils (being naturally nimble and swift, as was showed before) they might (by a local motion) apply true natural actives, to natural passives: upon which application there would undoubtedly ensue like natural effects. Hyperius, in method. theolog. lib. 2. pag. 314. As for example, wood fitly applied to fire by the hand of a man: fire is forthwith engendered in the matter of wood. And yet, that fire so engendered, is efficiently engendered by the fire itself, as by a natural and proper agent: although yet withal, that self-same fire, is also ministerially effected by the very hand applying the same. M. Perkins in his order of causes upon the 2. come. pag. 80. And, even so without doubt, the devils, they might easily apply some natural matter, preexisting in a near disposition to the form of true serpents, and withal (subjecting the said matter unto some proper agent) might by such means engender true natural serpents, and unperceiveably put them in place of the rods: whereas yet, those said serpents, so engendered, were efficiently engendered by some proper agent, although withal, they might truly be said to be ministerially effected by the sorcerers themselves, as by the very hand of the devil effecting the same. Even as also the husbandman (by applying and mixing wheat with earth, may ministerially be said to bring forth the said wheat himself. Yea, and these things may spirits and devils more easily and more speedily accomplish then men may possibly do, for many respects. First, because they understand the power of natural causes, much better than men. Secondly, they are much more nimble than men, in gathering and applying those natural causes. Lastly, for that those natural causes so assumed of devils: may also by them be applied to far greater, and more wonderful effects, then possibly they can be by men. Lycanthropus You affirm incredible things. For, how could the devils possibly find either serpents, or any other matter in a near disposition to serpents: for that so sudden an engendering and placing of true serpents in place of the rods? Physiologus. I speak not incredibly at all, if you rightly consider (as you ought) that the devils were especially assisted herein with a towfold power: namely, with the power of nature: and with the power of obedience. Lycanthropus. What mean you by the power of nature? Physiologus. None other thing else, but that divine action of nature, wherein the Lord God from the world's beginning, doth (of true matter measurably compounded by a determinate agent, & through a local motion effected also in time) even voluntarily procreate some certain determinate effects. Now then, the ordinary assistance of this self-same natural power, doth ordinarily befall to men, to spirits and devils in all ordinary and natural productions of forms: so far forth especially, as they (by a natural knowledge) are able rightly to comprehend, compound, and apply the same. Yea, and the assistance of this self-same natural power, was not wanting at all to the devils, in those their appearances of true natural serpents, as was showed before. Lycanthropus. And what mean you by the power of obedience. Physiologus. I understand thereby, Pet. Martyr in in Gen. cap. 30. 33. fol. 125. that extraordinary subjection wherein all things (without determination or repugnancy) do even readily submit to the will of God, as to the only supereminent sovereign over all causes, forms, and effects whatsoever. This self-same power of obedience, not only the Lord himself (immediately, and with no preexistence of matter almost) doth exercise by himself alone even from the beginning: but even hourly also by holy men, and by good Angels and devils doth administer the same. Hieron. ad vitalem. Non valet natura, contra naturae dominum. So that, whensoever the Lord commandeth any strange action (surmounting the ordinary power and course of nature) to be forthwith effected, then doth he extraordinarily take up the aforenamed persons, as the only fit instruments of that his divine, and supernatural power. Now then, this power of obedience, albeit the same doth not ordinarily attend upon the pleasure and beck of men or of devils: yet, the devils undoubtedly they had at that present (by some secret privilege from God) the extraordinary assistance also thereof, in those self-same appearances of true natural serpents. Yea, and this also according to the secret decree and counsel of God: who (having predetermined the destruction of Phaaroh) did, by this means harden his heart, Exod. 7. 13. and so made a passage to the timely execution of his judgements upon Phaaroh himself, and all the Egyptians. Exorcists. Notwithstanding these two presupposed powers assisting the devil in those your supposed appearances, me think it is clear by the text itself, that the Sorcerersrods were truly transformed to serpents: and I argue it thus. If those rods were no true serpents, but serpents only in an outward appearance, then is not that true which is set down in the text: Exod. 7. 12. namely, that the sorcerers, Likewise they cast down their rods, and they were turned into serpents. Physiologus. I answer you thus. It is undoubtedly true whatsoever is set down in the text: and may very well stand with that which I say. For, be it it supposed, the Sorcerersrods were turned (as you say) into serpents, yet were they not truly so turned; I mean, they were not existingly, but appearingly turned into serpents. And this distinction is very fully borne forth by other words in the text; Exod. 7. 11. which affirm, that the Egyptian Sorcerers they did (in like manner) by their enchantments. Where you may plainly perceive the particle of (likeness) purposely put down, to set forth the difference: as if he should say, the Sorcerers they did the very like in show, although not in substance. For mark I beseech you: there is in that text, both the manner and means of their working, precisely put down. The manner of their working, was by a likeness of serpents in an only appearance: the means of effecting that work, was the Sorcerers enchantments. From which words of the text, I may reason thus. A like cause argueth a like effect. But the Sorcerers enchantments (which are altogether deceivable, false, and standing only in outward appearance) were the very efficient cause of that likeness: therefore, the effect, I mean, that likeness itself, must needs be deceivable, false, and only exist in an outward appearance. Thus then, the case itself being (by all the premises) apparently evident: I will now return at the last, to answer your main or principal argument, which was this in effect. Satan (by the Egyptian Sorcerers) transformed rods into serpents: therefore, he is much more able to do the same by himself. This (I must tell you) is a false and deceivable argument, Petere principium. For first, in your antecedent you do shamefully beg the cause in question before it be proved: and now, when it comes to the trial, it is not able to hold the hammering. Again, your consequent also is false, for, therein you do make the devil a very free and absolute agent, in transforming of bodies as well without, as with means at his pleasure, which only is a power peculiar to God: whereas the devils can accomplish nothing in nature, but by natural causes and means, no more than the Carpenter can frame an house without fit matter and instruments to work withal. So then, both parts of your argument being apparently false: you cannot possibly conclude from thence, any power in the devil, for an essential transforming of bodies. Lycanthropus. Well sir? Howsoever you pass over this argument, taken from the sorcerers rods transformed to serpents, and all this (forsooth) by a pretty distinstion of a thing in existence, and of a thing in appearance: yet have I one argument more, which you shall never be able to avoid with that cunning devise. Physiologus. Let us hear that irrefragable argument: for, hitherto you have afoorded us none that needs any great cunning in answering. Lycanthropus. Nabuchadnezzar (it is very well known) was essentially transformed into an ox: Dan. 4. 13. therefore, the devil may easily change himself into any shape whatsoever. Physiologus. Or ever I come to answer directly your argument, do tell me how it is certainly known that Nebuchadnezzer was essentially transformed into an ox? Lycanthropus. josephus writing of the jewish antiquities, joseph. de antiq. judaic. lib. 10. cap. 11. he flatly affirms it so. Physiologus. josephus doth so I confess. Howbeit, josephus, he hath been so often discredited and tainted in other points of more weighty importance, as, the less credit is to be given him in this,: especially, the very words of the text being otherways evident, and testifying plainly unto us, that Nebuchadnezzer he was not essentially transformed at all, either in mind, or in body. Lycanthropus. Never go about to make us think so: Dan. 4. 22. for, the very text, it telleth us plainly, he did eat grass like an ox. Physiologus. It doth so in deed: and what of that? will you hereupon infer, that therefore, he was essentially transformed into an ox? That were a mad kind of inference. So coneys and geese, they do eat grass like an ox: and yet notwithstanding, they still retain their proper essential being, without any essential transformings into either oxen, or asses. Besides that, if you will wilfully insist upon any essential transformation in Nebuchadnezzer, you might with more show of sense, and better probability of reason avouch, that he was transformed rather into an eagle: both, Dan. 4. 30. because the hairs of his head (saith the text) were grown like to an eagle's feathers, and for that also, the very nails of his hands and feet, they were like to the claws of a bird. And therefore, it would be more consonant (you see) to conclude, that Nebuchadnezzer was rather transformed into some fowl having feathers and claws: then, into a beast that hath horns and hooves. Howbeit, there was in him no corporal transformation at all, but only a changed mind, for, so saith the text: Let his heart be changed from man's nature, Dan. 4. 13. and a beasts heart be given unto him. Lycanthropus. If you yield unto him a changed heart: I make no doubt at all of an altered body. For, if the mind itself which is the first substantial form in man, be transformed (as you say) to an ox: what other form or being at all can be given to the body (it being the organical parts of the mind) but only the form of an ox? Physiologus. What mean you by Nebuchadnezzer his heart transformed? Lycanthropus. I mean thereby, that his very heart itself was essentially changed into the very heart of a beast: for, so saith the text. Physiologus. The text understandeth there, Tremel. in Dan. cap. 4. 16. no real transmutation, or transformation of substance: but only an alteration, or change of qualities. Robertus Roll●cus, in Dan. 4. 16. For, there is no doubt at all, but that in Nebuchadnezzer there still remained a reasonable heart: George joy, in his Exposition upon Dan. cap. 4. 13. howsoever (by the just judgement of God for his pride) he was (for the determined time) even utterly deprived of all use of reason. Having his said heart (for the present) so plunged in beastly corruptions, and so wholly overwhelmed with brutish affections: as that (thereby) he differed nothing at all from a beast, being more blockish and senseless in human knowledge, than the very ox that feedeth on grass. So that, how honourable soever before in princely dignity, yet (having now in him no understanding at all) he is not unlike to the beasts that perish. Psal. 49. 20. Lycanthropus. If there were in his heart no substantial change at all: how could there possibly be wrought in the same, such altered, or changed qualities? Physiologus. There is nothing (you know) impossible to God. Math. 19 26. By whose eternal decree, the heart of Nebuchadnezzer was so thoroughly overtaken and tainted with such an outrageous fury, or madness, as that he (being utterly deprived of human sense) did presently depart the Court: very wildly wandering over the wilderness like to a beast, conversing (in brutish manner) among the brute beasts themselves, and leading (for the time) a very savage and beastly behaviour. Exorcists. If Nebuchadnezzer was not essentially transformed at all in body or mind, but possessed only with fury and madness, it is unlikely his Courtiers would suffer him then to converse with beasts abroad in the fields, but would rather have bound him, and kept him up close in the dark; and therefore, for any thing hitherto heard, he might be essentially transformed into a beast. Physiologus. That he was not essentially transformed at all, it is very apparent by all the premises. Why his own courtiers (perceiving him plainly deprived of reason) did not bind him forthwith, and keep him up close, but permitted him to wander wildly abroad, there was very great reason. For first, the courtiers they knew very well, and all men may see by experience that, the binding and keeping of a madman close; is so far from appeasing, as it rather doth aggravate (for the present) his furious humour: and therefore the courtiers forbore to bind him at all. Besides that, they were the more especially loath to be led to that course, because (by the revelation of Daniel) they plainly understood before, that, the lord God had determined his wandering abroad with the beasts in the field: and therefore, they greatly feared to intercept the said purpose of God, assuring themselves, that (after the determined time) he should safely return to his own kingdom again. Exorcists. But sir, if he was not essentially transformed at all, how then is it possible he should so long lie forth naked in the fields in frosts and dews; or live any time, with such unnatural diet, or, be preserved (at least) from the devouring of beasts? Physiologus. If we but consider this matter by natural reason, Hieron. in Daniel. we may find by experience, that many things (in deed) are impossible to a sound man: which yet, to a furious or mad man are not so impossible. For, fury is such and so headstrong an humour, as it maketh a man to endure and do many things; which otherways he could not possibly endure. As for example many madde-men (we see) are well able to continue in the cold dew a long time, and to be sustained (that while) with crude and raw meats: seeming also unto themselves, that they are not men, but brute beasts in deed, and thereupon also, they delight to converse with beasts, and to grow into familiarity with them, although yet, not essentially transformed into true natural beasts indeed. Pneumatomachus. Surely, this seemeth strange unto me: and I see not the reason thereof. Physiologus. The reason is this. Fury hath so highly disordered their nature, and made their minds so beastly affected, as, many things (in that their disordered state) are possible and delectable to them, which yet (in their sounder estate) were nothing so. Even as also we see by experience, that very coals or earth (to many women with child) are a very sweet and delectable diet, which yet (before then) they did loath and abhor: and all this, by reason of their disordered nature at that instant time. And, hereupon also it came to pass that Nebuchadnezzer did grow into such familiarity with beasts: namely, even by reason of that likeness of nature, which (to his own seeming) he had with brute beasts, in that his disordered state. Yea, and this also is the very natural cause, why (at that present) he was not torn and devoured of beasts: even as also we see by experience, that furious dogs, they do never hurt madmen, nor natural fools. Howbeit, Nebuchadnezzer (in his furious estate and melancholic passion) he was more especially preserved from the outrage of beasts, through a miraculous providence, and special protection of God: and therefore, his said preservation (in that self-same respect) the less admirable, and wonderful to us. Thus then (the matter itself, being manifestly apparent) I will now answer your main or principal argument: Dan. 4. 13. which was this in effect. Nebuchadnezzer he was essentially transformed into an ox: therefore, the devil may easily change himself into any shape whatsoever. This argument is many ways faulty, and halteth down right. For, first, your antecedent is utterly false, and a mere begging of the matter in Question: because Nebuchadnezzer (as you have hitherto heard) he was not essentially transformed into an ox: and therefore, this proveth nothing at all for the real transformation of spirits and devils. Secondly, if Nebuchadnezzer had been so transformed in deed as yourself doth imagine: yet, the sequel of your argument is utterly unsound: because it stands upon divers, or rather contrary efficients, namely God, and the devil. The one having of himself an absolute and indeterminate power, and therefore able of himself to work what he will, where, when, and howsoever best pleaseth himself: and so by consequence he might (if it had so seemed good in his wisdom) have essentially transformed Nebuchadnezzer into au ox. The other (the devil I mean) he hath only a finite and limited power, and therefore utterly unable of himself to accomplish any one work beyond the bounds of that power: and so by consequence, he cannot possibly transform himself essentially into any creature whatsoever, without a special power from God. Lastly, your consequent, it standeth only upon (may be) and so concludeth no certainty at all concerning the Question. Exorcists. Well sir? howsoever Nebuchadnezzer was not essentially transformed into an ox, yet this you confess, that, for seven years together, he did utterly want all use of reason: and therefore, I wonder how so renowned a kingdom could continue all that time without a governor. Physiologus. This is but extravagant and wandering speech, though yet the kingdom (no doubt) it was all that time governed by the princes and nobles, according to daniel's direction. Who fully assuring them of the king his undoubted return to the kingdom after those seven years end: the nobles either they durst not establish any other as king, for fear of being tainted with treason at his return, or else (honouring him in their hearts for his former victories) they resolved to expect his happy return with patience. Howsoever, the Lord who determined the judgement, he also prepared away no doubt, to the peaceable preservation of Nebuchadnezzer his kingly dominions. And therefore muse no more of the matter, but either speak to the purpose in hand: or, put an end to the conference. Lycanthropus. Sir, howsoever I am unable to reply upon any thing spoken: I will never believe, but that spirits and devils can essentially transform themselves into what bodies they please. Orthodoxus. I have hitherto endured your weakness in answering to any thing uttered by master Physiologus: hoping that very shame would have made you (ere now) to give over the field. Howbeit, perceiving your settled pertinacy in this your opinion, I cannot but speak: wondering withal, that you should be so resolute in that, whereof you can yield no one reason at all, but only your will. Lycanthropus. Yes sir, it is the general opinion of all men, that the devil can transform himself into any form whatsoever. Orthodoxus. Howsoever men, by tradition had received an error hand over head, Exod. 23. 2. for not looking thoroughly into it: yet may you not follow a multitude to do evil, neither agree in a controversy to decline after many, and overthrow the truth. And very certain I am, that no one sound writer, either old or new is of your mind: but rather the contrary. As for myself, I never could see any show of reason tending that way. For the Lord God, as he hath endued man, and every living thing, with their proper nature, substance, form, constitution, qualities and gifts, and directeth their wills, faculties, and powers accordingly: so hath he allotted to spiritual creatures, their own substance and properties several alone to themselves, and appointed them their laws and limits, beyond which they cannot possibly pass the breadth of an hair. And therefore, as it is absolutely against the ordinance of God, that I should fly like a bird, or swim like a fish, or creep like a worm, or become another creature in form, to that which by nature I am, insomuch, as if God would give me leave, I could not possibly do it, for it were flat contrary to his own ordinance and decree, yea, and even opposite to the natural constitution of that body which he hath created and given me: so is it undoubtedly incredible, that either a devil should be essentially transformed into a man, or a man substantially turned into a devil, or that either of both, should really change themselves into any other nature, substance, form, constitution, quality or gift, than those very same which they have by creation, yea, or that they should possibly apply those which they have, to any other end or use then that which God himself naturally decreed, and directeth them unto. Otherwise, either God should be contrary to himself which is far from him: or else those things must needs be supernatural, and so, a true miracle in whom soever. Neither yet is God's omnipotency hereby qualified: but the devil his impotency is rather manifested, and more lively declared. Who hath no further power than that which God from the beginning hath appointed unto him: and the same also consonant to his own nature and substance. The devil (I confess) may well be restrained from his natural faculties, power, and will: but (being God's minister) beyond the same he cannot possibly pass the breadth of a pin, neither yet any other ways, or further employ his endeavour, then only in that very work which the Lord (from the beginning) hath enabled him to do. Which is, that he (being himself a spirit) may vitiate and corrupt the spirit of man, and therein also he is diligent enough: howbeit for the doing hereof, he cannot substantially alter his form at all. Philologus. I have heard many very confidently affirm that the devil hath appeared to them in the likeness of a man, a cock, a cat, or a dog. Orthodoxus. Yea, but how are those confident affirmers certainly sure, that, the man, the cock, the cat or the dog, whose likeness they saw in appearance, was indeed, and in truth either spirit or devil: and not rather the Legerdemain of some conjuring Priest, or cozening companion. For, if a devil can indeed essentially transform himself into the likeness, figure, or shape of a man, a dog, a cat, a mouse, or a toad▪ why can he not also transform, a man, a dog, a cat, a mouse, or a toad into the likeness, figure, or shape of a devil, sith there is a like reason and possibility of both? Howbeit, we may not believe (saith Augustine) that, Aug. de civit. Dei, lib. 8. cap. 18. a man's body can (by any Art or power of the devil) be transformed into the lineaments of a beast: much less into the form or substance of any infernal devil. Besides that, Item, in libro de spiritu & anima, cap. 26. if spirits and devils may possibly transform themselves into an human body: then could not Christ his argument propounded to Thomas, be currant & good, where he saith, behold my hands and side, joh. 20. 27. and put thy finger into my hands, and thrust thy hand into my side: and be not faithless, but faithful. All this (how truly soever delivered by Christ) could never (in truth) have satisfied Thomas concerning the resurrection of Christ: if it be true in deed that devils can truly transform themselves into true natural bodies. For Thomas (remaining unsatisfied) might boldly have answered thus, oh sir? why do you will me to handle your hands and sides? that is no certain argument, to demonstrate unto me your rising again from the dead. Because, spirits and devils (you know) they can truly transform themselves into true natural bodies: and therefore (notwithstanding such an experimental, or sensible knowledge) you may rather be some transformed spirit or ghost to deceive me, than my Lord and my God which came for to save me. Thus than you see, that (if these essential transformations be concluded for currant) Thomas his incredulity (for any thing heard) might pass uncontrolled. joh. Bodin, de magic. daemon. lib. 2. cap. 6. None essentialis forma, id est ratio, sed figura solum permutatur. Exorcists. Though the devil cannot alter his form substantially, yet may he change the same in shape or figure, I doubt not, and such a distinction hath Bodin, saying: The essential form namely, reason itself, is not changed: but only the outward shape or figure. Orthodoxus. Bodin, he strikes it dead no doubt. For, here he maketh the devil a cunning juggler, who (by casting a mist before men's eyes) can give to spiritual substances, what outward figure and form he please. Howbeit, till Bodin be able to demonstrate truly unto us, that the devil may have power to alter essentially a spiritual substance: we will never acknowledge any possibility of transforming their shape or forms at all. Exorcists. Well, Aug. de civit. Dei, lib. 18. & cap. 17. 8 18. yet Augustine subscribes to such transformations. Orthodoxus. He doth I confess. Yea, those, and other like matters are so common in many of his works, as, I am driven to suspect they were rather cunningly foisted in by some cunning popish conjuring Priest, to credit his cozening practices: then carefully inserted by Augustine himself, to set forth a truth. Howsoever, Cardan. de vanitate rerum, lib. 15. cap. 8. I say with Cardanus, that, how many of those transformations Augustine saith he hath seen with his eyes: so many I am content (for the reverence I owe him) to give credit unto. All the rest I account but Cabalistical conceits; and no better (in effect) then foolish toys to mock an Ape. Yea, and so much the rather, Aug. de civit. Dei, lib. 18. because Augustine himself affirmeth those transformations to be but fantastical: and that they are not according to the verity, but according only to their outward appearance. Lycanthropus. Yet, such then according to outward appearance. Orthodoxus. I allow no such supposed appearances made by devils: G. Gifford in his Dialogue of Witches. Otho Casman. Angelogr. par. 2. cap. 19 pag. 561. because, I find no such power given them by God in all the scriptures. Besides that, if we admit, that devils may take only but forms, or shapes upon them, though not the very substance itself of a true natural body: yet then also Christ his argument made (else where) unto his disciples had not been sound in every point, Marc. 6. 49. Luc. 24. 39 Tertul. contra Martion. lib. 3. saying thus: handle me and see, for a spirit it hath not flesh and bones as you see me to have. Setting down visibility and palpability, as things opposite to the nature of spirits and devils: reducing his disciples (in discerning of spirits) to the judgement, first, of their eyes, and then next of their hands, and arguing thus. Aretius' in Luc. 24. 39 Spirits can neither be seen nor felt: but I may both be seen and felt, therefore I am no spirit. And then next, he reasoneth a disparatis, thus. A spirit it hath neither flesh nor bones: but I have both, therefore, no spirit. Putting down there you see) very apparent and manifest properties to separate himself in show, from a spirit. And therefore, if spirits and devils have power by any possible means, to transform themselves but into the only outward forms and shapes of true natural bodies, though not substantially transformed in deed: yet could not that which Christ concludeth, have sound established the disciples faith concerning the true body of Christ. Because they (by reason of such supposed apparitions) remaining still doubtful; might have fitly replied thus. Good sir, though spirits and devils have not substantially flesh and bones, and therefore, no true and substantial bodies: yet can they truly transform themselves into the outward shapes and forms of true natural bodies: and so notwithstanding, we may be deceived in an only outward appearance. These exceptions (you see) the disciples of Christ they might justly have made: neither (if these transformations be undoubtedly true) might Christ so sharply have blamed their unbelief. Lycanthropus. Spirits (I confess) they are not palpable, but only visible: and therefore, not the seeing (without the handling) might well have satisfied Christ his disciples. Orthodoxus. Yea, but (whatsoever you imagine of the other disciples) if you rightly way, and exactly consider the text itself with the several circumstances) you may plainly perceive, that the fault of Thomas his incredulity was secondly bewrayed and condemned: Hugo Cardinal. in johannem, cap. 20. 29. for that the durst neither credit the view taken by the other disciples, nor trust his own eyes concerning the truth of Christ's body. For (saith Christ) because thou hast seen (not because thou hast felt) thou believest. joh. 20. 29. Also, blessed are they that believe and see not: and not they that believe, and feel not. Giving thereby to understand, that our corporal eyes may truly discern between a spirit, and a true natural body: which were not true, if spirits and devils could possibly transform themselves into any visible shapes or forms of true bodies, for thereby the sense of seeing might soon be deluded. And in very deed, it is very erroneous for any to imagine that the eyes may possibly be deceived, in discerning between spirits and devils, and true natural bodies: as appeareth by sundry scriptures. Wherein Christ very sharply reproveth his own disciples: Math. 14. 26. for not crediting the judgement of their own eyes in such a case. Marc. 16. 14. Which could not (I say) be a certain rule; Luc. 14. 39 if spirits and devils can truly and essentially transform themselves into true natural bodies: or but change themselves into the true shapes and forms of such bodies. And, this (I believe) doth break the very neck of those your supposed transformations of spirits and devils whatsoever. Lycanthropus. This that you say is undoubtedly true, and yet, still me think the devil should have power, so to transform himself, either in substance, or appearance at least: although I myself am unable to render any one reason thereof. Orthodoxus. It is very ridiculous (saith one) for a man to leave manifest things, Pompanac. de incantat. c. 2. O quam credula mens hominis, & erectae fabulis aures. and such as even by natural reason may sound be proved: and so, to seek after unknown things, which, by no likelihood may be conceived, nor yet tried out by any rule of reason: but, Good Lord, how light of credit is the wavering mind of man? How unto lies and tales, his ears attentive all they can? Lycanthropus. Good master Orthodoxus? I am drawn (by the very force of your speech) into a marvelous perplexity. For when I examine the weight of your reasons propounded, I am driven to deny the transformation of spirits and devils: but, so soon as I return to the necessary consideration of my present distressed estate, then, that former new-bredde conceit is cut in the neck, and squashed quite. Orthodoxus. And why so I pray you? Lycanthropus. Surely sir, See the lively effect a melancholic humour, it being predominant. because I myself am essentially transformed into a wolf: I make no question, but that devils can also substantially change themselves into any true natural body. Orthodoxus. Very true as you say: the one is every way as possible as is the other. Lycanthropus. Why, then alas, the Lord be merciful to us: for what man in the world may possibly be free from their malice? Philologus. How now Lycanthropus, are you indeed in good earnest? do you verily imagine you are essentially transformed into a wolf? now surely, this is the oddest jest that ever I heard. Lycanthropus. Nay, nay (alas) it passeth a jest: for I find it and feel it to true by experience. Physiologus. Well said Lycanthropus, now I perceive your name was not given you for nought: it being so proportionably answerable to your fantastical nature. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Avicen. tract. 4. cap. 15. You are called Lycanthropus: that is, a man transformed to a wolf: which name is very fitly derived from the very disease itself that disorders your brain, called Lycanthropia. Paul. Aeginetus, lib. 3. cap. 15. Which word, some Physicians do translate Daemonium Lupinum, that is, a wolvish Demoniac: others Lupina melancholica, Aetius lib. 6. cap. 11. Leonardus Fuchsius instit, medec. lib. 3. sect. 3. cap. 11. and Lupina insania, that is a wolvish melancholy, or a wolvish fury and madness. And it is nothing else in effect, but an infirmity arising upon such fantastical imaginations, as do mightily disorder and trouble the brain. Lycanthropus. An infirmity say you? It is a very strange and fearful infirmity, that can so essentially transform a man into a very natural wolf? God bless every good man from such kind of infirmities. Physiologus. Had you lived in such a time, as beasts, and bears, & wolves were supposed to speak like men: it had been an easy matter (I perceive) to persuade you that you are a wolf. Lycanthropus. Yea, but how are you able to persuade me the contrary? Physiologus. That may easily be done, by describing briefly unto you, the very true nature of that the aforesaid diseases, which so fearfully affecteth your mind, with these fantastical imaginations and fond conceits. Lycanthropus. I pray you then describe it plainly unto me. Physiologus. With very good will. Wherein you must principally consider, that the very first matter which causeth Ly●anthropie, Auleen. tract. 4. de agritud. capitis, cap. 15. Phil. Barowgh. in method, physic. lib. 1. cap. 27. cap. 28. fol. 34. Leonard. Fuchs. Instit. Medeci, lib. 3. sect. 3. cap. 11. or this wolvish Demoniac: consisteth in the very self-same matter or stuff that maketh in any other man else, a melancholic humour, for either of both are melancholic persons. Howbeit, the peculiar cause itself which more especially procureth lycanthropy, is either that kind of melancholy which ariseth properly of choler adust: or that which comes of a simple and natural melancholy. Sometimes also it proceeds of an impostume of blood in the brain: but very seldom of bloudadust. Now then, that lycanthropy which ariseth only of the abundance of a simple melancholy, as it is (for the most part) the very worst of all, & therefore is called Lupina insania, a wolvish fury or madness: so is it commonly seated in the exterior parts of the brain, Avicen. tract. 3. de. apostemat. capitis, cap. 1. and hath an operation not unlike to the matter of a disease, called Karabitus, which is a hot impostume of the head, seated in the very ventricle of the brain itself, causing choler adust, and the melancholic matter very much to abound. Whose vaporous humours (vitiating and corrupting the brain,) do procure the patient unto a very deep sleep. Wherein his fantasy is fearfully troubled with the daily impression of such fearful and strange imaginations as do cause the interior spirits of the brain to wax very wild and fearful: by reason of those black and cloudy representations: which were received before in the fantasy. And hereof it is, that some unskilful Physicians, do so rashly ascribe this humorous disease to the operation of the devil: and that the ignorant people do absurdly imagine the party thus affected, to be undoubtedly possessed of devils, Howbeit, they should certainly know, that a choleric humour (so soon as an extreme adustion affecteth the same) is forthwith converted to fury or madness: neither is it then satisfied with an only simple melancholic affection. Avicen. tract. 4. de aegritud. capitis, cap. 16. This disease, it happeneth to men especially in Autumn through the maliciousness of the humours abounding, and eftsoons is increased in the spring, & in summer: yea, Phil. Earowgh. in method. physic. lib. 1. cap. 27. 28. fol. 34. & it is then the extremest of all when the north-wind blows, by reason of the dryness thereof. The signs that commonly fall forth in the beginning of this disease, are these, Otho Casman. Angelograph. par. 2. cap. 18. quest. 6. pag. 540. namely, strange conceits and fears, a proneness to anger: the party affecting solitariness, having a fearful swimming and turning about of the brain. Howbeit, when the disease is once grown to perfection: then there follows very fearful and strange effects. Hyperius in method, theolog, lib▪ 2. pag. 310. For, some are afraid the heavens will overwhelm them forthwith: some fear the earth will swallow them quick: some stand in continual dread of thieves: and others again, that wolves will enter into them. Some imagine themselves to be devils, birds, and vessels of earth: yea, and that they be truly transformed into wolves, and therefore they do counterfeit their voices, & wander about in the fields. This undoubtedly is your present disease: & this is that which makes you so resolute concerning the supposed possession of spirits and devils. All which you may plainly perceive, is nothing else in effect, but a fantastical conceit, occasioned only upon those disordered humours which hurt and trouble your brain. joh. Wierus de praestig. daemon. lib. 4. cap. 23. That which any further concerneth the nature, the causes, the circumstances, and cure of lycanthropy: you may see more at large in Wierus his works. Lycanthropus. This is very strange I assure you, and more than ever I heard: albeit I have felt the experience thereof in myself. Physiologus. Not so strange as true: and therefore, forsake your folly in time. Orthodoxus. I pray you heartily do so, and that so much the rather: by how much the devil (in working upon that disordered humour) will be ready eftsoons to abuse you afresh. In consideration whereof, I will show you what the Ancyran council a●d others have carefully decreed against such humorous persons, saying thus. Ancyranum concilium. Gratianus ibid. can. 26. q. 5. August. de spiritu & anima, cap. 23. Destructorium vitiorum, par. 6. cap. 49. Otho Casman. Angelograph. par. 2. cap. 19 q. 2. pag. 540. Whereas certain graceless women (seduced wholly by satins illusions) do verily imagine themselves (for certain hours in the night) to be riding upon wolves and beasts with Diana the pagan Goddess, and to pass through sundry countries: through which erroneous conceit, they (being grossly abused) do verily believe those things to be true, yea, and (in believing the same) do fearfully straggle from the true saving faith. It appertaineth therefore to the ministers (in every their several churches) to publish and confute the falsehood hereof: and withal, to strengthen the minds of their people against every such fantastical and fond illusion of satan. Who eftsoons assailing the minds of humorous women, and (through infidelity) conpling them sure to himself, deludes their said minds with dreams and visions: making them sometimes merry, and sometimes sad: showing them sundry persons, both known and unknown: yea, and leading them dangerous bie-ways to their own destruction. Thus you see the counsels decree against these roving conceits, wherewith yourself (at this present) is fearfully tainted: and therefore, forethink you thereof in time. Lycanthropus. Are there then no essential transformations at all? Orthodoxus. No verily, whatsoever they seem in show, they are but illusions and sleights of the devil to deceive: and therefore (I advise you to wind yourself from them with speed, for fear of a further mischief. And, because you shall not imagine this council I give, Anquirense concilium, Gratian, ibid. can. 26. q. 5. to be but a dreaming devise of my own: therefore, (besides that which was spoken before) I will yet further make known unto you, how general counsels, many good writers, yea, Prosper in libello de dono timoris. and the Popes own canons do all jointly condemn and pronounce this peevish opinion concerning the supposed transformation of devils, to be impious, absurd and devilish, and the maintainers thereof to be worse than Infidels, Destructorium vitiorum par. 6. cap. 49. saying thus: Whosoever believeth that any one creature can be made or changed into better or worse, or to be transformed into any other shape, or into any other similitude, Otho Casman. Angelograph. par. 2. cap. 18. q. 6. by any other then by God himself the creator of all things: without doubt, he is but an Infidel, and worse than a pagan. And therewithal, this reason is rendered. Because (say they) they do therein attribute that power to a creature: Malmesburij, degestis Anglorum lib. 6. which only belongeth to God the creator of all things. By this you may plainly perceive, of what reckoning these your supposed transformations have been in former times. Philologus. Lycanthropus? your opinion (it appeareth) is plainly condemned of all: and therefore, forsake it for shame. Lycanthropus. So I do I assure you: praising the Lord with all my heart, for bringing me thus to behold the folly thereof: yea, and am heartily sorry, for being bewitched therewith so long, being also ashamed now of my odious name. Physiologus. The Lords name be blessed for this your happy illumination in jesus Christ. Pneumatomachus. Yea, and the Lord grant the like happy success, to our further proceedings. Lycanthropus. So be it. But good Master Orthodoxus, I remember full well, how that (in the beginning of our conference, where we handled the power of spirits and devils) you spoke of a twofold possession: the one real, the other actual. The first you have fully confuted: notwithstanding any thing spoken to the contrary. Howbeit, of the other, the question is ordinary in every man's mouth: and therefore, I pray you heartily show us your judgement also therein. Orthodoxus. What (I pray you) is the common opinion of men concerning the same? Lycanthropus. I here of none that make any doubt of actual possession: yea, and the Exorcist also who cast out the devil at Magnitton (howsoever he faggeth with me now, M. Dorel in the title to his Apology. concerning his first conceit of real possessions) he is very confident (in the very title of his apology) to avouch the young man to have been actually possessed of satan. Exorcists. I do so in deed, and I make no doubt thereof at all being able (I hope) to manage the same against all men, yea even to the death. Orthodoxus. What are you able to manage against all to the death? Exorcists. That the devil hath, and may have now (even in these days of the gospel) an actual or powerful possession in men. Orthodoxus. What man? are you now fled from your idle conceit of essential possessions, to the supposed actual possessions of spirits and devils: this, as it argueth evidently great want of munition to manage that matter; so it haileth us perforce to follow your footings awhile, in these your wandering vagaries, that so (being forcibly beaten from all hope of recovering your former hold) you may be forced (at the length) to yield up the conquest in the open field. Howbeit, this question (I perceive) doth crave a larger discourse than the present time will afford: especially, our dinner being now in a readiness, and staying upon us. Let us therefore (for the present) put an end to our speech, till we have refreshed ourselves with the good blessings of God: and then afterwards walk forth, and confer of this point to the full. Pneumatomachus. Sir you may account us for bold and impudent guests, that are thus troublesome and chargeable to you. Orthodoxus. My ministery is allotted to these kind of troubles, and my cheer, I account well bestowed upon such sort of guests: therefore, make no more strangeness, but, arise and go with me, Philologus. We praise God for your kindness and care concerning our bodies and souls: and therefore do thankfully accept of your offer, and dutifully attend on your person. Orthodoxus. Let us then arise, and depart. The end of the fifth Dialogue. The sixth Dialogue. THE ARGUMENT. Of actual possession, what it is? And whether the devils now (in these dates of the Gospel) do actually possess either the mind or the body: by an extraordinary afflicting or vexing? The speakers names. PHILOLOGUS. LYCANTHROPUS. PNEUMATOMACHUS. PHYSIOLOGUS. ORTHODOXUS. EXORCISTS. Orthodoxus. Having blessed the Lord for his benefits, the choice shall be yours, whether you will walk forth abroad: or, keep close in my Parlour, and confer there of the question for one or two hours. Physiologus. Sir, you remember the Proverb. After dinner sit a while: and after supper walk a mile. The which, as it acordeth very fitly with the rules of Physic: so will it be a furtherance to the main purpose itself, which we have in hand. Orthodoxus. You say very well. Go to therefore Exorcists proceed in your purpose: and tell us what you hold concerning this point. Exorcists. This I have hitherto, and yet still do confidently hold: That the devil, even in these days of the Gospel: hath an actual possession in men. Orthodoxus. Well then (before you produce your proofs) let us first put down the question itself in it proper terms: that so, we may the better perceive the very point of your purpose. Lycanthropus. I pray you proceed in that course. Orthodoxus. With very good will. For so the matter controversed between us, may more fitly be comprehended within the true bounds of an orderly conference. Philologus. A very convenient course, in my proper conceit. Pneumatomachus. I am just of your mind. Exorcists. Neither know I of any one that dissents from the same. Tell us therefore, I pray you: what is actual possession? Orthodoxus. The actual possession, is that effectual working power, wherewith the devils (by an operative permission of God) do extraordinarily, and in most wonderful manner afflict, molest, torment, and vex some special persons (in a special judgement of God) put over unto them, for that special purpose. Wherein, we have first to observe, the primary efficient cause: namely, the special purpose and judgement of God. Then next, the secondary efficient cause: I mean, the effectual working power of the devil. Thirdly the material cause: that is to say, the affliction, the torment, and vexation itself. Fourthly, the formal cause: namely, an extraordinary manner of working. And lastly, the final cause: I mean, some special purpose of God, best known to his wisdom. Lycanthropus. How manifold I pray you, is this actual possession? Orthodoxus. It is twofold: namely, either mental or corporal. Lycanthropus. What mean you by the mental-actuall possession? Orthodoxus. My meaning is not, that the devil doth really enter, and essentially, or inherently dwell in the possessed man's mind, which we denied before, when we conferred of the real-mentall possession: but, that he doth only actually afflict, and effectivelie torment the possessed man's mind. Lycanthropus. What mean you, by actually afflicting the possessed man's mind? Orthodoxus. By actually afflicting, I understand the effectual and powerful operation, Gualther. in Math 8. 16. fol. 272. wherewith the devil (for the present) doth so fearfully molest, and so strangely deprive the possessed man's mind itself, from the present use of all reason: as he makes him even senseless and wood, very violently to rush headlong into fire and water, and outrageously to run upon desperate adventures. Lycanthropus. And what call you the corporal actual possession? Orthodoxus. I call the corporal actual possession, that inevitable working power: whereby the devils do actually torment and vex the whole, or some special part of the possessed man's body. Lycanthropus. What mean you, by actually tormenting the whole or some part of the body? Orthodoxus. My meaning is, that, the devils (for the present) do, either powerfully disable the whole, or some part of the possessed man's body, from the orderly accomplishment of their peculiar and ordinary operations appointed of God, joh. 9 1. by depriving the said body forthwith of seeing, Marc. 9 25. of hearing, of speaking, of walking, Act. 3. 2. by bowing and bending together: or do otherways, very effectually enable the said body, or the several parts thereof, with some extraordinary, and unnatural force, for the fearful effecting of many outrageous, and most mischievous practices. Namely, Math. 8. 28. the remaining day & night among graves: the knapping in sunder of chains: Luc. 8. 26. 27. a violent rending, and tearing: a tumbling headlong into fires and waters: Luc. 8. 29. a scriking, a wallowing, a foaming, Math. 17. 15. and leaving for dead. Marc. 9 26. Pneumatomachus. These actual possessions, are fearful possessions. Orthodoxus. They are so I confess. But what saith Exorcists to those things that be spoken? Exorcists. Sir, the description which you have made of actual possession, with those her several kinds: I approve in every point. But, tell me in good earnest, do you absolutely deny every such actual possession? Orthodoxus. I do freely acknowledge, that the same was undoubtedly in use in the days of Christ: howbeit, I do flatly deny any further continuance thereof now, in this time of the Gospel. Exorcists. Men may deny the sunshine at midday: if they could bear us in hand we were blind. Orthodoxus. And, men may affirm the moon to be made of a green cheese: if they could make us believe what they list. Howbeit, affirm what you will: joh. 5. 38. we are commanded to search the scriptures, and to try out your spirit, ●. joh. 4. 1. before we believe you. Licanthropus. Good master Orthodoxus, resolve us I pray you in this so intricate and doubtful a matter: for all men do acknowledge, and myself hath hitherto ever held the actual possession of devils, Orthodoxus. I do neither respect what the most men acknowledge, nor greatly regard what yourself do hold so long as I have truth on my side. We must not run after a multitude in the doing of evil: Exod. 23. 2. nor agree in a controversy to decline after many in overthrowing the truth. You also held the real possession of devils not long since, which now you disclaim: and so will you do this other I doubt not before it be long. Lycanthropus. Very true as you say: and therefore I lay my hand on my mouth. Exorcists. Sir, notwithstanding these your cloaked insinuations, I make no question at all, concerning the actual possession of devils, even now in these days of the Gospel. Orthodoxus. Why man? The Lord God never purposed, much less hath he openly avouched the perpetuity thereof in any part of his word: therefore, the same was only temporary, and no way perpetual. Exorcists. Yes sir? Math. 10. 7. a perpetual commission for repelling the actual possession of devils, Marc. 6. 7. was undoubtedly given by Christ and the same very formally executed also by his own disciples: Luc. 9 1. & 10. 9 17. as appeareth plainly in sundry scriptures. Marc. 16. 20. Act. 16. 18. Orthodoxus. Frame your argument from those places of scripture. Exorcists. I frame it thus. The commission given by Christ, for repelling the actual possession of devils remaineth perpetual: therefore, the actual possession itself, remaineth also perpetual. Orthodoxus. Prove in your antecedent, the perpetuity of that commission. Exorcists. Why sir? there is no one express inhibition thereof in all the scriptures. Orthodoxus. Sith you so resolutely insist upon the perpetuity of that commission: I intend to drive you away from that covert, by arguing (from the tenor of that self-same commission) against you thus. If that commission given by Christ for repelling the actual possession of devils, be undoubtedly perpetual in these days of the Gospel: then the drinking of deadly poison, Marc. 16. 18. with warranted safety from all bodily harm, is also perpetual. Good sir? let us forthwith behold I beseech you in your own person, an experimental demonstration of this one thing, first: and we will the rather believe you in all the rest. Philologus. Master Exorcists, you were much better (in my simple conceit) to give over this argument quite: then be forced, thus to demonstrate the truth thereof to the world. Exorcists. Not so. For, the whole contents of that self-same commission, save only the expelling of devils: were altogether temporary, and no ways perpetual. Orthodoxus. Who dare avouch the perpetuity of that actual possession of Devils: more then of any the rest? Nay, who would not much rather account both it, and the rest of those the miraculous operations comprised jointly together in one and the self-same commission, to be every of them undoubtedly determined: because, those temporary officers whereunto they properly appertained (namely, Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, and the seventy disciples) are long since determined. Who being every of them extraordinary officers, Luc. 24. 46. Act. 1. 8. received (together with the office itself) extraordinary grace and power from above, to accomplish the same. Eph. 4. 13. Whereas the ministerial functions of Pastor and Doctor (perpetually remaining to the end of the world) are both of them ordinary functions: and therefore, to be ordinarily directed, disposed and guided, according to the ordinary Constitutions, and Cannons contained in the word. Exorcists. Notwithstanding the Pastor and Doctor be (in very deed) but ordinary officers: yet I doubt not at all, but that some certain of them (as seemeth good to the Lord) may also be endued with an extraordinary power and grace for repelling the actual possession of devils. Orthodoxus. Seeing you stand with such a settled pertinacy in your proper conceit, I do argue against you a fresh on this sort: The extraordinary power of casting out devils, was peculiarly appropriated to Christ himself, and his own disciples: therefore, the said extraordinary power doth not ordinarily appertain to any ordinary ministery succeeding that primitive age. And, if no extraordinary power for expelling the actual possession of devils remaineth perpetual: then, neither the actual possession itself remaineth perpetual. Exorcists. But, why should that extraordinary power be peculiarly appropriated to Christ himself, and his own disciples? Orthodoxus. Because the very main ends of every such extraordinary and miraculous work, D. Fulke to the Rhemish testament, in Math. cap. 17. vers. 19 sect. 5. were to be accomplished especially, and only by them. For first, our saviour Christ being both God and man, but yet utterly unknown to the world: it was therefore undoubtedly meet, that he especially, and only he himself (by some such extraordinary and miraculous works as none other might possibl●e do) joh. 15. 24. Math. 28. 19 Marc. 16. 15. Zanchius, in Eph. cap. 4. 11. pag. 178. should apparently make known to the world, the admirable power of his Deity. As also, his own disciples, they being extraordinarily and specially appointed to preach and to plant the Gospel of Christ throughout the whole world: it was likewise undoubtedly necessary, that, the infallible truth of such heavenly doctrine so extraordinarily delivered from them, should (in an especial regard of the strangeness thereof) even by those their extraordinary actions also (as by the supernatural seals of the Almighty himself (be perpetually established to the end of the world. In an only consideration whereof, even, those their peculiar prerogatives (together with an extraordinary ability in preaching the Gospel) were especially, and only bestowed on every of them, as very plainly appeareth in the authentical tenor of that self-same commission, saying, Go preach to all people, Math. 10. 7. 8. and tell them the kingdom of heaven is at hand: heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise up the dead, and cast out devils. Now then, this the aforesaid commission, with these peculiar graces & powers, being thus extraordinarily appropriated to the disciples themselves: they proceeded accordingly in an extraordinary execution thereof, Marc. 16. 20. & preached the Gospel every where, the Lord working together in every of them, and, confirming the word with miracles following. Exorcists. Sir? justin. Martyr. contra Triphon. Tertul. de caena domini. howsoever you seem to determine the extraordinary power for repelling the actual possession of devils, together with the Disciples days: yet, this I am certain, that Iustinu● Martyr, Tertulian, Cyprian, Augustine also, Item in Apolog. cap. 23. and the Council concluded at Bracha, do all jointly affirm, that the working of miracles was very ordinarily practised in every of their times: yea, Cyprian. lib. 4. epistola 7. and it may plainly be gathered from the Ecclesiastical histories, Aug. de civit. Dei, lib. 22. Item Psal. 65. Concil. Bracharense. that the continuance thereof was found in the Church, for eight hundred years after Christ at the least. Orthodoxus. They all write as you say, and the Ecclesiastical histories also avouch the same: but, josep. Antiq. lib. 8. cap. 2. what infer you thereof? Exorcists. I infer from thence, Wilelmus Minatensis, ration. divinor. officior. the actual possession of devils in these days of the Gospel. Orthodoxus. I perceive no such inference thence: for this I suppose, is your argument. justinus Martyr, Cyprian, Tertullian, Augustine, the Council of Bracha, and Ecclesiastical histories do all jointly avouch the continuance of miracles for eight hundred years after Christ at the least: therefore the actual possession also of devils, so long time continued in use. This, as it followeth fair and far of: so surely, it makes nothing at all for that actual possession which you plead for yourself, sixteen hundred years since the coming of Christ. No surely, it doth rather conclude a final determination thereof, above eight hundred years passed at the least. But be it, that the continuance also of actual possession were jointly avouched by every of them for eight hundred years after Christ: yet this, as it makes nothing (I say) for the possession impleaded by you: so are we not necessarily bound to believe whatsoever they write concerning such matters, we having both scriptures and probable reasons impugning the same. Again, howsoever justinus, Tertulian, Cyprian, Augustine, the Council of Bracha, and Ecclesiastical histories do all jointly avouch the continuance of actual possession in those times and places wherein they conversed: yet no one of them all (how holy or gracious soever) do challenge such extraordinary power to themselves, or once write that they dispossessed satan of any one person by him possessed. And therefore they might be deceived by some false supposal of an actual possession pretended by others: and so (by consequence) that which they write concerning those matters, is of so much the less credit, by how much especially, there have in every age of the Church, D. Fulke to the Rhemish testament, in Marc. 13. 22. sect. 3. some seducers sprung up, who (for gain or glory) pretending a special power from above, for the dispossessing of devils, both might and did also therein deceive the wisest of judgement. Briefly, we are therein to believe their writings the less: because there be sundry sorts of diseases in men now adays, so like to the actual possession of devils, as very few or none can hardly discern the one from the other. Which falling forth likewise in those former times, might easily draw those good Fathers into a strange imagination of some actual possession: there being in truth no such thing at all. Exorcists. But tell me in good earnest I pray you, do you confidently deny unto all men, an extraordinary power for driving forth devils in these days of the Gospel? Orthodoxus. Touching any thing hitherto heard I do I assure you. And, for a further confirmation I argue it further thus. If an extraordinary power for driving forth devils be now given to any in these days of the Gospel, the parties then who challenge such power, they must as directly declare that their special donation by some peculiar privilege from God, as did the disciples of jesus Christ: My meaning is, that whosoever will challenge to themselves any extraordinary power for the working of miracles, they must first testify that power by their extraordinary graces in preaching the gospel, they themselves being before but unlettered men: and they must also be able, even as authentically to avouch for infallible truth whatsoever they preach, as were the disciples themselves, upon whom was bestowed especially that peculiar commission, with extraordinary graces and powers to accomplish the same. Otherwise we may shrewdly suspect some legerdemain in pretending any extraordinary seal: Psal. 45. 1. where the tongue is not extraordinarily appointed before, the extraordinary pen of an extraordinary writer. For, seeing all extraordinary offices are fully and finally determined long since: we make no question, but the extraordinary graces and powers, attending especially those extraordinary offices, did cease together with the office itself. And therefore, there remaining now in the church, Rom. 12. 1. etc. but ordinary officers, 1. Cor. 12. etc. they (at no hand) may challenge any those extraordinary graces and powers beyond their reach; 1. Tim. 3. 1. etc. but must ordinarily attend upon such ordinary canons and rules, Tit. 1. 5. etc. as the holy spirit puts down for their ordination: Act. 20. 28. and (in an orderly execution of every such office imposed upon them) they must by earnest study, Colos. 4. 17. meditation, 1. Tim. 4. 13. 16. and prayer, 2. Tim. 4. 1. 2. except from God an especial blessing upon those their ordinary labours and travels bestowed. 1. Pet. 5. 1. 2. Exorcists. Howsoever the extraordinary offices, and officers are undoubtedly determined long since, as you seem to avouch: I for my own part, do make no question at all, but that the devils have now (in these days of the gospel) an actual possession in some at the least: and that therefore, there is also an extraordinary power in some, to expel them from that their possession. Otherways, it were to to absurd, to grant the continuance of such a disease in the church as the Lord hath reserved no remedy for. Orthodoxus. Thus than you reason. The disease itself is still continued: therefore, the remedy also thereof is still continued. I answer, your antecedent is but a pitiful begging of the cause in question. For, P●titlo principij. the continuance of actual possession is the very thing we dispute of. We flatly deny it: and yourself (not having hitherto proved the same) would now by way of entreaty, obtain at our hands a grant thereof. Exorcists. I entreat no such favour at all; See Dorel his doctrine, pag. 31. but do prove it thus. All other matters else whereupon the miraculous faith of Christ his disciples did especially work, namely deafness, dumbness, blindness and such like, have still their continuance in the church of God: therefore, the actual possession of devils (comprehended in one and the self-same commission with them) it also is still continued in the church of God. Orthodoxus. I answer your antecedent thus. Deafness, dumbness, blindness and such like, they are not still continued in the church, as things actually effected by any extraordinary power of the devil, but as matters naturally arising in men, by reason of some defect or redundancy in nature, or otherways, by means of some disordered humours, and such like unnatural accidents. Howbeit, the actual possession we speak of, is no matter naturally arising in men, but a malady rather, that is actually, and immediately wrought by the power of the devil himself. And therefore, this (you see) is no sound consequent uz. Infirmities naturally arising in men, are still of continuance in the church: therefore, the actual possession of devils, is still of continuance also. Here is no sequel at all. For, the one, I mean those natural infirmities, they are but ordinary matters: the other, that is, the actual possession of devils, was an extraordinary malady, and had an extraordinary power to repel the same. Exorcists. Sith you acknowledge the continuance of all save only that of actual possession: See Paul his doctrine, pag. 31. there can be no question of the continuance also thereof, and I prove it thus. If deafness, dumbenes, blindness, and such like (being every of them in Christ's time, the principal matter whereupon the miraculous faith did work) are yet ordinary diseases continued still in these days of the Gospel, and are only now cured by Physic, as by an ordinary and natural means appointed of God: then, the actual passession of devils (it being also in Christ his time, one principal matter for the miraculous faith to work upon) it also is now an ordinary infirmity continued still in these days of the Gospel, and is only now to be cured by fasting and prayer, as by an only ordinary and natural means appointed of God. But, the first is true in all experience: and therefore also the latter. Orthodoxus. Albeit I should grant you the truth of the first in all experience: yet, your consequent concluded thence, hath in it no appearance of truth, but is undoubtedly an extravagant and roving conceit, nothing concludent in reason, but beyond the bounds and limits thereof. For, howsoever deafness, dumbenes, blindness, and such other occurrents in nature, be every of them ordinary and natural diseases, and are commonly cured by ordinary medicines and other Physical helps, as by the ordinary and natural remedies appointed of God: the actual possession of devils never was, nor is now any ordinary or natural infirmity, but an extraordinary torment, actually inflicted upon some, by the extraordinary power of the devil, and therefore never yet was nor is now any ways curable by ordinary or natural means, but, by an extraordinary and supernatural work of God. So then, howsoever yourself would seem to make the actual possession of devils (in these days of the Gospel) but an ordinary, or natural disease, and the supposed cure thereof by fasting and prayer, to be now but an ordinary and natural remedy, perpetually established by God in his Church: yet in very deed and in truth, the disease itself, and the cure also thereof by such means effected, are both of them extraordinary and supernatural matters, and so by consequence, a miracle surmounting the compass of all ordinary and natural causes. Unless haply you imagine that the fasting and prayers performed by Exorcists, are mere natural matters, and have in them naturally, some secret natural vigour, naturally available for the timely expelling of actual possessions: even as herbs, and physical confections have naturally in them such a natural operation, as very fitly acordeth to the timely curing of natural infirmities. Howbeit, pretermitting the further discourse of this point, till we come to handle the power of dispossessing the devil: do now object what you can for the matter in question, or, give me leave to proceed in the rest. Exorcists. Proceed I pray you, and spare not. Orthodoxus. Well then, against the continuance of actual possession I argue further thus. Whatsoever in itself is perpetually existing, that also in itself is ordinary and continually working. But the actual possession of devils (in these days of the Gospel) is in itself neither ordinary nor continually working: therefore, the actual possession of devils (in these days of the Gospel) is in itself not perpetually existing. Exorcists. I deny your proposition. Because something may be perpetually existing: which yet is neither ordinary nor continually working: even as we see by experience, that the brightness and heat of the Sun (though the Sun itself be perpetually existing) yet, neither is the heat thereof ordinary, nor the brightness continually working. Not at such times especially as there is an interposition of clouds between the said Sun and the earth: or when he which withdraweth his force from this our Horizon, and maketh his progress among the Antipodes. Orthodoxus. How certainly, or uncertainly soever the Sun may be said to continue his appointed progress, very certain I am, that the man who endeavoureth to follow your footings at every turn, shallbe sure to finish his own progress in an endless labyrinth. For, how should the actual possession of devils by possibly perpetual, and not be ordinary in itself, nor continually working? Sith that which is perpetually existing, must needs in itself, be ordinary, and continually effecting some manner of work. Besides that, you your own self (even in your last answer but one) did confidently conclude the actual possession of devils, to be none other thing now, but an ordinary infirmity, very ordinarily inflicted upon the church: and the cure also thereof, is to be ordinarily effected by fasting and prayer, as by the ordinary means appointed of God. Upon which your assertion, I framed this my last argument against the perpetuity of actual possession: whereunto you do now very impudently opposse yourself, by denying the very point you propounded before. Giving us thereby to understand by the way, that (howsoever you want a liars memory) your tongue would be lavish enough: if your teeth would but give it the scope, to be ranging abroad. Exorcists. I only opposed myself to your mayor proposition, and (besides our present question, concerning the perpetuity of actual possession) I did further demonstrate the matter, by giving a fit instance, borrowed from the brightness and heat of the sun. Orthodoxus. A very fit instance in deed. For, even by that self-same instance wherewith yourself would demonstrate your matter: I myself do also intend to remonstrate the truth of my argument. Whereas therefore you do freely acknowledge, that the actual possession of devils may (in deed) be perpetually existing, but yet, neither ordinary, nor continually working: giving us also an experimental demonstration thereof (as you imagine) from the material sun, which, howsoever the same in itself be perpetually existing, yet, neither is the heat thereof ordinary, nor the brightness continually shining. Mine answer is, that, even as by taking brightness and heat from the sun, you do (in effect) deny the sun itself to be perpetually existing, because, heat and brightness are essential qualities inseparably inherent, and perpetually knit with the sun: so surely, by denying the ordinary and continual working of actual possession, you do consequently conclude, that even the actual possession itself is not perpetually existing. Because the actual possession of devils, all the while it is an actual possession in any existence: so long (at the least) the same must needs (in itself) be ordinary, and will effectually perform some actual experiment. Otherways, how may that be truly termed an actual possession, which doth not agere aliquid: not accomplish (I mean) some one act or other. Notwithstanding all this, you labour to uphold the likelihood of this your imagined instance, by two special cautions: the one taken from an interposition of clouds, the other from the sun his conversing among the antipodes. To what purpose these cautions should serve, I perceive not as yet, unless (as it seems by the purport of your speech) you would give us a watchword, & thereby illustrate unto us: that howsoever the actual possession of devils be in it own self perpetually existing, yet, the same is (in effect) neither ordinary, nor continually working. And why so I beseech you? Because the devil (forsooth) at some one time or other, may happily be playing bopeep with the party behind a coverled: or may bid us here in England farewell for a season, while he go and converse among the Cannibals. Howbeit, unless you be able directly to demonstrate unto us, that there may be some odd time or other wherein the sun itself, neither in this our horîzon, nor among the antipodes hath his ordinary course, or is continually shining: do pardon us (I pray you) though we (in the mean while) begin to imagine, that your wits (by roving at random among the antipodes) be turned topsy-turvy, and permit us withal to conclude as before, that, because the actual possession of devils is in itself, neither ordinary, nor continually working, therefore the same in itself is not perpetually existing. Lycanthropus. Express more plainly unto us, what you mean by the terms of ordinary: and continually working. Orthodoxus. My meaning is, that, if actual possession (as the Exorcist affirmeth) be now in these days of the Gospel, an infirmity inflicted perpetually upon the Church, as are also those other diseases contained jointly with it in one and the same commission: the same undoubtedly (as are all the rest) would be much more ordinary with us then now it is. I mean, it would bemuch more frequent and often, at many more times, in many more places, and among many more persons than we see it to be. Yea, and it would undoubtedly, be so much more ordinary than any of the rest: joh. 1. 7. & 2. 2. 1. Pet. 5. 8. by how much more maliciously the devil compasseth the earth, and goeth continually about, seeking whom to devour. Whereas the actual possession which Exorcists pretendeth, is a thing (now a days) so unwonted, and so rare in experience, as, very hardly it is heard of in twenty years space. Yea, Katherine wright saith, she never did think she was possessed: but that M. Dorel would needs persuade her she was so. and when the same is generally supposed, to be presently apparent in some: yet, the same even then, is so uncerteinlie known unto men, as, the very parties themselves, (of their own knowledge) are unable to say they be possessed of devils, neither (if they were not earnestly persuaded unto it, by some of the Exorcists trade) would they ever imagine, any possession at all. And therefore (howsoever you dream of the perpetuity of actual possession) the same (you see) cannot truly be said to be ordinary: but rather, an extraordinary, and supernatural matter, surmounting the order and course of nature. Philologus. Surely sir, I am just of your mind, that, if actual possession were now, as ordinary with devils, as are diseases with men: such and so great is their malice, we should forthwith have the whole world actually possessed at least. Exorcists. That followeth not. For, howsoever the actual possession of devils be perpetually ordinary in these days of the Gospel: yet is the same no further effectual than God hath appointed. Orthodoxus. Perceive you not the absurdity of your speech, in avouching a perpetual action, without an effect? Howbeit because you rely so much upon the perpetuity of actual possession. I do argue further against you thus. Whatsoever power our saviour Christ hath undoubtedly determined long since; no man may now hold the same in opinion, nor conscionably avouch the perpetuity thereof. But that extraordinary power which concerns the actual possession of devils, Christ hath determined long since: therefore that extraordinary power of actual possession, no man may now hold in opinion, nor con●cionablie avouch the perpetuity thereof. Exorcists. Prove your assumption. Orthodoxus. I prove it directly, from a proportionable respect of the two main ends of such a possession, namely, the declaration of Christ's Deity, & the confirmation of his glorious Gospel: both which two ends are determined long since, and therefore, the extraordinary possession of devils which were especially for those two ends, it also is undoubtedly ceased. The determination of the latter, (I mean the confirmation of the glorious Gospel) shall hereafter be handled at large, when we come to entreat of the ceasing of miracles: in the mean time, this I do boldly avouch, namely, that the extraordinary possession for the other main ●nd (namely the declaration of the glorious deity) is long since by Christ determined. Exorcists. When, & where hath Christ determined the extraordinary possession of devils, concerning that special end? Orthodoxus. Even then, and there, where he telleth us plainly, that, now is the judgement of this world: joh. 12. 31. now shall the prince of this world be cast out. Foretelling directly unto us, that (immediately after his death and resurrection) the extraordinary, & actual power of satins possession, should receive a full, and final subversion, as a thing now merely superfluous to work upon, for any further declaration of his glorious Deity. Exorcists. Good sir, by your leave, you do greatly mistake the meaning of that Scripture. For Christ (by the adverb of time, or particle (now) doth not precisely, and purposely restrain the final determination of actual possession, unto any predeterminate or special time: but, thereby doth rather insinuate the perpetual efficacy of that his own effectual working power, which (by the powerful preaching of his glorious Gospel) should after his death successively show itself upon Satan, to the very end of the world. Orthodoxus. I perceive you need no Gentleman usher: for, you can take leave (without leave) to censure the exposition I give of that Scripture, by qualifying the literal sense of the particle (now.) Which in that place (you say) importeth no predeterminate or special time: but only hath reference unto the successive working power of Christ (executed by the powerful preaching of the gospel) to the end of the world. In deed, I do willingly gra●t that the effectual working power of Christ, neither doth, nor may possibly determine to the end of the world: for, he must effectually reign, 1. Cor. 15. 25. till he hath (actually) subjecteth all his enemies under his feet. But withal, I do flatly deny the continuance of satan his power of actual possession to the end of the world: neither may such manner of inference be possibly enforced from thence. For, what a dalliance is this? Christ his effectual working power, must successively show forth itself upon satan to the end of the world: therefore the actual possession of satan, must not, nor may not determine to the end of the world. As though, if the actual possession of devils should now finally cease, and determine: the effectual power of Christ could find nothing at all in satan to work upon. But tell me (I pray you) had not the devil at the first of all, a power of possession: and a power of obsession permitted unto him? And was, and is he not industrious enough in the execution of both from time to time? Let continual experience speak in this point. Now then, if the effectual working power of Christ hath actually, & fully subdued the first: may therefore the efficacy of that his said power remain now utterly idle from time to time, notwithstanding any the fiery assaults or harms which might grow from the latter? I suppose, nothing less. For, remember you not that old saying? It is as much to keep an hold: Non minor est. virtus, quam, quaerere, parta tueri. as was before to win the hold. Hence therefore, it is very apparent, that, as the effectual working power of Christ, hath extraordinarily and actually showed forth itself upon satan, by suppressing for ever his power of actual possession: so surely, the efficacy of that his said power, must now successively show forth it sefe upon satan to the end of the world, by repelling his power of obsession, I mean by withstanding his outrageous assaults, his cunning circumventions, his subtle temptations, and by quenching the force of his fiery darts for ever, through the powerful preaching of his glorious gospel. So then, howsoever the continuance of Christ's power be granted unto you: yet, unless you be able withal, very substantially to prove the perpetuity of satan his actual possession, you speak nothing at all to the purpose. Exorcists. Sir? howsoever I may seem unable to manage the common sense which men give of that place: I perceive no reason as yet, of your own exposition. Orthodoxus. Let us therefore labour the clearing thereof, by this following order. First, let us carefully examine those places of scripture: which (both before, and after the manifestation of Christ in the flesh) do purposely entreat of his effectual working power upon satan. The next, let us more exactly analyze that portion of scripture which we propounded even now: to prove the final determination of satan his power of actual possession. And then lastly, let us endeavour to confirm our said exposition, by the testimony of writers, both old, and new. All this being fully effected: the truth of the matter will break forth (I doubt not) like the Sun in his strength. Lycanthropus. A very excellent order: I pray you proceed in the same. Orthodoxus. With very good will. First therefore, concerning those several scriptures which purposely handle the effectual working power of Christ, before his manifestation in the flesh: we have to consider, that the Lord God immediately after the fall of man, did (for the comfort of the godly, and terror of satan) foretell to them both, Gen. 3. 15. that, the seed of the woman should bruise the serpent's head. In which place, he precisely puts down one special act, to be actually effected by Christ upon satan, namely the actual subduing of his actual dominion, understood (in that place) by the serpent's head: and, purposely refers the actual accomplishment thereof to the future time, saying thus. The seed of the woman (not doth, or hath) but rather (shall) bruise the serpent's head. That is, in process of time, shall even actually overcome the said power of the devil: having also therein, a more special relation to the very death of our saviour Christ, understood (in that place) by the bruising of his heel. Now then, from the due consideration hereof, I do argue thus, namely, that even as, howsoever the devil may be said to wage war with Christ and his members from time to time, yet, there was one special time predetermined of God, wherein the said devil was actually to bruise the heel of our saviour, and that undoubtedly was the very ti●e of Christ his suffering upon the cross, whereupon, the devil accordingly did put into judas his heart to betray his master: so surely, joh. 13. 2. howsoever Christ and his members may be said to infringe effectually, the devil his tyrannical power from time to time to the end of the world, yet was there one special time foreappointed of God, wherein Christ alone was actually to break the serpent's head, and that undoubtedly, was the very self-same time wherein Satan bruised his heel, I mean the very time of Christ's sufferings, when he said, it is finished. Exorcists. Why do you so exactly restrain, the conquest of Christ over Satan, Apoc. 13. 8. unto the only time of his sufferings: sith he was, the lamb slain from the beginning of the world? Orthodoxus. I restrain not the efficacy, but the very act of Christ's conquest, to the only time of his sufferings. Moreover, although it be truly said that Christ was the Lamb slain from the beginning of the world; yet, joh. Calvin. in Heb. cap. 9 26. that must not be understood of any actual, but of an effectual sacrificing of Christ, to so many as in all ages and times do apprehend the efficacy of his said sacrifice by a lively faith, 1. joh. 5. 4. which is the victory whereby they overcome the world. If therefore, you understand the aforesaid place of an actual sacrificing of Christ, from the beginning to the end of the world: then surely, your speech is not only, to to absurd, but withal, it crosseth directly the holy Ghost elsewhere: who telleth us plainly, Heb. 9 26. that (if an actual sacrificing of Christ be there understood) than Christ must often have suffered from the world's foundation. Besides that, it doth quite overthrow the dignity of Christ his priesthood, above the Levitical priesthood: which is there set forth by many comparisons thus. The Levitical high priest, Heb. 9 11. 12. 24. 25. he sacrificed in a corruptible tabernacle: but Christ in the tabernacle of his own body. He sacrificed with strange blood: Bulling. in Heb. cap. 9 26. but Christ with his own blood. He entered into the sanctuary made with hands: but Christ into heaven itself. He appeared before the material Ark: Pelican. in Heb. 9 25. but Christ before God his father. He every year once, iterated his sacrifice: whereas Christ (offering himself but once for all) abolished sin altogether, as well of the former, Heb. 9 26. as of the ages to come. Then (after all this) he renders a reason why Christ could actually but once be sacrificed; namely, because he could actually but once be crucified. And in the end he confidently concludes, Heb. 9 27. 28. that, howsoever Christ was but once actually sacrificed, yet, the virtue and efficacy of his said sacrifice, did, and doth effectually extend itself to the sins which were before, and to the sins which succeeded his sufferings. So then (notwithstanding whatsoever you object) you may plainly perceive, that, even as albeit Christ his said sacrifice hath ever been, and ever shall be effectual from time to time, yet, there was one special time foreappointed of God, wherein his said sacrifice was actually effected: so surely, that although the effectual working power of Christ, hath been, and is ever effectual from time to time against the power of actual possession, Pet. Martyr. in Gen. 3. 15. yet there was undoubtedly one special time wherein the said power of actual possession was by Christ actually annihilated, joh. Calvin. in Gen. 3. 15. and that was the very time of Christ his manifestation in the flesh, when as (by the very force of his sufferings) he broke the serpent's head. Hereunto also the Evangelist Luke very aptly acordeth saying. Luc. 11. 20. 21. When a strong armed man keepeth his house, the things that he possesseth are in peace: but, when a stronger than he cometh upon him, and overcometh him, he taketh from him all his armour wherein he trusted, and divideth the spoils. The Evangelist there, Gualt. in Luc. 11. homil. 115. doth allegorically depaint unto us the condition, dominion, and practise of satan. Mosculus, in Math. 12. 29. For by the strong armed man, he meaneth the devil. By his house, he understandeth generally the world, and more particularly, the parties actually possessed. D. Hil. in his treatise of Christ his descension, sol. 63. By peaceable possession, the power and sway of his tyrannical dominion. By the stronger, he understandeth Christ that victorious lion of the tribe of judah. H. jaacob in his treatise of Christ's his sufferings, pag. 161. By the binding of him, the irrecoverable weakening of his power of obsession. By the taking away of the armour wherein he trusted, the utter annihilating of his power of possession. Lastly, by dividing the spoils, he meaneth the timely restoration of all poor possessed souls, to the kingdom and service of Christ, according to that which Christ saith, now is the judgement of this world. Understanding thereby, the judgement of discretion: not the judgement of damnation, as if Christ should say thus. Now is that self-same time of the world's reformation at hand: Aug. in joh. cap. 12. 31. tract. 52. wherein shall be plainly discerned the chosen servants of God, from the confounded slaves of Satan. Because, now shall the prince of this world be actually cast out: joh. Calvin. ibid. Item, joh. 16. 11 Muscul. in joh. 16. 11. by the effectual power of my death and resurrection. Thus then, we have briefly heard those special scriptures: which do purposely point at the effectual working power of Christ before his death. Lycanthropus. Let us hear in like sort, those other scriptures, which do purposely handle the said effectual power of Christ; now since his death. Orthodoxus. Content. First therefore, the holy Ghost saith thus to the Hebrews. Heb. 2. 14. For as much as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, Christ also himself took part with them: that he might destroy through death, him that had power over death, that is, the devil. Wherein, first (you see) he puts down the incarnation of Christ: Henr. Bulling. in Heb. 2. 14. and then next, he showeth the main cause of his said incarnation, namely, that he might destroy the devil. Now then, this same destruction of the devil, it must in no wise be understood of the essence: but of the actions of Satan. For, the devil (as touching his essence or▪ being) still liveth, and live must for ever. Howbeit concerning his actions, I mean his tyrannical dominion, Aug. in joh. cap. 14. 30. tract. 95. and actual power: he may very fitly be said to be now destroyed. Because, howsoever satan be accounted a prince of this world, and therefore endeavoureth very proudly to dominire over all: joh. 12. 31. and 16. 11. yet, when he came unto Christ, he found nothing at all in him, joh. 14. 30. M. Bucer. in joh. 14. 30. Muscul. in joh. 14. 30. that is no such matter of subjection as he happily imagined. Neither could he possibly have any power over him at all, or, no further power at the most, than the bruising of Christ his heel, I mean, the crucifying of his flesh. And, this one work of satan, Aug. in joh. 14, 30. tract. 79. was that which accidentally procured his proper destruction. For, therefore did Christ take flesh upon him, that, even in the flesh, Item ibid. tract. 95. he might conquer him who had conquered flesh: Beza annotat. in Hebr. cap. 2. 14. and through death might destroy him that had power over death, namely, the devil, as was showed before. And this, as it hath reference to the actions, and not the essence of satan: so shall it give much light to the matter in hand, Theophil. in joh. 12. 31. if we precisely examine the very word itself which the holy Ghost here observeth. For, he saith not, that Christ hath abated, infringed, or weakened, but that he hath destroyed the devil: that is, that he hath utterly cut off, exiled, and banished his tyrannical dominion. For, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, id est, constringere, exterminare, disperdere. so much the word tsamath importeth, which signifieth to chain up, to exterminate, to drive out, and in such sort to consume a thing, as there remaineth no hope at all of any possible recovery. Yea, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, id est evacuare, dissoluere, irritum facere, and the Greek word catargeo, portendeth fully as much. Now then, howsoever Christ may truly be said to have destroyed the devil: yet, this word (destruction) hath not properly any reference to the essence of satan, for, therein he liveth, and live must for ever, as hath been declared. Neither may it be fitly applied to Satan his power of obssession, which is not yet utterly destroyed: for thereby, he assaulteth, circumventeth, and tempteth men still to the end of the world. And therefore, it must necessarily, and more especially be appropriated to his power of possession, which was not only much maimed, but utterly destroyed by the death of our Saviour: although yet we deny not, but that this utter destruction, both may be, and is also (in some sort) understood of the whole dominion and power of the devil whatsoever. All which his said powers, were so mightily weakened by the sufferings and resurrection of Christ: as, thereby he shall never be able any more now to hurt the elect. Because Christ (taking part with them in the flesh) hath destroyed through death, Heb. 2. 14. him that had power over death, namely the devil. And, hereunto acordeth that which the holy Ghost elsewhere avoucheth, saying, that Christ hath appeared, 1. joh. 3. 8. to loosen, dissolve, or destroy the works of the devil. Exorcists. That (destruction) is to be understood of annihilating the venom and sting of sin and death: and not of a final determining of satan his power of actual possession. Orthodoxus. Herein your speech is derogatorious to the efficacy and dignity of Christ's death, in that (by restraining the same as you do, to the only annihilating of the venomous sting of sin and of death) you utterly exclude the effectual working power thereof, from the actual determination of satan his actual possession. For, consider you not what peculiar action therein, the Scriptures impose upon Christ? First, he hath been from the world's foundation, peculiarly appointed of God, to be that promised seed which should bruise the serpent's head. Gen. 3. 15. Then next, he is undoubtedly that stronger man, Luc. 11. 20. who was to bind the strong armed man: and to divide his spoils. Both which places, as they plainly import some peculiar action to be performed by Christ: so do they undoubtedly, bind the actual accomplishment thereof upon his own person alone, and that also even in the future time. Gal. 4. 4. Then (after the fullness of time, our Saviour Christ being come in the flesh) he flatly affirmeth, joh. 12. 31. that even now shall the prince of this world be cast out. Limiting (you see) the actual effecting of that self-same peculiar action (so foretold as before) unto the present time of his sufferings. Moreover, after the actual accomplishment thereof by his death, Heb. 2. 14. the holy Ghost else where affirmeth accordingly, that he hath by death, destroyed him who had power over death: and again, that Christ hath appeared to destroy the works of the devil. 1. joh. 3. 8. Both which last places of scripture, as they plainly import some special action effected by Christ in the preter time, as did those other before in the future time: so surely Christ (after he was come in the flesh) did likewise alotte the actual performance thereof unto that present time of his death, wherein he was actually to finish his predetermined conquest over satan himself. Now then, this said actual accomplishment of some special action thus actually effected by Christ: must necessarily have a special reference to the final determination either of Satan his power of possession, or of his power of obsession. But, not of his power of obsession, for therein he still assaulteth and tempteth men's minds: and therefore, of his power of possession, as was showed before. Lycanthropus. Let this suffice for the sense of those several scriptures, which (both before, and since the coming of Christ) do point forth unto us his effectual working power upon satan: and now, I pray you analyse that self-same scripture you propounded of late, to prove the final determination of satan his actual possession. Orthodoxus. Content. Wherein you have to consider first, that, our saviour Christ, in saying, Now is the judgement of this world, joh. 12. 31. now shall the prince of this world be cast out: had an especial regard to that earnest petition which certain greeks a little before, did personally put up unto Andrew, joh. 12. 20. saying. Good sir? we also ourselves, would gladly see that same jesus, whom the world so eagerly affecteth and followeth. joh. 12. 21. Andrew no sooner perceived their suit, but he acquainted Philip therewith: and, they both together propounded the whole matter to jesus. joh. 12. 22. Now than jesus, considering (in the zeal of those greeks) how all nations affected his preaching and miracles, and came flocking unto him: joh. 12. 23. he answered Andrew and Philip thus. I perceive by all signs, that the very hour itself is now come, wherein the son of man must be glorified in the actual manifestation of his effectual power upon satan by his sufferings and death. Which his said death (I assure you) must now necessarily succeed, to the actual accomplishment of that actual conquest: a very lively resemblance whereof you may plainly behold in the wheat corn. joh. 12. 24. Which, unless it doth fall into the ground and die, abideth alone: but, if it do die, it bringeth forth abundance of fruit. And even so, if this body of mine were once wrapped within the bowels of the earth by the dart of death, there would undoubtedly spring many more branches from thence: as from that living root which quickeneth many to eternal life. Neither let any be so dismayed with the sight of my death: as that therefore, they themselves would not gladly undergo the like shame of the cross. For, whosoever is so taken up with the love of this life, joh. 12. 25. as he would not (for my sake) be thoroughly willing to put over the same to the extremest adventures of all: that man (without question) shall lose his life. Whereas they that (for my sake) do make themselves ready to forego (if need so require) their very life in this world: joh. 12. 26. they shallbe sure to preserve the same to eternal life. Yea, and even you also yourselves, whom I have especially chosen my ministers, to declare my said death to the world: if in your said ministry you desire to serve me aright, you likewise must willingly follow me your Lord and Master, now leading this dance unto death. For, wheresoever I am; there must my ministers willingly be. Neither have I any other purpose in suffering death for you: 1. Pet. 2. 21. but, to give you an example to follow my steps. Wherein if you readily serve me, assure yourselves that, then, my father in heaven will honour you highly. In deed, this corporal death (I confess) is extremely fearful to flesh and blood. For, even my very soul (I assure you) is so intolerably tormented with the terrors thereof, as I would earnestly entreat my father, that the approaching hour of this my death, might presently pass away: joh. 12. 27. were it not that even therefore I came unto this hour. In consideration of which my determined death, I will the more earnestly endeavour myself, to undergo with patience, the whole bickering whatsoever, by crying incessantly unto my father, joh. 12. 28. and saying: Oh father, glorify thy own name in these my appointed sufferings. Moreover, to the end you may plainly perceive the fruits of my prayer: you yourselves shallbe ear witnesses of my father his answer from heaven, saying. My son, I have both glorified it before in thy conception, joh. 12. 28. thy birth, thy baptism, thy fasting, thy preaching, and miracles: and I will now glorify it again, in thy death, and resurrection: because therein shallbe actually effected the final overthrow of satan his kingdom. And, joh. 12. 29. howsoever the people here present may happily imagine this sound from heaven to be but a thunder, or some voice of an Angel at the most: yet I assure you, it is the very thundering speech of my father himself. joh. 12. 30. Neither came this voice only because of myself: but for your sakes especially. To teach you assuredly, that, even now is the judgement, and reformation of this world: joh. 12. 31. because, even now must the prince of this world be actually cast forth from thence, as touching his actual possession. Yea, and this so glorious a conquest over satan: joh. 12. 32. must even now be actually effected by the power of my death wherein, if I were once lift up from the earth and fastened withal upon the cross: I would then actually determine the actual dominion of the devil, yea, and would effectually draw his captivated prisoners under my princely regiment. joh. 12. 33. Now, all this have I purposely spoken unto you, to show you before hand, what death I must die: that, so soon as you perceive me to give up the ghost, you may then certainly assure yourselves, that the whole work of your redemption from satan, joh. 19 30. from death▪ and from hell is actually effected & finished. Thus much for analysing the text itself. Wherein you have heard the occasion, coherence, proceeding, and the orderly conclusion of all the premises. Lycanthropus. The exposition is plain, in my simple conceit: let us therefore now hear the testimony of writers for further confirmation thereof. Orthodoxus. You shall. And first, August. in evang. joh. cap. 12. tract. 52. to begin with Augustine, he saith, that (by the judgement of the world) we must there understand, not the judgement of damnation, which is reserved to the last day: but, the judgement of discretion, which consisteth wholly in reforming the world by the expelling of Satan. For, the devil (saith he) possessed mankind, and held them guilty of punishment: through the handwriting of sin. He did domineer in the hearts of Infidels, and drew them (being deceived and captivated) to worship the creature: Rom. 1. 25. by forsaking the Creator. Howbeit, through that self-same faith of Christ which (by his death and resurrection) was (actually) established, and through his precious blood which was shed for remission of sins: a thousand believers being then (actually) freed from the power of the devil, were (effectually) coupled to the body of Christ, and by the operation of his spirit, became lively members of his mystical body. For, so Christ expounds himself in the very next words saying, Now is the prince of this world cast forth. Understanding by the particle (now) that which was then to be done at his death: not that which he was finally to accomplish at the general judgement. The Lord therefore foresaw that work, which he knew should be effected after his death and glorification: namely, that many thousands throughout the world, should faithfully believe in his death. From whose hearts, the devil who worketh effectually in them before: should (actually) be driven out by Christ's death, Act. 3. 16. and finally be subdued through faith in his name. Exorcists. The devil then (it should seem by your speech) was never driven forth from the patriarchs, before the passion of Christ. Orthodoxus. Not so: Apoc. 13. 8. For Christ was the Lamb slain from the beginning of the world. Neither speak we in this place of the effectual: but, of the actual conquest which he made over Satan. August. in joh. cap. 12. 31. tract. 52. Yea, and this I further avouch, that even as the particle (now) in an especial regard of Christ's actual conquest, respecteth especially the very hour of his death: so surely (in some consideration also of Christ's effectual eonquest) the said particle (now) may likewise have a more speeiall reference to the very hour itself of that his said death. Because howsoever the efficacy of that his effectual conquest, hath (from the beginning of the world been always effectual: yet the virtue and power thereof did more effectually show forth itself at the death and resurrection of Christ, then ever before. And even thus is that place to be understood which Christ elsewhere propoundeth, saying, joh. 7. 39 that the holy Ghost was not yet given: because Christ was not yet glorified. Not, that the holy Ghost was never given to the fathers before, 2. Pet. 1. 21. for holy men of God, spoke ever as they were moved by the holy Ghost: but that he was never so universally, nor so effectually given as after, when he was in all abundance powered forth upon the Apostles, upon old men and children. Act. 2. 4. & 2. 17. 18. Even so, the devil in like manner he was undoubtedly cast forth of the fathers from time to time by the effectual conquest of Christ: but yet, never so universally nor so effectually driven forth, as after that actual conquest of Christ on the cross. Exorcists. If the devil be now so universally, and so effectually cast forth from the faithful as yourself do avouch: then the faithful (it seems) are now free from temptations. Orthodoxus. That followeth not. For, August. ibid. joh. 12. 31. howsoever the devil his actual possession be actually expelled: yet ceaseth he not still to assault & to tempt the children of God. Aliud est intrinsecus regnare: aliud forinsecus pugnare. Howbeit, it is one thing to reign inwardly, and another to assault outwardly. For the best defenced cities of all, are eftsoons of the enemy besieged: yea and sometimes very hotly assaulted. Notwithstanding, though the devil doth daily cast forth his fiery darts: Eph. 6. 13. etc. we are spiritually armed with the complete armour of God. 1. joh. 2. 1. 2. Yea, and if at any time we hap to be wounded: the Physician he is ever at hand to cure our souls. For, Math. 6. 12. what pray we for else, when we say, Forgive us our trespasses: Luc. 11. 4. but only that our wounds may be healed? And what other thing else do we ask, Math. 6. 13. when we say, Led us not into temptation: Luc. 11. 4. but, that he which besiegeth, and assaulteth us outwardly, may never break in upon us on any side, neither yet, by any fraud or force may be able to conquer a fresh? So then, albeit the devil doth practise his policies daily against us: yet, forsomuch as he hath now no abiding place in that heart where faith is resiant: he may fitly be said to be both actually, and effectually now cast forth. Hitherto Augustine. Exorcists. Proceed in propounding the rest of your writers. Orthodoxus. I will. Next therefore for chrysostom, he saith, Now shall the prince of this world be cast forth: Chrysost. ibid. Mittetur deorsum. that is (saith he) be tumbled down headlong. For the devil, who (before that time) did domineer, and bear the whole sway in the world: shall now be overthrown, and violently cast forth as it were with a sling, at the passion of Christ. Again, Theophilac. in joh. cap. 12. 3▪. Theophilact, upon these words (Now is the judgement of this world) writeth thus. This (saith he) doth fitly accord with the premises. For, the father protesting before from heaven, that he would glorify his name again: Christ showeth here, the manner how his said name should be glorified. Namely, when as (by casting forth the prince of this world) the world should be judged, that is, revenged of satan. For, this casting forth, is a metaphor, taken from such as (being justly condemned in judgements) are actually cast forth from the tribunal seat. Or, by this casting forth may be understood the exiling of satan into the external darknesses: because now he hath lost his dominion over the faithful. Neither shall he ever be permitted to reign (as before) within men, I mean, either in their minds, or their mortal bodies: for I will (saith Christ) now draw all men unto myself. Howbeit, because men cannot possibly be brought unto me, all the while they are captivated, and fast bound by that tyrant: Having therefore thus (actually) conquered satan, cast him forth, and broken a sunder the iron bars of his power by my death: I will now (effectually) draw all men unto me, in despite of his teeth. Again, Nich. Lyra in joh. 12. 31. Lyra saith thus. Now is the judgement of this world: that is, the judgement for this world. Because (saith he) the world now, by the definitive sentence of God, and through the power of Christ's death, is (actually) delivered from the power of the devil. And therefore it followeth, that, now the prince of this world shall be cast forth by the passion of Christ. By the power of which passion is set open unto us the gate unto glory, so that the devil can now no more hinder the saints from the consecution of glory, as he did in times past: although it be permitted him still to tempt, for the trial and exercise of all the elect. Again, Hugo Cardin. in joh. cap. 12. 31. Hugo saith thus. Now is the judgement of this world: because (saith Christ) the devil (by my death and passion) being now (actually) destroyed, many poor souls shall be delivered from him. And a little after he saith. Now shall the prince of this world be cast forth: that is, be (actually) driven out of the hearts of men, by the death and passion of Christ. Again, the master of the sentences, Petr. Lambert. lib. 2. dist. 6. doth plainly avouch, that, the devils, they have not now, the self-same power over men: which they enjoyed before the coming of Christ. Again, Ludulph. de vita Christi. joh. 12. 31. Ludulph saith thus. Now is the judgement of this world, (now) that is, even in this very time of my passion (is the judgement) not of condemnation, but of discretion. (Of this world) that is, for this world against satan: because, now shall this world be judged, separated, and delivered from the power of darkness, that is, from the dominion of the devil. And, this is that judgement of discretion: whereby very many are plainly discerned, and separated now, from the power of the enemy. For since the very time of Christ's death: the faithful believers, are apparently espied from the obstinate infidels. And then after, he showeth the effect of that self-same judgement which concerneth the world, saying thus. Now, the prince of this world (the devil I mean) who from Adam, hitherto, hath borne the whole sway in this world: shall be cast forth, that is, from the elect, and shall lose his power of drawing men after him any more. After all this, our Saviour (saith Ludulph) declareth the manner of his death and resurrection, in this sort. And I, if I were once lift up, would draw all men unto me. As, if he should say thus; That self-same love which I show forth by my death: it hath in it, a certain attractive virtue, or power of drawing men's minds unto me: even as the Adamant stone hath in itself, an hidden force, to draw iron unto it. Again Bucer saith thus. Martin. Bucer. in joh. 12. 31. Things amiss, in judgements, are usually corrected and changed. Now then, the devil that strong armed man (carefully keeping his palace:) before time did quietly exercise his tyranny over the world. But being now, to be (actually) cast forth from the hearts of so many as dedicate their names unto Christ: this Christ by the very power of his death hath (actually) conquered his tyranny. And, therefore the holy Ghost saith truly, that, now is the judgement of this world: that is, even now, and forthwith, shall the reformation thereof, be effected. Again, Muscul. in joh. 12. 31. Musculus (upon these words, Now is the judgement of this world) saith thus. The Lord (in these words) doth seem to unfold the meaning of that heavenly voice, which spoke thus, a little before. I have glorified my name already: and, will glorify it again. For, what is it else to illustrate the name of God, in this world: but, to beat down, and destroy the kingdom of Satan, the prince of this world? And because this overthrow of Satan, was to be (actually) effected, by that self-same death which Christ did then suffer for the redemption of the world; therefore he saith not, there shall be a judgement of this world: but, now is the judgement of this world. Neither saith he the prince of this world (shall be) but, now is cast out. Again, joh. Calvin. in joh. 12. 31. master Calvin, upon these words, Now is the judgement of this world: writeth thus. By the word (judgement) some understand the reformation, and some, the condemnation of the world: the first acordeth better with the purpose of Christ, because the world (by his death) was then to be brought into a lawful order. For the Hebrew word Mishpat, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ●. judicium, sententia judicij. which is here interpreted judgement: betokeneth a right, and a lawful constitution of things. Howbeit, we have to consider, that without Christ there is nothing in the world but mere confusion. Item, pro mensura, & dispositione accipitur. Although therefore, that Christ before (by his preaching and miracles) began to erect the kingdom of God: yet for all that, his very death itself, was the true beginning of a rightly compounded state, and the full restoration of the world. Notwithstanding, this withal would be noted, namely, that the world's reformation, it cannot possibly be effected: but the kingdom of satan must first be abolished, but flesh (and what else soever withstandeth the justice of God) must first be subdued. Christ therefore pronounceth the prince of this world to be now cast forth: because all dissipation, and deformity proceedeth from him. For, so long as satan doth exercise his tyranny: so long, there doth violently break forth all manner of iniquity. So then Satan is no sooner cast forth, but the world is forthwith recalled from her revolted estate, to the well ordered kingdom of Christ. Again Hemingius upon these words, Hemingij Postilla dominic, 4. post pasch. pag. 370. the holy Ghost shall reprove the world of judgement, because the prince of this world is judged already, saith thus. The world that made a mock of Christ, and willed him (if he were the son of God) to come down from the cross: Math. 26. 42. by the holy ghost who fell upon the disciples at the feast of Pentecost, Marc. 15. 30. 32. was flatly convinced, that (in so doing) they judged unjustly of Christ. Act. 2. 3. 4. For, the holy ghost (saith Christ) shall then cause them to understand and perceive in deed, that I (having conquered the devil by my death and resurrection) do now exercise (by your ministry) an absolute authority over the world: Math. 10. 20. in that none are now able to withstand the wisdom which speaketh so effectually in every of you. Luc. 12. 12. This (saith Hemingius) is the very sense of this place: Act. 6. 10. if especially we refer (as we ought) the fulfilling thereof, to the efficacy and power of the holy ghost, apparently resting upon the Apostles at the feast of Pentecost. To be short, Gualther. in Math. 8. 16. fol. 272. Gualther, upon these words, they brought unto Christ a Demoniac; saith thus. There were many such (no doubt) in the days of Christ; because, the prince of this world was not yet cast forth. Who grew so much the more raging mad: by how much he perceived that fatal hour very nearly approach, wherein, he knew he must needs be cast forth from the possession which he had so long time unjustly usurped. Lo Exorcists, these be the writers which (for the present) I have purposely produced, to prove the exposition I gave of these words, Now is the judgement of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast forth. Exorcists. Whatsoever you say, or whomsoever you produce for proof of your purpose I pass not: this exposition you give is strange, and something more than that which hath been usually received. Orthodoxus. Be it so. It overthrows not (you see) but rather confirms the ordinary received exposition: in that it shows directly, some actual accomplishment of that actual conquest concerning satins dominion. Yea, Isa. 49. 8. 9 and this actual conquest, satan himself so actually felt: Marc. 1. 24. as he was forthwith enforced to acknowledge the same, saying thus. joh. Brentius in Marc. 1. 24. Ah, what have we to do with thee o jesus of Nazareth: art thou come to destroy us? Not meaning therein satan his essential destruction; but, the actual annihilating of his actual dominion, Gen. 3. 15. as hath been handled before. And this also according to the determinate council of God: who had certainly decreed the actual breaking of the serpent's head by the promised seed of the woman. Heb. 2. 14. The which promised seed did purposely take flesh and blood: that he might in the flesh destroy through death, him that had power over death, that is, the devil, as was showed before. Exorcists. Why should you so confidently apply this destruction of Satan, to the actual determination also of his essential possession: and not rather, to the only effectual weakening of that his spiritual dominion, as it is usually expounded of others. Orthodoxus. Because the holy Ghost (over, and besides the effectual weakening of Satan his spiritual dominion) speaketh directly there, of the actual accomplishment of something else, by the very act of Christ's death. The which actual accomplishment of something else, may (at no hand) be understood, either of the essence of Satan, or of his power of obsession: but only of that his temporary power of actual possession, as hath been handled at large. Yea, and that self-same actual determination of Satan his said temporary power of actual possession, it was so mightily feared, so actually and so sensibly felt of the devil; as it made him (with a bitter exclamation) to burst forth and say, Ah, art thou come to destroy us? Marc. 1. 24. As if Satan should sorrowfully exclaim in this sort. Oh thou the promised seed that must actually break my head? Thou jesus of Nazareth: Thou son of the living God: Thou that by the very act of thy approaching death, art appointed to destroy me that had power over death? Ah, woe worth thee? Oh, what have I to do with thee? Art thou come to undertake the actual destruction of my actual possession? Art thou come now with force and arms to enter my house, Luc. 10. 21. 22. to deprive me of this my special armour wherein I trusted, and even actually to cast me forth of that my palace or house, which I have hitherto possessed in peace? Yea, and therewithal likewise to weaken my whole spiritual dominion for ever? Exorcists. But, why should you thus precisely apply this destroying of Satan, to the actual determination also of Satan his temporary power of actual possession. Orthodoxus. Because Christ elsewhere so expounds, and applies it himself saying thus: Luc. 13. 32. 33. Go you and tell Herod that fox, behold, I cast out devils, and will heal still to day and to morrow, and the third day I shall be perfected, or will make an end. As if Christ should have said thus to the pharisees, you go very cunningly about to discourage me from doing my duty, by telling me of Herod his threatening my death. But, know this for a certain, that I am so far off from fearing the threats of that fox, as I would have you tell him plainly from me, that (for the whole time I have yet to live) I will be thoroughly industrious in doing the business I have now in hand, especially in driving out devils, and in curing diseases; until I have both fully confirmed the glory of my Deity, and am come to the very period itself of satan his actual destruction. The which also I am now the more earnestly in hand withal: because within these three days I must even actually accomplish the same, by my determined death. And then I shall be perfected, or then I will make an end of that business. Which perfecting or ending of Christ may in no wise be understood of Christ his essential being: because that could not be destroyed by death, Rom. 1. 4. in as much as he was to be quickened again by the mighty power of the father in his resurrection from death. Eph. 1. 19 20. Neither could it have reference to the final determination of his office of mediation: for, therein he still liveth, and must live an high priest for ever. And therefore, it must needs be understood of the actual accomplishment of that his glorious triumph over satan his actual possession: according to that he saith here, behold I cast forth devils to day and to morrow, and the third day I shall be perfected, Luc. 13. 32. or I will make a final end of that special business. Exorcists. But, why should you so precisely apply the determination of satan his power of possession to the very period itself of Christ's death: sith after his said death, it is very apparent there were dispossessions of devils, by the twelve Apostles, and seventy disciples? Orthodoxus. There were dispossessions (I grant) effected by them, a time after Christ his death for confirmation of his glorious Gospel, Erasm. Sarcer. in Act. 4. 30. but none at all for the declaration of Christ's deity: no, Christ alone did fully determine the dispossessions for that special purpose by his own death and resurrection: which (to that end) was the last miracle for ever, as himself hath avouched saying. Math. 12. 39 40. An evil and adulterous generation seeketh a sign, Luc. 10. 29. 30. but no sign shallbe given unto it, save the sign of jonah the prophet. For as jonah was three days and three nights in the whales belly: so shall the son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. Lo here he maketh his death and resurrection the last miracle of all, for the glorious manifestation of his actual power over satan. Exorcists. Whatsoever you say, or whomsoever you produce for the proof of your purpose: the former exposition of the 12 of john, is something more than that which hath been usually received. Orthodoxus. Well, I do freely confess, that, the spirits of the prophets, they are authentically subjecteth to the censure of the prophets. 1. Cor. 14. 30. 31. If therefore, any thing be revealed to another, let him (in the name of God) propound the same with pregnant proofs; and myself will forthwith be silent. In the mean time, I conclude from thence as before, that (seeing our saviour Christ hath long since determined the extraordinary power of actual possession) therefore, none now may possibly revive the opinion of any such possession: nor yet conscionably avouch the continuance thereof. Exorcists. Conclude what you please: but I hold (as before) the actual possession of devils. Orthodoxus. What man? will you wilfully oppose yourself against unanswerable reasons, against authority of ancient writers, and (which more is) against the plain evidence of sacred scriptures? Exorcists. If the propounding, and persisting in truth, be deemed a plain opposition to that which you hold: then (for any thing hitherto heard) I must constantly dwell in such an opposition, for, 1. Cor. 13. 8. I may do nothing against the truth, but for the truth. Orthodoxus. You dwell (you say) in a truth: and yet have you no one colour of truth, to uphold your supposed truth. For, what one probable reason have you at all: that may make you so confident in this your preposterous conceit? Exorcists. Why sir? what better reason, then common experience? Orthodoxus. Common experience (I confess) will carry a wonderful sway in any apparent truth. Howbeit, because this point doth crave some longer discourse than the state of our bodies (without some intermission) will be able to endure: Let us therefore, go take the fresh air for one hour, and then return to our purpose a fresh. Physiologus. We like very well of your motion. Orthodoxus. Come then: arise, and let us depart. The end of the sixth Dialogue. The seventh Dialogue. THE ARGUMENT. Common experience, what it is? Whether the actual possession of Spirits and Devils, especially, that your supposed possession in the yoongman at Magnitton, may be proved thereby: And of the Devil his power of obsession. The speakers names. PHILOLOGUS. LYCANTHROPUS. PNEUMATOMACHUS. PHYSIOLOGUS. ORTHODOXUS. EXORCISTS. Orthodoxus. NOw surely, this fresh air, it hath wonderfully revived my spirits, and made me as apt to any good action, as I was in the morning. Oh how highly are we beholding to God, for the sanctified use of so singular a creature? Physiologus. Sir, not only this one, but all the other creatures of God, they are comfortable and helpful unto us, if we had the grace to use them aright. Orthodoxus. Virtue true as you say: howbeit, this is beside our intended purpose. Come on therefore Exorcists, tell us what one reason you have, for this your confident persisting in so fond a conceit. Exorcists. Sir, in the very last speech which passed between us, I told you, I had common experience, not only to prove the actual possession of spirits and devils: but also to approve of my own action wrought at Magnitton. Orthodoxus. What mean you by common experience? Exorcists. I do understand thereby, such an experimented knowledge concerning these matters in question, as hath been experienced in every age of the world, testified of old and young, and approved directly by a general consent. Such an experience I am certain I have; to confirm me in this my opinion. Physiologus. Master Orthodoxus: this point more especially respecteth my proper profession: and therefore (if you think it any ease to yourself) do put over the prosecution thereof unto me. Orthodoxus. With very good will. Physiologus. Come on then Exorcists, let us hear the best argument you have for this your opinion. Exorcists. There can be no better argument I hope then common experience. Physiologus. Indeed (as you say) experience, she is called the schoole-mistres of fools; and yet, she is not to be accounted a foolish schoole-mistres; but such a one rather, as (when all other means fail) is able to work wisdom in the most foolish on earth. Yea, she is such an approved schoole-mistres: as, even the wisest of all, must be subject unto. And therefore, if you have her on your side (as you say) you are not unlike to prevail. Exorcists. Yes, I have her very sure. For the most in Mahgnitton, and sundry other beside, are every of them able to testify (in their own experience) an actual possession in the yoongman there: as also, in many others else where. Physiologus. They are able to testify thus much (you say) in their own experience. The question is now, whether that their own experience: be a true experience? Exorcists. There needs no question to be made thereof. For the witnesses eftsoons did see the fellow in his fearful fits: they viewed his wallowings, his foming, his rendings and tearings; they beheld his senselessness, his bowings and bend together: they perceived his many outrages, his swoonings and dangerous falling in fires: they handled his stiffness of limbs, his sundry swellings, and the Kitlings crawling under the coverlid as he lay in his bed: they heard his roar, his cry, with many strange knockings, and the Devil eftsoons speaking very hideously within him: briefly they smelled many sudden and unwonted strong savours, eftsoons very sweet, and sometimes more stinking than brimstone, with sundry other very sensible signs of actual possession: yea, and all these very sensibly in their own experience. Physiologus. These your supposed sensible signs, they are (I confess) such sensible demonstrations as may fully suffice to conclude a common experience: if all were as commonly true, as they are commonly reported abroad. Philologus. True sir? why (I assure you) they are all extant in Print in a very authentical narration: and (which more is) in master Exorcists his Printed Apology. Physiologus. I am easily drawn to believe your report: and, Horat. Art.— pictoribus, atque poêtis Quid libet audendi semper fuit aequa potestas. so much the rather, for that Painters & Poets do challenge a privilege to print what they please. Howbeit, this is no good argument, they are all extant in print: therefore they are all undoubtedly true. Exorcists. As you say sir. But these (I assure you) are all avouched for truths: and that also upon the corporal oaths of sundry discreet and honest deponents. Physiologus. For truths as they took them at least: and so, neither their discretions, their honesties, nor oaths are any thing tainted, though happily they failed in substance. Howbeit, many others (not of the meaner, or simpler sort) are otherways fully resolved. Partly, in regard of the very actions themselves: and partly in an especial respect of Satan, the supposed actor of them. For first, concerning the actions themselves. How strange soever in a seeming show, they are no way so strange in truth, but that many things else (as much, and more strange than they are in show) may ordinarily proceed from natural experiments, and be admirably effected by active and ingenious persons: the practice whereof would seem (in these days) if not an actual possession, yet a cozening trick of some cogging companion at least. Lycanthropus. I pray you discover some few of those natural experiments. Physiologus. With very good will. And, this I must tell you before, that, there is not a man in the world (though never so little imbrued with Philosophical skill) but he very well knoweth, there be many hidden virtues of mere natural things, and those also the hourly effectours of many admirable actions: which said virtues if a man understood well, and could skilfully apply them to his purpose pretended, he might undoubtedly accomplish many unwonted experiments. Yea, there be many marvels in nature, hitherto unexperienced of any, and (to use Pliny his words) as yet wholly overshadowed with nature's majesty: which the spirit of all spirits only knoweth how, and when to implop at his pleasure. Now then, if any man (covertly practising the experiments of these natural causes) did apparently accomplish like admirable matters, men would commonly account him a Magician, and very hardly believe he could possibly effect those rare and strange feats, Aristot. de admirandis auditionibus. without the power and help of the devil: whereas yet, they are only mere natural actions, Plin. historia natural. and produced wholly from mere natural causes. Of these natural marvels hath Aristotle penned down a most perfect treatise: Proclus, in lib. de sacrificio & magia. which notwithstanding, is (by some) ascribed to Theophrastus. Pliny also, he hath some such wonderful matters in sundry of his works, but very many in his natural history: Aug. de civit. Dei, lib. 12. cap. 4. 5. as may appear plainly to such as exactly peruseth the same. Besides this, Proclus he also hath penned down many, Albert. Magn. lib. 2. Minoralium, cap. 1. 12. 17. all tending directly to that self-same purpose. Yea, and which more is, Augustine himself, Albertus Magnus, Fracastorius, and Ficinus also: they are none of them inferior herein to any of the others before. Fracastor. in lib. de Sympath. Ficinus, lib. 4. Theolog Plat. Cardanus, de subtilitate, & varietate rerum. To be brief, there are very many such matters dispersed throughout Cardanus his books concerning the subtlety and variety of things: which I will here briefly repeat out of Pliny his works. Pneumatomachus. Do so I heartily pray you: for, therein you shall accomplish unto us a singular pleasure. Physiologus. I will spare for no pains, so far forth especially as my memory serves me: and therefore, hearken attentively to it. Philologus. Yes sir, Act. 17. 21. be you sure you shall find us attentive Athenians; in hearing, and reporting strange news. Physiologus. Well then, Plin. lib. 2. cap. 96. this first I must tell you, that very near unto Harpasa, a town in Asia, there standeth an horrible craggy rock or torre, which a man may easily move with a little touch of one of his fingers: whereas, if he set his whole body unto that self-same rock, he cannot possibly stir it the breadth of an hair. Again, there are other two mountains, very nearly adjoining unto the famous river called Indus. The nature of one mountain, is to draw iron unto it: and of the other, by all means to reject and put iron from it. In so much as if any man come on those mountains with nails in his shoes: he cannot (with his said shoes) be possibly pulled from the one, nor by any means stand on the other. Again, Thom. Coper. Thesaurus. Strabo, in Geographia. very near unto Babylon, there floweth forth from a rock, some certain natural matter called Naphtha: being a chalky clay, and of a slimy moist substance not unlike unto pitch. This said Naphtha (on which side soever a man shall behold it) hath flames of fire overflowing the same: which cannot possibly be quenched but with abundance of water, with vinegar, with alum, or bird-lime. Again, from Nympheum, the famous promontory or mountain of Proconnesus, Plin. ibid. cap. 107. an island in Propontis: there floweth forth from the midst of the rock, a flame which by the drops of rain is kindled, and set on fire. Again, Plin. ibid. cap. 103. in Dodona a city of Greece, jupiter his well, when it is cold as ice, and hath utterly extinguished the flaming fiery faggots: if (after those faggots be thoroughly quenched) they be presently put into the well again, it kindles them as fresh as before. Yea, and in the country Illyrium, if clothes be there spread over a certain coldwell: they are presently burned. Again, Thom. Coper. Thesaurus. Plin. ibid. the admirable Aetna, a certain hill in Sicily, now called Gibello monte, containing in circuit, twenty furlongs, environed with a bank of ashes the height of a wall, and having in the middle thereof, a round hill of the self-same matter and colour, with two huge holes therein, fashioned like two cups: this hill is not (for the strangeness thereof) inferior to any of the rest. For, from out of those holes do strangely arise, sometime sundry fearful flames of fire: sometime a horrible smoke: and sometimes are fearfully blown forth from thence, very burning stones, in infinite numbers. Moreover, before the said flames of fire do sensibly appear, there is heard in the ground, a very terrible noise and roaring. And (which is more to be marveled) when the smoke and fire is most abundant and fervent: yet, round about the top of this hill, are always seen snow, and hoary frosts. Again, Plin. lib. ult. cap. 4. the said Pliny makes mention of a stone, called in the Greek tongue Adamas, and in English a Diamond; which can neither be broken with violence, nor burned with fire: and yet it may easily be softened and made pliable to any good purpose, by steeping the same in goat's blood a while, being warm. Yea and (which more is) this Diamond is in nature so opposite unto a certain stone called Magnes, in english, the loadstone, as (the same being laid near to a needle) it will not suffer the Loadstone to draw the said needle unto it: and being thrust hard to the Loadstone, it forthwith apprehendeth, snatcheth up, and carrieth the Loadstone quite away with it. But, of all wonders under the sun, there is none (in my seeming) more admirable than the Loadstone itself: were not the hidden operation thereof, so commonly experienced, and known as it is. For, that the same should draw iron unto it, and, so directly dispose the very point of the mariners needle towards the south as it doth: which of the wisest philosophers could ever as yet find forth the very true natural reason, and cause thereof? Howbeit, Aristot. de hist. animalium. the little fish Echneis (which is commonly called Remora, of staying or hindering) is of all others the wonder of wonders. Plin. lib. 32. cap. 11. For of this fish Aristotle he writeth, and Pliny reporteth from his proper experience, that the same (being but half afoot long, and very like to a snail) if she once but cleave to the side of ship (though of very great burden, and never so fleet under sail) yet the said fish will so strongly restrain the force of that ship, as she will compel her perforce, to stand still, notwithstanding the violence of wind or oar: and this with no labour at all, but only by cleaving upon the side of the ship, as was showed before. Hitherto Pliny. Lycanthropus. These I assure yond, are very strange, and admirable actions in nature. Physiologus. There are many others as strange as any of these, if we had time to report them. Moreover, besides these things which want reason, many men also themselves, have even naturally effected such like admirable actions; as very few (never seeing them done) will either credit the actors themselves, or believe them at all, being sound reported by others: although yet Augustine he makes it very evident by many examples. Philologus. Report some few of those examples I pray you. Physiologus. Content. Aug. de ciui●. Dei lib. 24. cap. 23. We have heard (saith Augustine) the natures of some certain men, very much unlike to the nature of others, yea, and (for strangeness) every ways admirable: effecting with their own proper bodies, such wonderful actions, as none other might possibly do, and (hearing only thereof) will hardly believe them. For there were some to be seen, who (without stirring their heads at all) could shake their own ears; either one by itself alone, or both at once at their pleasure. Again, there were some others, who not moving their head (where their locks especially grew) would very easily put down their whole bush of hair to their forehead: and eftsoons recall it again at their pleasure. There were some others again, who, of such meats as they had eaten before (those self-same meats also, being incredibly very many and divers) by often handling their stomach, from thence would easily bring forth unconcoctod, what morsel they thought best at their pleasures. There were some others again, who (from the very bottom of their belly, and that also without any slovenly crackings behind) would forthwith procure so many sundry sounds at their pleasure: as a man would have thought there had been some singing within them. Yea, and I also (saith Augustine) have seen in my proper experience; a man that would sweat when he listed himself. And it is very well known, that many can weep when they please: and power forth abundance of tears. Yea and (which more is) there was a certain priest in Calamensis parish, who (when seemed him good) would deprive himself of all bodily sense, and lie flat on the ground as if he were dead: insomuch, as when he was pinched, pricked, or pulled by the hair, he felt nothing at all, yea, and eftsoons also when the beholders did touch him with candle or fire, he perceived no manner of grief, neither could they (for all that while) discern any breathing in him. Thus far Augustine there. Now then, from all the premises, I may fitly enforce this one inference upon Exorcists. Namely, that if all these the precendent matters (how admirable soever in show) yet were and might well be effected by nature herself, and only by mere natural means: why then should those your imagined marvels wrought at Mahgnitton (for any their supposed strangeness whatsoever, it being also, so far inferior to many of these) be deemed for any such unspeakable wonders as could not possible be effected, but, by some supernatural power of the devil? Yea, and why should you urge such uncertain and doubtful actions: to conclude a certain experience? Exorcists. Nay sir, they were all I assure you, very strange and undoubted true actions. Physiologus. But their strangeness whatsoever (you see) cannot certainly conclude them for truths; sith many things more strange may be effected by nature herself, and by mere natural means, as was showed before. Besides that, many more strange actions than any were done at Mahgnitton: may, and do eftsoons accidentally arise from mere natural diseases. Paul. AEginat. lib. 3. cap. 15. Namely, from disordered melancholy, from Mania, from the Epilepsy, from Lunacy, Aetius, lib. 6. cap. 11. from lycanthropy, from Convulsions, from the mother, from the menstrual obstructions, and sundry other outrageous infirmities. Levinius For, the animal parts being marvelously affected Lemnius. with some disordered fantasies arising only upon some falsely supposed sensible notions, Avicen. tract. 3 de apostemat. capitis, cap. 1. and the mind being mightily troubled by means of noisome fumes, black and gross, vapouring up to the brain like the soot of a chimney: they imagine themselves to be vexed eftsoons, joh. Wierus de praestigijs Daemon. lib. 4. cap. 25. of some hurtful spirits, and do strongly persuade themselves, that the devil assaileth their minds, and driveth them forthwith into many absurd, inconvenient, foolish, Levinius. and fantastical imaginations. And which more is, Lemnius. there be many most fearful diseases which happen to maidens and widows, of the passions of the womb, or from the late fluxion of their natural evacuations, or when they defer their marriage to long, and then be suddenly bestowed in marriage: all these do no less hurt and disquiet the poor patient's mind, then if they were actually possessed of Satan. And therefore, me think it is to to ridiculous, that men of sound judgement will so soon be overswaied with any fantastical conceit: as that (from the only bare notions of a deceivable sensitive knowledge) they should (by these only supposed strange actions) imagine any actual possession of Satan: seeing the like admirable accidents, both may, and do daily proceed from mere natural diseases, without any operation or power of the devil. Moreover, some of those your supposed signs, now extant in print to prove the pretended actual possession of Satan, they are (in themselves) so absurd, so supernatural, and impossible: as they are of all wise men derided, and deemed no better than juggling devices, to deceive the simpler sort. Now then, if the greatest part of those your supposed signs, be adjudged untrue, and concluded unsound: why may not the rest be deemed (in like manner) so deceitful and false, as they deserve, and are worthy no credit at all? Briefly, if all those your suggested signs (put lately in print by the parties themselves, to prove the pretended possession of devils) must needs be canonised currant, and held as infallible oracles from Apollo Pythius at Delphos: why then should we the rather believe our Saviour Christ for any his miracles, or supernatural operations: sith the young man at Magnitton, did likewise (for his part) accomplish so many extraordinary and admirable actions, if that which is published in print, may possibly be proved a truth? Exorcists. Nay sir, the young man he wrought not those admirable actions, by any supernatural power of his own: but the devil rather (within him, and by him) effected the same. Are you fled to the essential and inherent possession of Satan afresh? I perceive you are like to the hunted Hare which seuddeth hither and thither, and standeth in fear at every squat. Howbeit, as the untruth of those your supposed signs of actual possession is ferretted forth in an especial regard of the actions themselves: so surely the further untruth of those your supposed signs shall now further appear in an especial respect of satan himself, whom you make the supposed actor of those your supposed actions: which is (I assure you) the other main cause, why most wise men account all those the aforesaid suggested signs of actual possession, but fine-witted forgeries, and mere cozening conceits of cogging companions. Namely, for that the very devil also himself (whom you make the supposed actor of those your supposed actions, is utterly unable to accomplish any such actions as are impossible in nature, and incredible in all sound Divinity. For first, (concerning an impossibility in nature itself) the devil (as hath been declared, and you know it full well) he is but a finite creature himself: and therefore his power whatsoever, is so limited and bounded unto him, as the same may not possibly exceed the appointed territories of his determined nature. Now then, if his power whatsoever, be paled about, and hemmed within the natural compass of his essential, and natural being: how could he, either of himself, or by the young man at Mahgnitton, in any possibility, effect so many absurd, supernatural, and impossible actions, as in those books are blazed abroad? And next (for the impossibility also thereof in all sound Divinity) very certain I am, Gen. 1. 1. etc. the devil, he is no creator of substances, no transformer of natures: Rom. 4. 17. nor no worker of miracles. First, that he is no creator of substances, 2. Cor. 4. 6. it is apparent in this: namely, for that jehovah alone is the Creator of all things. Gen. 1. 3. He only it is who calleth those things which are not, job. 41. 2. as though they were. Isa. 44. 24. He bringeth light out of darkness, Isa. 42. 8. he is the author and father of all things: Natura principiorum amat singularitatem. and therefore the glory of creation belongeth only to him. Moreover this (in all reason) is very apparent, namely, that the nature of beginnings affecteth singularity: insomuch as possibly he could not be singular, Danaeus, physica christiana, par. 1. fol. 92. if he should communicate the power of Creation, to any besides himself. Now then, if spirits and devils be accounted the creators of substances, Isa. 45. 18. then must they (in like manner) beheld the quickners, joh. 1. 8. and sustainers also thereof: and so (by consequence) be Gods and jehovah, Act. 17. 28. causing things to exist. Colos. 1. 16. Which, how repugnant it is to all sound Divinity: may plainly appear in sundry scriptures. Aug. de trinit. lib. 3. cap. 8. Yea, this is flat opposite to the approved testimony of all the fathers. For, Damascen. de Orthodox. fide lib. 20. Augustine, he flatly denieth spirits and devils to be Creators of the smallest creature on earth: yea, even of a flea or a louse. Damascene also, August. tract. in joh. 2. & 3. he acordeth thereto. Yea, and Augustine, he backeth this point by a second supply: affirming, that by whomsoever the glorious Angels were made, A quo vermes creantur, ab eodem & Angeli. by him also, the silly worms were created. This then, may fully suffice, to conclude, the devil, no creator of substances. Now next, that he is no transformer of natures, it is very apparent, In the 5. Dialog. fol. 77. 78. in that he cannot possibly transform his own proper nature: no, not so much as in an outward appearance, as hath plainly been proved before. And as for working of miracles, he is as impotent therein, as in any of the rest: because he hath no supernatural power to accomplish such matters. He may work strange wonders, Act. 1. 9 10. 11 as Simon Magus hath done: but, George Gifford in his discovery of Witches. he can effect no supernatural, and miraculous actions: though God give him leave to show his whole power. So then, Pet. Martyr. in 1. Sam. 28. & loc. come. 9 fol. 67. the devil (you see) he hath a double bridle put in his mouth: namely, the bounds of nature: and the will of God. By the one he is unable: and by the other he may not do more than the appointment of God. The premises therefore considered, who seeth it not utterly incredible in all sound Divinity, that many of those your supposed actions could be possibly effected of satan: in such sort at least, as in those your published pamphlets they are falsely reported. Exorcists. The devil, he is able to accomplish great matters. Physiologus. So much I confess. And therefore (for arguments sake) be it by the way, supposed (which may never be proved) that the devil, either of himself, or by the young man at least, was thoroughly able, and did truly effect such supernatural matters as are published in print: there is then no doubt but that he can do them again, and as oft as he please. For, if he be any ways able: there is no doubt of his willingness in working of mischief. That (if he hath done them before at Mahgnitton) he is then able to do them again, my reason is this: namely, for that every art, or action, presupposeth always an essential power in the artist, or actor himself. Your Apology therefore, reporting (as it doth) for infallible truth, that the devil (in the yoongman at Mahgnitton either did, or could possibly accomplish such impossible actions: you yourself must be able to demonstrate by what possible means he might possibly effect them, which I verily supposse you cannot possibly do. For this you may not be ignorant of, that, to every action is required the faculty and ability of the agent; the aptness of the patient or subject: with a convenient and possible application of true matter and form. Now than first for the devil, the supposed agent of those your impossible actions; he is not omnipotent, but an impotent, a finite and circumscriptible spirit: and his power whatsoever, it dependeth upon the analogy and consonancy of his mind and body, if he had any at all. Howbeit, with his mind he can do no more but understand and will, and with his body (if he had any at all) he could accomplish no more than the very bounds and ends of corporal sense would suffer, and the faculty of his nature extendeth unto: and therefore his natural power whatsoever, it cannot possibly stretch forth itself to the powerful effecting of any such supernatural actions as do infinitely surmount his natural and finite faculty, his sense, his understanding and will. So then, here wanteth (you see) first, the faculty and power of the efficient itself: for the possible effecting of those impossible actious wherewith you would manage your pretended actual possession. Whereupon I infer, that, if no such supernatural power at all may be proved in the devil his supposed possession: then, no such supernatural actions (in truth) may possibly proceed from the same, notwithstanding any your printed reports. For, in all reason, there can be no greater virtue in the thing caused: then is in the cause itself, or in that which proceeds from the benefit of the cause. But you (in your printed apology) do make the devil his supposed actual possession, the principal efficient cause of all such supernatural actions as were ministerially effected (you say) by the young man at Mahgnitton: and therefore (the said power being finite) you cannot possibly conclude from thence, any such admirable matters as you would bear us in hand. Neither may you conscionably persuade us to entertain for sound truth, whatsoever you report concerning that point: especially, Arist. de anima lib. 2. if we will credit our own experience and sense unabused, the rules of philosophy, and sound divinity. Now next for any aptness in the young man at Mahgnitton See M. Dorels Narration, to the 16. objection fol. 4. pag. 1. whom (in any wise) you will have the proper patient or subject of those strange and impossible actions: how should there possibly be found in him any aptness or inclination at all, to any such supernatural matters, He saith, if M. D. would say or swear that summers did such things, he was not to be credited. Because, none by teaching or learning: can practise impossibilities. he himself being but a mere natural creature: consisting naturally of body and soul: endued only with mere natural faculties and circumscribed no doubt with mere natural bonds? And therefore, you see it is utterly impossible for him to have any further aptness or inclination that way: then his natural faculty extendeth unto, and may possibly proceed from the very sway and reach of his own proper nature. Briefly, concerning some convenient and possible application of true matter and form, Item, in M. D. for the orderly effecting of those your supposed supernatural actions: such a convenient and possible application, is much more impossible than any of the rest. Apolog. pag. 10. videlicet, Supernatural, Actions, Strength, Knowledge. Both, because no such true matter for those your supposed supernatural actions, was ever preexisting in nature: and, for that also, the true form itself, for a convenient and possible application thereof, must needs be supernatural, The Devil in likeness of a mouse, a black dog. surmounting by much, the natural power of the devil. And so, (by consequence) those your printed reports, they are (you see) no sound demonstrations: to conclude unto us the certain truth of such supposed supernatural His body in length beyond the tallest man. His hands, feet, face, and hair not burnt, he being in the fire, etc. actions. Exorcists. Why are you so loath to believe that, which so many beheld with their eyes? Physiologus. Because I see not how they should possibly behold that with Kitlings creeping in his bed, etc. their eyes, which you would have me believe with my heart: contrary to divinity, to philosophy, to physic, to nature, to law, and to conscience. 1. For first, the working of miracles (in all sound divinity) Divinity. is ceased long since: neither was the devil ever able to effect any miracle, whatsoever he pretended in outward appearance. 2. Besides that, Philosophy. no one reason (in all Philosophy) may possibly be yielded: for the confirmation of a matter so impossible in reason. 3. Again, Physic. howsoever the young man was said to use ointments in working his feats: yet, very certain I am, that no one Physical receipt may (by art) be prescribed for the possible effecting of such impossible actions. 4. Nether yet may a circumscribed nature, Nature. at any hand extend herself beyond her own natural bounds: to the admirable accomplishment of such supernatural matters. 5. Moreover, Law. because there is nothing possible in Law, which in nature itself is absurd and impossible; the judge therefore (notwithstanding any thing confessed before by the parties) he is not to attend or regard whatsoever those partial reporters have published in print, or otherways reported to be done by the devil at Mahgnitton: but, he must strictly examine, and in equity allow rather of that thing which is substantially proved to have (in deed and in truth) by him been effected, or which (at the least) might naturally and possibly fall within the full power of the agent to do. 6. Lastly, Conscience. whatsoever the yoongman may haply report concerning the supposed accomplishment of any such supernatural actions by himself, or the devil: he is not (in conscience) to be believed therein, whether his judgement be sound or unsound, I mean, whether he be well, or but wild in his wits. For first, be it supposed the man were sound in his judgement, yea, and so well in his wits, as possibly he might be: yet were there no conscience at all, to credit a cozening companion, so unconscionably avouching such incredible actions. But if (as may rather be deemed) he was someway intoxicated, or not well in his wits when he reported such matters abroad: then tell me what conscience, or what wisdom it were, to credit for infallible truth, the crazy confession of a crazy weak brain, in matters especially so absurd, and so opposite to the orderly course of nature? For, L. absent de paenis. this I take to be Law; namely, that when the error of judgement, or the blindness of will dependeth upon some secret disease, L. 2. cum. gloss. or natural infirmity: the men's actions then (in such kind of cases) are in all tender compassion to be carefully pitied, but their confessions at no band, to be conscionably credited. Because (the mind itself being destitute of reason) the will (in such a case) could yield no sound consent to the action: Delictum sine consensu, non potest committi, neque iniuria sine animo ●●siurandi. neither could any crime be committed without a consent, nor injury effected but with a mind to do wrong. Yea, & (which more is) be it supposed the yoon gman at Mahgnitton should very solemnly confess, he had indeed a resolute purpose to have effected some such supernatural actions as are (by yourself) reported in Print: yet, See M. Dorels Narration, the 2. answer to the 2. objection, fol. 2. pag. 2. for that such a purpose retained in mind (all the while it is uneffected) doth nothing at all to the public or private hurt of any, that self-same intended purpose may not justly be esteemed as an offensive action in Law. Much less then, is an impossible purpose of a crazy weak brain, to be conscionably credited, summers is not to be believed, affirming impossibilities. how confidently soever the same be reported: because, a sound mind, purposeth nothing but what is possible. Lycanthropus. Why hold you many of those reported matters; Item, in Apolog. pag. 15. Sanae mentis voluntas, voluntas rei possibilis est. impossible for satan to do? Physiologus. Because, if devils may possibly bring such impossible matters to pass at their pleasure: then may they also be causes, or impediments to the ordinary course of all other natural actions and ordinances appointed by God. Namely, they may then cause it to hold up, when it should rain, and to rain, when it should hold up: they may then cause midnight at noonday, and noone-daie at midnight: yea, and by that means, the divine power itself, should (after a sori) become serutle to the will of a devil: so as we should neither eat, nor drink, but by the devil his permission. Howbeit, to press you a little, with one only instance of many. This I must tell you, job. 5. 10. that (whatsoever some men imagine concerning the devil his supposed power, job. 38. 28. for the raising of showers and tempestuous storms) it is the Lord God alone who giveth Psal. 135. 7. us rain in due season. jerem. 5. 24. and 14. 22. For, when by the power of the Sun and force of the winds, some certain exhalations are drawn and lifted up from the earth, Act. 14. 17. into the middle region of the air: jam. 5. 18. the coldness of the air there, doth so congeal and thicken those said exhalations, as forthwith they become clouds: which clouds being eftsoons (by the heat of the sun dissolved; & by the force of the winds dispersed) are turned straightways, into either rain or hail: into rain especially, if by the way, those drops be not frozen, and so turned to hail. These circumstances conferred with the whole course of the scriptures: it cannot possibly be brought within the power of a devil, to procure either rain or fair weather. Now then, if there be no possible power in a devil, to raise up and procure a tempest of rain, which doth seem to our sense, the most accident all matter under the heavens: then surely, much less is he able by himself or his substitute, to accomplish any of those impossible actions which yourselves have so confidently reported abroad. And so by consequence, all those your sensible demonstrations hitherto declared: are very insufficient to conclude unto us any such approved or common experience. Exorcists. Sir, notwithstanding these your Philosophical proceedings, the matters which fell forth at Mahgnitton (even in an approved experience of all the beholders) were very apparent signs of an actual possession. Physiologus. Well sir? how triflingly soever you travers the matter, these my Philosophical proceedings (for any thing hitherto heard) might fully suffice to put your fantastical fooleries to a perpetual non-sute: were you not like to the ravenous Ferret, which rendeth in pieces whatsoever poor Rabbit doth come in her reach. And therefore it shall not be amiss to cope up your lips a little, by taking forthwith so strict a course as you shall never be able to contradict with all your skill: which may in this sort be very fitly effected. Namely, first, by searching forth sound, the very true nature of those things that were done at Mahgnitton: and then next, by laying down some certain rule of right judgement, to examine them by. Lycanthropus. Proceed in that course I beseech you. Physiologus. With very good will▪ First therefore, concerning the things, themselves, Danaeu● in physic christiana. tract. 1. cap. 6. fol. 5. it may not in reason be denied, but that undoubtedly, they were things either natural: or not natural at least. Things natural, I account all those several matters to be, whatsoever, which God hath essentially enabled unto the orderly accomplishment of that self-same end whereunto he created them first: it being withal, very natural and consequent in the things themselves. And of this sort, I esteem all matters and actions whatsoever; which be naturally consonant and concludent to the orderly course of nature. Now sir, if your matters at Mahgnitton were all undoubtedly such, then, either all men in like sort, are naturally tainted with Satan his actual possession, because all men in their natural actions, do equally observe the like natural course either more or less: and so, the whole world beside, which have hitherto wanted your help of prayer and fasting, should wholly remain in Satan his actual possession. Or (on the other side) if all men in like sort, be not naturally possessed, then, neither the yoongman himself (remaining with them, in one and the self-same natural condition) was possessed at all: and so by consequence, you have kept at Mahgnitton, a greater coil about nothing, than the Grecians ever kept at the conquest of Troy. Exorcists. Nay sir, the matters at Mahgnitton: were rather, things not natural. Physiologus. Are you fled so soon, from things natural: to things not natural? Well; go to then. Things not natural, I reckon all those matters or actions whatsoever, which have naturally in themselves, no natural ability for the orderly accomplishment of nature her orderly determined courses: neither yet, of, or in their own selves are natural and consequent to any such natural purpose or end. And these not natural things, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. are undoubtedly, such as be directly, either against nature, or besides nature, or above nature at least. 1 Things directly against nature, are all those accidental occurrents 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. which do altogether withstand those essential properties, this inbred faculty, yea, and that very natural disposition of the things themselves (which by the operation of God) were naturally engrafted in every of them: and which more is, doth violently destroy, & even utterly annihilate the proper essence, or essential being of all those natural things whatsoever. Of this sort are hanging, kill, poisoning, strangling, and death also itself. Now then, your matters at Mahgnitton, they may not justly be concluded for things of this kind; both because the yoongman himself is yet living and lusty; and for that, no one of those your supposed supernatural actions, were in themselves either deadly or mortal. 2. To proceed. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Arist. physic. lib. 2. Things directly besides nature, are all those unnatural declining courses of nature, which, notwithstanding they do not totally and wholly withstand the orderly force and operation of nature; Aug. Enchir. cap. 87. yet do they hinder it much: and (by either adding thereunto, Plutarch. de placit. philosoph. lib. 5. cap. 8. or by subtracting therefrom) do mightily forestall the very true natural courses thereof. As for example, when (over and beside the orderly parts of nature) a man hath two heads, Hieron. epist. ad vital●m. two noses, and four hands; or, but one eye, Ni●eph. histor. eccles lib. 12. cap. 37. & 18. 33. one arm, one leg, and such like. All these, with many other such unnatural accidents, are things directly besides nature: whereof sundry approved writers (especially Hierom himself, and Nicephorus also) have written at large in their several discourses. Now sir, you may not, and which more is, you dare not (without blushing) affirm, that any of your matters at Mahgnitton, were (indeed, and in truth) any such monstrous, or unnatural occurrents: and therefore, from thence you cannot possibly conclude any actual possession at all. Or if notwithstanding, you will impudently affirm, that those your said matters were undoubtedly some of them such monstrous occurrents, and thereupon infer an actual possession; it must necessarily follow, that either the yoongman at Mahgnitton was not possessed at all; or else, that only the monstrous persons are actually possessed, which were a very absurd and monstrous opinion. 3. Briefly, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. the things directly above nature, are all those matters & actions whatsoever, which (beyond their own natural force, and rather in, then by the very things themselves) are eftsoons effected: although yet, not by any order and faculty of nature, but by an extraordinary, and supernatural power of God. As, to make iron swim, fire to freeze, water to burn, the dead to return to life, and such like. Now sir, if you dare flatly affirm that your matters at Mahgnitton, were things undoubtedly of this self-same kind: then must you, not only very necessarily avouch some supernatural power in the devil and yoongman possessed, for the admirable effecting of all those your supposed supernatural actions: but (which more is) you must very confidently conclude, that, such an admirable dispossessing of the yoongman possessed at Mahgnitton, was undoubtedly, the miracle of miracles. Exorcists. Make of it, a miracle, a monster, or, what pleaseth yourself: possessed I am certain he was. Physiologus. Possessed you are certain he was: and yet cannot certainly show in what sort. Howbeit, having hitherto searched forth sound the very nature of the things themselves, and finding them in effect to be things neither natural, nor not natural, and so by consequence, but mere delusions: Let us notwithstanding, imagine them all for such as you say, and therefore now here in like manner, Lay down some certain rule of right judgement, to examine them by. Lycanthropus. I pray you do so. Physiologus. Content. The rule of right judgement, is some certain direction, level, or square, whereby is declared unto us, both what is true, and what is false: and for which only respect, it is also very fitly termed the rule of truth. Moreover, this self-same rule of truth, is either natural: or supernatural. The natural rule of truth, is that natural direction, which nature herself doth truly declare; and very sufficiently afford unto us. And this self-same natural rule of truth is also twofold; namely, either some natural principles, or universal experience. The natural principles, are some certain general notions, or universal directions, very naturally engrafted and known unto men by nature itself: and which also are so necessarily, so certainly, and so unchangeably true, as whosoever shall dare to call them in doubt, he may justly be termed a madman, or fool. And these natural principles also, are, either theorical: or practical. The theorical principles, are all such speculative demonstrations, as do certainly direct and guide the judgement, in a true understanding & knowledge of things. As for example, twice two, are four. Again, there is one only truth. Again, the whole is greater than any part thereof. Again, the cause is not after the effect. Again, there is one only natural motion of a simple body, and so forth. The practical principles are such certain and infallible grounds of truth, as do certainly direct and govern the manners of men. As for example, God is to be served. Men may not be hurt. Honest things are to be done. falsehood is to be fled, and so forth. Now than this natural rule, I mean these natural principles (whether theorical, or practical) they can be no competent judges to examine and try forth the truth of those your supposed marvels wrought at Mahgnitton. First, because this self-same rule (being only but natural, in what kind soever) cannot possibly extend forth itself to the full compass and reach of those your admirable actions: many of them especially being so absurd as they are, so supernatural, and every way so impossible in nature. Secondly, for that many wise men in the world (no less wise than yourself, yea, and as sufficiently qualified with those self-same natural principles whatsoever) are of a far different judgement to yours: and therefore (by force of this rule) you cannot possibly put down unto us any such infallible and certain conclusions, as may possibly persuade an actual possession. And thus much briefly, for that first rule of truth, which ariseth only from mere natural principles. Lycanthropus. Show us in like sort (I beseech you) that other infallible rule of truth, which proceedeth from universal experience. Physiologus. With very good will. And, because, this is that very loadstone itself whereunto Exorcists attendeth for his special directions in those supernatural accidents: I will therefore, first unfold the thing itself, and then next, discover the sundry degrees thereof. Pneumatomachus. A very excellent order; I pray you proceed. Physiologus. Content. First then for the thing itself, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. ex 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Auenarius in Lexic. Hebraic. the same is called in the Hebrew tongue Cheker, that is, a diligent scrutiny, investigation, invention, inquisition, or searching out of a thing to the bottom. It cometh of the Radical word Chakar, which signifieth to make diligent inquiry for a thing to the bottom, to make a profound inquisition, to gauge, very deeply into, and to search down, to the first fountain itself. In the Greek tongue it is called Emporia: that is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Experientia. an experience, skill, specialty or proof. In the Latin● tongue experientia: that is, an experiment, a due trial, a pattern or precedent. And, in our English tongue, we commonly call it a common use, example, or practise. Now then, all these the aforesaid Etymologies (so fitly consorting in one) as they do lively portend at a blush, a ●erie admirable, and most certain demonstrative rule: so do they teach us withal, that universal experience, Experience, what it is? is a perpetual use of things, wherein all men of sound judgement (howsoever severed by times, and places) do by due experiments prove and know, that they have evermore received one and the self-same thing, after one and the self-same manner. And that therefore, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. it is called a catholic, or common experience. As for example, Fire is hot: life is one thing: and death is another: wine and pepper, have an inflaming faculty: snow is white: the heavens are moved circulerly, and so forth. Lycanthropus. Let this suffice for the thing itself: and now, show us in like sort, the sundry degrees thereof. Physiologus. The sundry degrees of an universal experience, are those several proceedings: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. . wherein she groweth from step to step, to her full perfection. And these self-same degrees are four: namely, aisthesis, hystoria, Epagoge, emporia. 1. Aisthesis, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. is the first degree of universal experience, when as by sense (I mean, by seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting & handling:) there is something very sensibly perceived. And, this falleth effectually forth in all things; either objected to sense, or propounded by example. 2. Historia is the second degree of experience: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. when as from the objected sensible notions, or propounded examples, we do constitute an observation or rule. For, from one, or a few examples: we may fitly gather a rule. 3. Epagoge, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. is the third degree of universal experience: when as by an orderly induction we collect and bring in very many examples, and those also, very fitly according with the former constituted rule. 4. Briefly Emporia, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. is the last degree of universal experience: when as we do certainly find by like perpetual experiments, that all the examples propounded unto us, are after one and the self-same manner, and do fully consort themselves, to the former determined rule. Thus then, you may plainly perceive, that sense, observation, induction, and the like perpetual experience: do fully constitute a second infallible natural rule, for the orderly examining and trying forth of truths. Howbeit, neither may this self-same natural, or experimental rule: in any sort be enforced to serve Exorcists his turn. Because, it in no wise acordeth with his supposed actual possession; or with any the admirable actions arising from thence: whether we respect the very rule itself, or the several degrees thereof. For first, concerning the very rule itself. There were then, and are now many wise and sensible persons besides yourselves: some of them severed by time and place, and many of them conversing among you, even then and there, where your supposed actual possession was actually effected, or practised. Who do all of them flatly affirm, that, they (for their own parts) neither then, nor at any time since had any such experimented trials, or approved experiments of such an actual possession, as yourselves have published in print: and therefore, the experience which you flee unto now for your refuge, is no catholic or universal experience. Besides all this, let the matters themselves be yet further examined and tried forth fully by the several degrees of the universal experience propounded before: and then tell me, how this self-same experimental rule, and the actions that are to be ruled thereby, may possibly accord in one. For first, concerning sense, how is it possible that any sensible experience (as it were step by step) should directly proceed from the sensitive knowledge, to the memory itself, seeing all the objects of sense (arising especially from any your supposed supernatural actions) were none other thing else, but deceivable objects and crafty conveyances: and therefore, could not possibly afford true natural notions, towards the timely effecting of a universal experience? And next for observation, how is it possible that any infallible rule for the trial of truths: should be sensibly and sound collected from such insensible notions, and unsound examples? Again, concerning induction, where, or from whence should we possibly collect any other examples, which may, or can possibly accord with this supposed example of yours: for the further confirmation of the former infallible rule, constituted (as before) upon sensual experiments, and sound examples? Moreover, where is that perpetual consenting experience, wherein all men of sound judgement whatsoever, have truly found forth by like perpetual experiments from time to time: that, this one, with all other the approved examples of actual possession, do mutually concur after one and the felfesame manner, and fully accord in every point? Now then, sith the universal experience we speak of doth not (so much as in outward appearance) hold any agreement at all, either, with your pretended actual possession, or with any the supposed actions thereof: you cannot (in any proportion of reason) either conscionably avouch, or consequently conclude from thence, any approved experience, to try forth the truth of your matters. Yea, and this I say more, that, if the experience we speak of here, and your actual possession with the supposed actions there at Mahgnitton, did so fully accord, and so justly jump together in all outward appearance, as the one might not possibly be discerned from the other: yet could you not gather from thence, such a certain rule of right judgement, as might (for the purpose in hand) be able to serve your turn to the full. Because, that your pretended actual possession, and the supposed actions arising from thence, are (many of them) supernatural, absurd, and impossible: whereupon, this experimental or universal experience being (you may see, when it is at the best) but a mere natural rule) it cannot possibly compass and square forth unto us, the certain truth of those your supernatural actions. And therefore, it is utterly in vain for yourself, to rest as you do: upon universal experience for trial thereof. Exorcists. Nay sir, I rest not at all, upon any such an experience as proceedeth only from mere natural rules: but, upon a spiritual experience rather, arising directly from the confirmed canons, and infallible rules of the word. Physiologus. Your manner of disputing, is very like (I perceive) to a maultmilne horse his manner of drawing. For he (being blindfolded before he be put in his gears) knoweth none other, but that he goeth directly forewards: when notwithstanding, he keepeth only a circular motion: so surely, yourself (being horribly hoodwinked herein with the palpable mask, of a mischievous selfe-conceite) you do verily suppose, that (in this your giddy course of disputing) you go directly an end, when you follow eftsoons the wild-goose chase: one while fleeing from scripture to common experience, and (being soon weary of your part that way) another while retiring from common experience to the scriptures again, as one that wotteth not well, in what place to fasten his foot. But, go to man, stick fast to the infallible rule of the scriptures, and cleave close to the confirmed canons thereof: for, howsoever these natural rules (laid forth by myself) may not possibly be made pliable to the very point of your purpose in hand: the sacred scriptures, they are those supernatural rules, whereunto (by Orthodoxus his help) your supposed supernatural actions (being sound currant) may well be made suitable, and sorting in every respect. If therefore your said actions may possibly endure the hammering and trial of scripture: I warrant you I, they will all be cannozed currant. Exorcists. Yes sir, jerem. 23. 29. our matters (I assure you) they are very well able to endure the fire and forge of the word: yea, 1. Cor. 3. 13. and to be thoroughly balanced with the holy weights of the sanctuary. For, Heb. 4. 12. the actual possession we plead for, not only acordeth in every condition, with the actual possessions expressed at large in the scriptures: but which more is, the same is a perpetual infirmity eftsoons falling forth among men, as was showed before. And therefore, there is no question at all concerning the certain truth thereof. Orthodoxus. I perceive you have hardened your forehead against the infallible truth of the Lord, for, Physiologus having before (by natural philosophy) very sufficiently showed the apparent disparison between your pretended actual possession, and the approved actual possessions expressed in the scriptures, and which more is, myself also having eftsoons (by the sacred canons and rules of the word) very fully confuted your idle conceit, concerning the falsely supposed perpetuity of actual possessions: you notwithstanding (being utterly unable to make any sound reply unto either of both, even by a pitiful begging of that which you cannot possibly prove) do now afresh, very impudently insist upon the controversed question itself, without, either probability of reason, or show of sense. Exorcists. Yes sir, the perpetuity of actual possession, is very apparent in the sacred scriptures. Orthodoxus. I doubt not then, but that you would more fully have made known that self-same apparancy long ere now. But, go to, be it so as you say. The perpetuity thereof will then appear unto us, either, by some canon, or counsel at least contained in the scriptures: which (I verily believe) you will never be able to show. For, first, the Apostle Paul, he tells the Ephesians (with an appeal to their conscience) that, Act. 20. 27. he hath showed them the whole council of God that is, so much of God's counsel as may any ways concern the saving or killing of souls. But, in all his authentical epistles, he gives neither canon, nor counsel concerning the perpetuity of actual possessions: therefore, the perpetuity of actual possessions, is no such part of God's counsel, as may any ways concern the saving, Act. 20. 26. or killing of souls. If yea, then was not the Apostle himself set free from their blood in concealing it from them: for, in none of his canonical Epistles hath he discovered the same. If no, than the perpetuity of actual possession is no part of God's counsel concerning the saving or killing of souls: because the same cannot possibly be proved from any of the Apostles authentical writings. For, the Apostle no doubt, Epistolae Paul● ad Timotheum, & Titum. if he had ever intended to put down a Canon concerning the perpetuity of actual possession, than had he very fit occasion therefore, in all, or some one of his Epistles to Timothy and Titus: where he purposely handles all ministerial functions, and precisely puts down all ecclesiastical constitutions and orders concerning Church discipline. But, in no one of those his authentical Epistles, is there any one Canon at all apparent, which may tend in show, to any such purpose: and therefore, the perpetuity of actual possession, is no such part of God's counsel, as may in any sort concern the saving or killing of souls. And as no one Canon: so, neither hath the Apostle himself (in any his Canonical writings) given any one counsel at all, concerning such matters. No, not even there, where he purposely entreats of the full power of the devil: and had just occasion (if ever) to have given some advise at the least, concerning the same. Especially, Eph. 2. 2. there where he calleth The prince of the air, that self-same spirit, which even now effectually worketh in the children of disobedience. Also even there especially, where he affirmeth, 2. Tim. 2. 26. all those the disobedient ones, to be strongly ensnared, and fearfully captivated of the devil at his pleasure. In these two places (you see) he purposely entreateth of the power of the devil whatsoever. But, in neither of those places, the Apostle doth give any one counsel at all concerning the perpetuity of actual possession: therefore, the same is no part of God's counsel, which may any way concern the saving, or killing of souls. Exorcists. Why sir? even in those places of Scripture which yourself now reciteth, Eph. 2. 2. 2. Tim. 2. 26. the Apostle saith plainly, that the devil worketh effectually in the disobedient sort: and that those disobedient ones, are ensnared and captivated of the devil at his pleasure. These words, if they import not a counsel: yet are they a watchword at least concerning such matters. For what employ those words else I beseech you: but an actual possession. Orthodoxus. They employ an actual power in the devil: but no actual possession at all. For else, either must all persons whatsoever, be actually possessed of satan, Eph. 2. 1. 3. because, (before regeneration) it is the natural condition of all men, yea, even of the Apostles themselves, to be under his power: or you must necessarily conclude at the least, that only the unregenerate, and reprobate people are actually possessed of satan, for that the Apostle in those places entreateth only of such. And so (by consequence) the yoong-youth at Notrub; he was not actually possessed at all, because every man else, and even you your own selves do generally repute him, a religious, a godly, and a gracious youth. Moreover, Eph. 6. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. even in that self same Epistle where the Apostle adviseth the whole Church at Ephesus to be every way careful in furnishing themselves with the complete armour of God, for the better enabling of them against all the assaults of the devil, and the speedier quenching of all his fiery darts, he gives them notwithstanding, no counsel at all for using of that their said spiritual armour against any your supposed actual possessions: and therefore the perpetuity of actual possession, was no part of God's counsel, that might any way concern the saving, or killing of souls. If yea, than the Apostle himself, he hath not so sufficiently, and so fully instructed his Christian soldiers concerning an absolute use of that their spiritual armour, as in equity and conscience he ought; and thereupon he is not free from their blood. Act. 20. 26. If no, then (without question) a plain nullity of actual possession, now in these days of the Gospel, is (by the Apostle his purposed silence therein) very apparently evident. Besides that, the Apostle Peter, 1. Pet. 5. 8. stirring up (in like ●ort) the scattered Christians unto a continual and watchful regard against all the dangerous vagaries the lion-like ramping, and greedy devouring of satan: he maketh no mention at all of any their watchings and wardings against your supposed perpetuity of actual possessions. Luc. 22. 31. As also our Saviour Christ (admonishing Peter, and the other Apostles, of satan his inexorable desire to winnow and sift them like wheat) he speaketh no one word of any the extraordinary power of the devil, for actual possessions. Whereas Paul, Peter, and our Saviour himself, had every of them (in those the forenamed places) very just occasion to have written thereof. Yea, and some of them also (in some of those places at least) would purposely have handled your supposed actual possession of devils to the full: if so be the supposed continuance thereof had been undoubtedly determined in the secret counsel of God. But no one of them all (in those the forenamed places, or any where else) do so much as once mention the same: and therefore the perpetuity of actual possession; is no such part of God's counsel as may any way concern the saving or killing of souls. Exorcists. Though the perpetuity of actual possessions be not plainly expressed: yet, why may not the same be covertly implied in some part of the Scriptures? Orthodoxus. Because, this your supposed (may be) cannot certainly conclude from thence, any such supposed implication at all: and I argue further against you thus. If the perpetuity of actual pssession, be, either expressly, or implicatively contained in the word, then also, the miraculous faith (for suppressing such actual possession) is either expressly or implicatively contained in the word: but the latter is undoubtedly false, and therefore also the first. Exorcists. Why may not the miraculous faith be avouched perpetual? Orthodoxus. Because the same was but temporary, and had only her powerful continuance, so far forth as seemed good to the Lord, Mart. 16. 20. for an extraordinary sealing up and confirming of the word with miracles following. But that use hath undoubtedly ceased long since: and therefore also the miraculous faith (attending such temporary use) is undoubtedly ceased. Howbeit, of this more at large, when we come to handle the means of subduing the extraordinary power of the devil. In the mean time, I argue the matter against you thus. All true Christian churches, and the soundest Divines in our days, do generally conclude a final discontinuance of the miraculous faith, in these days of the Gospel: and therefore (by consequence) the undoubted determination of the devil his extraordinary power of actual possession. Exorcists. Do you then, very confidently deny all power to the devil: in these days of the Gospel? Orthodoxus. I only impugn his supposed extraordinary power, for the perpetuity of actual possession: I deny not his power of obsession at all. Exorcists. Why? what understand you, by his power of obsession? Orthodoxus. This question (I assure you) is very fitly propounded for having hitherto handled at large, The devil his power of obsession. What it is? the devil his power of actual possession: it remaineth now, to entreat a little of his power of obsession: wherein we need not to be tedious: the same being apparently evident: and generally confessed of all men. Now therefore, by the devil his power of obsession: I do here understand, some certain predeterminate ability, faculty, or inclination of his spiritual nature, for the more powerful enabling of his restless endeavours, and insatiable desires to work our daily destruction: wherein he eftsoons assaulteth, circumventeth, encloseth, environeth & besiegeth the servants of God a fresh, with a purposed mind to devour them quite, were they not very mightily protected by an invincible power of the Lord. And this his said power of obsession, consisteth especially, either in an outward assaulting and vexing: or in an inward suggesting and tempting at least. Lycanthropus. What mean you by an outward assaulting and vexing? Orthodoxus. I understand thereby, all those their external allurements, Math. 4. 2. encumbrances, molestations, and griefs whatsoever; job. 1. 15. 18. 19 wherewith the whole nature of man is wonderfully distressed, disquieted, job. 2. 7. and vexed. Partly by worldly authority, examples, promises, 2. Sam. 24. 8. compulsions, profits, 1. Chron. 21. 1. pleasures, and so forth: and partly by fleshly affections, inclinations, dispositions, Math. 4. 8. delights, attempts, and carnal practices whatsoever they be. 2. Sam 11. 4. Numb. 25. 3. Philologus. And what mean you by inward suggesting and tempt? Orthodoxus. I understand thereby, all those the internal allurements of satan whatsoever, Luc. 22. 3. wherewith he endeavoureth to draw men's minds from their dutiful obedience to God: joh. 13. 2. 27. by daring or thrusting into them, jam. 1. 14. 15. all treacherous and devilish devices, yea, and by kindling within them, all ungodly motions, affections, 1. King. 22. 22. lusts, and desires. Now, for the speedy effecting hereof, 2. Chron. 18. 21. the devils they become lying spirits in the mouths of false Prophets: 2. Thes. 2. 9 11. they work lying wonders, Revel. 16. 14. in all deceaveablenes of unrighteousness: they buffet men's minds with fearful temptations: they endeavour, 2. Cor. 12. 8. Luc. 22. 31. to fife and winnow their souls, Math 12 45. as men winnow wheat: they make men unclean, and replenish their hearts with filthy pollutions, Act. 5. 3. that thereby they might draw them into open dissimulation with the job. 1. 7. & 2. 2. holy Ghost: Reue●. 2. 10. they vex and torment men within and without: yea, & (which more is) they so dangerously ●ncumber men's judgements, Rom. 7. 23. through the Law of their members, rebelling against the Law of their minds, Rom. 7. 24. as eftsoons they enforce them to distrust their happy deliverance, Phil. 1. 23. yea, and to desire their present dissolution, to be presently with Christ himself. Lo, thus much in effect: for the devil his power of obsession. Lycanthropus. This sir (I assure yond) is a wonderful power: and such as should forthwith awaken our hearts to a continual watchfulness. But, tell us further I pray you, by what means the devil especially effecteth these matters? Orthodoxus. Although the devil hath undoubtedly innumerable means to accomplish his villainies: yet surely, the most principal, for the timely effecting of his power of obsession: Eph. 4. 18. is an holding men fast in the ignorance of God. Math. 4. 18. That so, all the while they do carelessly continue in darkness, Luc. 1. 79. and sit still in the shadow of death: the devil might assault them eftsoons at his pleasure, Math. 13. 25. and come upon them at unawares, to accomplish in them his mischievous purposes. Neither is this holding of men in palpable ignorance, impossible for satan (by the permission of God) to effect. 2. Cor. 4. 4. Because the devil himself being the God of this world (and therefore, of an admirable power) be both can, and doth purposely blindfold the minds of all infidels: lest at any time, the light of the glorious Gospel of Christ (the image of God) should shine forth unto them. 2. Tim 3. 26. That (having so ensnared and captivated the men at his pleasure) they might from thenceforth, walk on in vanity of their minds. And (which more is) that their understanding (by this means) being darkened, they might (through their own ignorance, Ephes. 4. 17. 18. 19 and hardness of heart (become aliens & strangers from the life of God: and (being past feeling) might forthwith give over themselves unto wantonness, to work all manner of uncleanness, yea, even with insatiable, and greedy affections. Exorcists. Well sir. And how is it possible the devil should accomplish these fearful effects in any man's mind, but by an actual possession at least? Orthodoxus. Yes, the devil he well may, and doth easily effect all these, with many other like fearful effects; only, by an actual power, without any actual possession at all. And this especially, by depriving the world of that eternal word of life; which was given to enlighten men's souls. He deprives the world of the word of life, either, by holding it altogether from them: or otherwise, by hindering the effectual working power thereof at the least. He holds the word altogether from men, Rom. 1. 13. by forestall and hindering the timely establishment of faithful Preachers in every place. 2. Thes. 2. 18. Again, if he cannot possibly intercept the Preachers establishment, Math. 9 32. than he endeavours eftsoons to hinder (at least) the affectual working power of the word, joh. 2. 23. being preached powerfully among them. joh. 12. 11. and 34. 3. And this also, either by working effectually upon the hearer's infirmities, namely, upon their natural blindness, Rom. 10. 17. dumbenes, Isa. 6. 9 deafness, as also by making their ears without hearing: or, Zach. 3. 1. otherways, by practising all possible resistance against the powerful preaching, 2. Cor. 12. 7. and preachers themselves. Howbeit, this his resistance against the power of the word, 2. Tim. 2. 25, 26. & 3. 8. and preachers thereof: Jude 9 is not always effected after one and the self-same manner. For, sometimes he useth an inward: and sometimes an outward resistance. By inward resistance, he laboureth chiefly, either to make the holy word itself, unfit for men's minds: and this, Math. 13. 19 sometimes by stealing the word from out of their hearts: 1 King 22 2. sometimes by corrupting the purity of the word itself, Math. 13. 25. through a confused mixture of his cockle and darnel: sometimes, Gen. 3. 3. by perverting the true purpose and sense of the Scripture itself: Mart. 14. 58. and sometimes also, by calling in question the certainty and truth of the word. Luc. 24. 21. Or if (notwithstanding these the aforesaid means) he cannot possibly make the holy word unfit for men's minds: then he taketh a quite contrary course, and endeavoureth to make men's minds (at least) unfit for the word. And this, partly, Luc. 22. 3. by entering effectually into their hearts, and so, joh. 13. 27. filling them full of all iniquity: Act. 5. 3. partly by circumventing their hearts so violently, Math. 12. 45. as no preaching at all, may possibly penetrate, or pierce through the same: partly, Act. 8. 22. 23. by profaning their hearts with the filthy pollutions of profits and pleasures: and partly also, 2. Tim. 2. 25. 26. & 3. 8. & 4. 14. 15. by ensnaring and captivating their hearts so powerfully, as they may not possibly be brought to acknowledge the truth. And this in effect, for his inward resistance. His outward resistance against the power of the word, and preachers thereof: is partly by fair means, and partly by foul means. By fair means first. And this especially, Math. 8. 29. by making some outward fair show, concerning the holy religion professed: Marc. 5. 7. or otherways, by fawning upon the professors themselves, Luc. 8. 28. with an holy pretence of wishing their good. Act 16. 17. By fowl means also, Math. 16. 22. & 22. 16. he withstands the power of the word, and preachers thereof. And this especially, either by sifting and winnowing the professors thereof, as was showed before: or, Luc. 22. 31. by entangling and entrapping them by some manner of means: Math. 22. 15. or by a judas-like, Ioh 8 4. 5. and treacherous betraying of their persons & states: or; by procuring fiery trials, Luc 22. 3. persecutions, joh. 13. 2. and troubles against them or, by committing the professors themselves unto prison: Revel. 12. 3. or lastly, by an outrageous tortoring, racking, Revel. 2. 10. tormenting and killing of their bodies outright. Ioh 1. 2. Lo, these (in effect) are the most principal means, joh. 8. 44. whereby Satan effecteth his power of obsession: without any actual possession at all. Exorcists. Good sir? I beseech you beware what you do. And so much the rather, because, this your absolute denial of actual possessions; will open a wide door unto Atheism, and loozen the reins of our unruly affections, to an irreligious, licentious, and dissolute carriage. For, let men but once hear they are free from all bodily danger of devils: and what will they not forthwith adventure. Orthodoxus. Nay rather, this your obstinate avouching of actual possession, it the very high way unto Atheism, to an irreligious behaviour, and all carnal security. For, by making men very idly to gaze (as they do) at an imagined actual possession of devils, when no such matter (in deed and in truth) may sound be proved: what do you else (in effect) but lull the whole world fast a sleep in the cradle of carnal security? Yea, and (which more is) by this means you make men forgetful and careless of Satan his pernicious power of obsession: wherein lieth covertly enfolded, a very pestilent poison, and most deadly confection for body and soul. Neither may you more fitly pleasure the devil, nor more fully make him beholding unto you in any thing else: then, in upholding for him (as you do) a falsely imagined actual possession. For, by this means, the mystery of iniquity, doth more freely and more forcibly work in the minds of men: and the devil may more easily seduce their souls at unwares: by using at his pleasure, the power which he hath, while the whole world (at their pleasure) so improvidently, and so carelessly stand musing upon an imagned power which he hath not indeed. And, herein the subtle dealing of Satan, is nothing inferior to the crafty birdcatcher: who (while the silly poor birds sit prying at, and playing with the whirligig, or stalling before them) doth cunningly clap them (up at unawares) in his net, and nips them all dead in the head. Howbeit, that which is spoken may fully suffice, (I perceive) for a caveat herein: you yourself being thus driven (as you are) into a marvelous maze concerning the matters in question. For these your idle vagaries, and often start aside from the purpose propounded: do import a wonderful defect in your skill, or imply a marvelous distrust in your cause at the least. Exorcists. Nothing less I assure you. For, I am resolute (as before) in the actual possession of devils: which may yet more effectually be proved thus. I drove out the devil from the yoongman at Mahgnitton: and therefore the yoongman (no doubt) was actually possessed before. Orthodoxus. And I disprove it effectually thus. The yoongman at Maghnitton was never actually possessed of satan: and therefore, you did not, nor could not possibly drive forth the devil from him. For, how is it possible you should dispossess the devil, of that party, whom (indeed & in truth) he never possessed? Howbeit, this question falls forth very fitly for another discourse: wherein shall be purposely put down, the very true means for subduing the power of devils. Notwithstanding, the time now is far spent, and our Supper doth stay on our coming: therefore, Let us go and refresh ourselves with such repast as God sends: and afterwards, confer of the point for an hour or twain if you please. Otherways, I must put over the perfecting of our present discourse, till some other appointed season: because the next day (if God will) I must sequester myself to some other more private meditations, for the Saboth days exercise. Lycanthropus. And we also ourselves must return homewards to morrow upon urgent occasion. Howbeit, we are all very loath to leave the matter so raw as it is: and therefore, if it please Exorcists and the rest of the company, we will, rather lose an hours sleep or two, then go home unresolved herein. Exorcists. I am (for mine own part) very willing thereto: and so much I dare say for the rest. Orthodoxus. Let us then arise, and depart. The end of the seventh Dialogue. The eight Dialogue. THE ARGUMENT. Of the undoubted true force, for the timely subduing of this the forenamed power of the Devil. Whether any created means may therein prevail? yea, and whether prayer and fasting, have in themselves, any power, to effect such a work? The speakers names. PHILOLOGUS. LYCANTHROPUS. PNEUMATOMACHUS. PHYSIOLOGUS. ORTHODOXUS. EXORCISTS. Orthodoxus. THe Lord having in great mercy enabled our bodies a fresh, by his good blessings bestowed upon us: it shall not be good to trifle the time, but forthwith go an end in our conference. Come on therefore Exorcists, repeat, and prosecute, your lately propounded argument. Exorcists. This than it is. I drove forth a devil, from the yoongman at Mahgnitton: therefore the yoongman he was actually possessed before Else how could I possibly have driven forth the devil: if he had in the yoongman no possession at all? Orthodoxus. I answer you thus as before. The yoongman at Mahgnitton he was not actually possessed of satan: therefore, you could not possibly drive a devil from him. For, how is it possible you should actually dispossess the devil of that man: in whom he was never actually possessea? And thus still, you may plainly perceive your preposterous hap, in disputing this point. For (notwithstanding any thing hitherto heard) you are yet as far from the probable dispatch of your pretended actual possession, as you were at the first: and will be I warrant you, so long as you insist (as you do) upon the propounded question itself. 〈…〉. This is nothing else, but to prove the same by the same: the which in all ages hath been accounted, a reason, without any reason at al. Howbeit, because you are now fled (as it seems) to your uttermost refuge; I mean, to the succourless shelter of that your weather beaten action pretended to be done at Mahgnitton: I do verily persuade myself, that (if once you be daunted therein) you will shortly give over the skirmish. Exorcists. Yea sir. When I see you have proved my action at Mahgniton, no action at all concerning the actual dispossessing of devils: I will then lay my hand on my mouth, without any further reply to any thing spoken. But, this I suppose, must not be performed in haste. Orthodoxus. Well, than we will take so much more leisure in performing the same. And therefore having hitherto, very fully discovered that tyrannical dominion of devils, which might any way concern their power of possession, or their power of obsession: we will now proceed next, to an orderly examination of that superior inevitable working power, whereby the aforesaid actual possession of devils is undoubtedly conquered, subdued, squashed, and even utterly annihilated, in comparison of any the precedent poisons thereof. Yea, and so much the rather, we intend very carefully to follow this our intended course: because in an only Imagination thereof, there doth lie (it should seem) the very fortress itself, of all those fantastical and idle conceits, which concern your supposed dispossessing of Satan. And therefore, having once (by a conscionable discovery of the infallible truth) made known to your conscience, that, your pretended action which was wrought at Mahgnition, cannot possibly challenge the approved privilege of any exordinarie power from the Lord, for the actual dispossessing of devils. I hope we may confidently conclude from the consideration thereof, an apparent nullity of all actual possessions in these days of the Gospel. Lycanthropus. That is undoubtedly true: and therefore, I pray you proceed. Orthodoxus. With very good will. First therefore, this said tyrannical dominion of devils (respecting especially, their temporary power for actual possession) the same ever was, and is effectually subdued by an only extraordinary, a supernatural, and supereminent power of the omnipotent, eternal God. Which self-same supernatural power, the Egyptian sorcerers were forcibly constrained to acknowledge for some etsbang-elohim: that is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some Divine operation or virtue extraordinarily proceeding from the Almighty jehovah himself. Exod. 8. 17. And, because the holy spirit of God, Augustinus Cyri●●us. is that only essential virtue of the father, and the son together: therefore, Didimus Alexander. lib. de spirit. sanct. Hugo Etherianus de processione spiritus sancti. that self-same speech of the sorcerers concerning this power, it is by our Saviour Christ, even purposely interpreted Pneuma, kaidactylos theou: that is, the spirit and finger of God. Because, that self-same holy spirit (being an essential power, equally proceeding from the Father, and Son together) doth (as it were by a finger, or hand) very powerfully distribute some certain extraordinary gifts, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. and graces to some certain peculiar persons: peculiarly appointed of God, for the actual dispossessing of devils. Math. 12. 28. And, this said supereminent power of the Lord, Luc. 11. 20. is twofold: namely, either immediate or mediate. Math. 10. 7. 8. Exorcists. What mean you by the immediate power of God? Marc. 6. 7. & 16. 20. Orthodoxus. I understand thereby, Luc. 9 1. & 10. 9 that self-same divine, supernatural, and supereminent authority of jesus Christ the stronger. Marc. 9 38. Who, of himself alone, Act. 16. 18. and without any one instrument or means attending upon him, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Isa 9 7. is that undoubted el-gibbor, that invincible prevailing power, which doth (by the commanding force of his spiritual sceptre) very valiantly vanquish, Math. 12. 29. overcome, and subdue the actual power of satan the strong armed man: Marc. 3. 27. notwithstanding he maintained before, Luc. 11. 21. 22. a peaceable possession over the world. 1. joh. 3. 8. Philologus. And, what mean you by the mediate power of God? Orthodoxus. I understand thereby, a secondary, or subordinate power of the almighty jehovah: Act. 16. 18. executed by some certain special persons, peculiarly appointed by the Lord himself, to that special purpose. Who ministerially, Hieronimus, Christus potestatiuè sugabat Daemons: Aposto●i nomine eius. and, in the only name, mediation, and virtue of jesus Christ: do valiantly conquer, and actually overcome the actual power of satins possession. For, very certain it is, that the son of God, he powerfully expelleth devils by his own immediate power: whereas all other beside, they do it ministerially, in, and by the virtue & power of Christ his name. Howbeit, we have yet to consider further, that, this same mediate power of the Lord, is also twofold: namely, Apostolical, and Ecclesiastical. Exorcists. What mean you by the Apostolical mediate power? Orthodoxus. I understand thereby, Math. 10. 7. 8. that peculiar prerogative, or that extraordinary spiritual pre-eminence, operation, and virtue, Marc. 6. 7. wherewith the only wise God, Luc. 9 1. more especially invested his chosen Apostles themselves, Act. 16. 18. concerning some extraordinary power for the powerful expelling of devils. And all this, for the more authentical confirmation of the newly published Gospel, Marc. 16. 20. throughout those newly established churchess, wheresoever they came. Lycanthropus. And, what mean you by the ecclesiastical mediate power? Orthodoxus. I understand thereby, some extraordinary peculiar privilege, or special grace very extraordinarily bestowed upon the newly established Marc. 9 38. churches, over spirits and devils. And this especially, Luc. 10. 9 17. 18. 19 for a further more admirable approbation of the newly established Gospel: so admirably planted among them before, 1. Cor. 3. 6. by the extraordinary preachers thereof. Wherein, we have to consider further: that, this self-same ecclesiastical mediate power, is here, to be considered in a double respect. Namely, in respect, either of the churches primitive: or of the churches successive. Philologus. How first, in consideration of the churches primitive? Orthodoxus. The ecclesiastical mediate power (respecting more especially the churches primitive) was an extraordinary ability, faculty, Luc. 9 42. virtue, or force, Luc. 10. 9 17. 18. 19 very apparently evident in the 70. disciples, and some other beside. They having every of them, an extraordinary power from the Lord, Marc. 9 38. to subdue the actual possession of devils▪ during especially that primary age immediately succeeding the Apostles of Christ And this also, for the more admirable watering of that self-same Gospel of salvation: so admirably planted before, 1. Cor. 3. ●. by Christ himself and his chosen Apostles. Lycanthropus. And, how next in consideration of the churches successive? Orthodoxus. The ecclesiastical mediate power more especially respecting the churches successive, was some certain imagined faculty, ability, or force, in some certain peculiar persons: for the timely expelling of spirits and devils from out of newly borne infants, before their admission to baptism. Having also (for that special purpose) their Exorcists and Exorcisms peculiarly appointed thereto. Which said order, or rather disorder of Exorcizing (in as much as it wants the warrant of the word, and for that also it foisteth very oddly into the church, such new found offices, and officers as never were planted by Christ:) it was never yet justifiable in the court of conscience, and we wonder not at all, though the same (being no plant of the almighty his planting, Math. 15. 13. ) be now plucked up quite by the roots. Lo, these be those several sorts of Exorcizing which were ever yet practised in the true church of Christ: since the very first time the Gospel began to be preached among them. Aretij problem. Loc. 67. fol. 210 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And, these Exorcizing also, by some others of special account, are distinquished, or entitled thus; namely, they are, either archical, apostolical, ecclesiastical, or infantical. Howbeit, (respecting perspicuity or plainness, and, for that especially they come all to one and the self-same period) we do rather, the more purposely retain our own order, rehearsed before. Exorcists. But, tell me I pray you, were there no other sorts of Exorcizing at any time practised, but these four which yourself have expressed? Orthodoxus. Yes, there hath ever been, and will be to the end of the world a certain conterfeite, or feigned faculty pretended by some: for expelling the possession and power of the devil: and the same also undoubtedly proceeding from a preposterous emulation, or rather, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. from an apishimitation of that self-same extraordinary power apparently evident in the Apostolical or primitive church. For in all ages of the world, some certain odd persons, are wonderfully affected, ●. Cor. 11. 13. 15. with either glory or gain at the least. These men therefore perceiving how easy a matter it was, and how glorious a thing with the faithful, for any to have power over devils; they eftsoons attempted, or at least, they pretended the self-same power in themselves. Yea, and which more is, 2. Thes. 2. 9 10. even satan also (for the better enthronizing of himself in the seat of God, as also, for a more easy establishing of all his dangerous errors) he in like manner attempted an apish imitation of this the admirable power of the Lord, for the expelling of devils. And this his pestilent purpose, he might so much the more easily effect: by how much he plainly perceived that, the miraculous faith did not necessarily require such special persons only as were upright with God, and righteous before men. Math. 7. 22. Perceiving therefore that the very hypocrites also and reprobate wretches (men fit for his purpose) might fully Act. 19 13. 14. participate with that self-same special power for the admirable expelling of spirits and devils; as well as the other: Satan himself, he also undertook that self-same enterprise, and began by himself and his instruments, to practise the like. And, this said counterfeit or feigned faculty for expelling the power of spirits and devils; is also foretold. Namely, Satanical, ethnical, judaical and Papistical. Lycanthropus. What mean you by the Satanical faculty? Orthodoxus. That self-same Thrasonical brag, or that Spanish-like Bravado, wherewith the devil adjured our Saviour Christ: as though by his great words he could scar, Tobit. 8. 3. or by his Exorcizing power he would bind our Saviour himself, beyond the utmost borders of Egypt, Marc. 5. 7. saying, I adjure, or conjure thee (thou Christ) that thou torment me nothing at all. Howbeit, his success in that proud enterprise, was not unlike to the proud Spaniards success in eighty eight: for (notwithstanding any their magical skill, or Thersites-like vaunts) they were both constrained to get home by weeping cross, with confusion and shame to themselves. Pneumatomachus. And what mean you by the ethnical faculty? Orthodoxus. That Satanical pretended power which Satan did seem to practise by heathenish persons, as by his organical instruments for that special purpose: Eph. 2. 11. 12. 13. howbeit, such as were strangers and foreigners from the Church of Christ. These men notwithstanding, by crystals, by rings, by stones, by herbs, and such other like fooleries; they would seem to do something in show at the least. Philologus. And what mean you by the judaical faculty? Orthodoxus. That self-same Satanical violence, which the devil also, by those his pharisaical organa endeavoured to establish and to communicate from hand to hand, unto all the posterity following. And these judaical adjurations, they were so much the more dangerous, by how much the patrons and professors thereof, did (in outward appearance at least) more nearly approach to the Church of God. And, for that also, by an execrable and blasphemous profaning of that sacred and unexpresable name of the Lord, tetragrammaton: they very pestilently pretended the powerful establishment of their pestilent practices. Yea, and which more is, so soon as the holy name of our Saviour Christ began to be admirably and powerfully published abroad: they eftsoons also, abused that glorious name, in every of their said exorcisms, adjurations, or conjuring attempts. Imagining the honourable name of jesus, to be much more powerful for that special purpose: then the name tetragrammaton was ever before. And hereof it came also to pass, that the seven sons of Sceva the jew (being stirred up with a like counterfeit Act. 19 13. 14. zeal) did thereby undertake to adjure the devils to their cost. Exorcists. Not so: for Cyprian very flatly affirmeth, that the devils gave place to their said conjurations. Cyprian, in serm. de bapt. Orthodoxus. No such matter at all appears in the text. Nay, it telleth us rather, Act. 19 16. that, the evil spirits ran violently upon those Coniurours, overcame them, and prevailed against them: insomuch as the Coniurours fled forth of that house, all naked and wounden. Now, Marc. 9 38. these kinds of Exorcisms were very ordinary among many in those days, Luc. 9 49. which were not of the College of Christ: yea, and some of them also but reprobates. Math. 7. 22. Which declareth plainly unto us, that, the gift of miracles was then indifferently bestowed upon good and bad: so far off was it, that any holiness of that instrument effected the work. Lycanthropus. And, what mean you by the papistical faculty? Orthodoxus. That self-same presupposed Satanical power which was compounded, partly of Gentilism, and partly also of judaism, as a very mingle-mangle, or hodge-podge of all the Magical sorceries of satan: consolidate fully in one filthy confection, to the more dangerous deceiving of unstable and ignorant persons. For first, they had their lygatures, their herbs, their consecrated verum, their roots, their hol●● water, their salt, and such other odd relics, after the manner of the Ethnics: and observed in every of their adjurations, the heathenish Exorcisms, their consecrated crystals, their sacred rites, their magical ceremonies, and conjuring charms. Then next, from the jews they had also the sacred names of their God, tetra-grammaton, of Angels, of patriarchs, of Christ, of the Apostles and holy Martyrs of God: that the devil, 2. Thes. 2. 11. 12. (by such glorious appearances) might the more grossly delude and bewitch with strong illusions, the minds of the Infidels. Lo, these in effect are those other sort of Exorcisms or Conjurations which were covertly brought in by the cunning of satan: at any time since the Apostolic or primitive age. Now then, do tell ●et Exorcists (I pray you) among whether of these sorts of adjurations you do range or consort, that your supposed dispossessing of satan from the yoongman at Mahgnitton? Exorcists. Not among any of those four last rehearsed: for they are but Satanical and devilish, by whomsoever effected. Orthodoxus. Neither may you presume to consort the same, among any of those other declared before: for, they were all supernatural, by whomsoever effected, and continued only in that primitive age, See M. Dorels brief Narration, fl. 5. pag. ●. as hath been, and shall be apparently proved. Yea, and you your own self have elsewhere confessed, that the miraculous curing of fevers, palsies, leprosies, diseases, and that driving out of devils by Christ and his own Apostles gave credit to the glorious Gospel. Which said Gospel of Christ, (being already so fully confirmed by the Apostles preaching, Marc. 16. 20. and these miracles following) must now be entertained by faith, without any such heathenish expectation, Math. 12. 28. and 16. 1. or curious requiring of wonders, as the ●uill and adulterous nations do daily demand. Marc. 8. 11. Exorcists. Howsoever you catch hold of any my scattered sentences, Luc. 12. 54. very certain I am, and five hundred are able to witness: that, I drove forth a devil from the yoongman there. Orthodoxus. You are certain, and five hundred are able to witness, that you bore them in hand you wrought such a feat. But, how is yourself, or any one of those five hundred able to avouch on their oaths, that (indeed and in truth) you drove forth a devil: sith devils are such invisible, and impalpable spirits, as cannot possibly be discerned by any sensible means. Exorcists. I do freely confess there can be no sensible appearances of any their essential departures from men: because spirits and devils, they are only of a spiritual, invisible, and impalpable being. Howbeit, that the yoongman at Mahgnitton was undoubtedly dispossessed of satan, See M. Dorels Apology, fol. 10 Marc. 1. 26. and 9 26. the signs thereof do confirm, which are, crying aloud, rending sore, and leaving as dead: these signs were seen and heard at the instant of his deliverance. And therefore, from thence I do reason thus. Where there was crying aloud, rending sore, and leaving as dead, there were the undoubted true signs, of the dispossessing of satan. But in the yoongman at Mahgnitton there was crying aloud, rending sore, and a leaving as dead: therefore, there were in the yoongman at Mahgnitton, the undoubted true signs of the dispossessing of satan. Orthodoxus. I answer you thus. Where there is crying aloud, rending sore, & a leaving as dead, there are the undoubted true signs of the dispossessing of satan. But in mania, in phrenesies, in the mother, in convulsions, Marc. 1. 26. and 9 26. in Catalepsies, in Epilepsies, and Lunacies, there is crying aloud, rending sore, & a leaving as dead: therefore in every of the aforesaid diseases, there are the undoubted true signs of the dispossessing of satan. So then, by this (you see) it is very apparent, & you must likewise conclude, that so many as are sick of the aforesaid diseases, they are actually also possessed of Satan, because in every of them also, those your supposed infallible signs of dispossession are very apparent: or else you must be enforced to confess, that crying aloud, rending sore, and leaving as dead, they are no such undoubted true signs of the dispossessing of satan, as you would bear us in hand they be. Exorcists. Why man, they are the undoubted true signs, put down by the blessed Evangelists: to declare the like dispossession performed else where by our Saviour himself. For, Marc. 9 26. so soon as Christ had but said to the devil, thou dumb and deaf spirit, I charge thee come out of the child, then, forthwith the spirit he cried, and rend the child sore, and came out of him, and the child was as one being dead, insomuch as many said he is surely dead. See now I beseech you, whether these be undoubted true signs of the dispossessing of Satan? Orthodoxus. Well, go to. If we must in any case account them the undoubted true signs of the dispossessing of satan: then, do tell me (I pray you) whether we must take them for the precedent, or the subsequent signs of such dispossessions? I mean, whether we must account them, such undoubted true signs, as do only preceded, and go before the action itself: or such rather as do necessarily succeed and follow the same? Exorcists. Even for such undoubted true signs as do necessarily succeed the dispossession itself: otherways how could they be certain signs of a certain deliverance, the deliverance itself not fully effected? And so, Marc. 9 25. 26. the Evangelist Mark he puts them down as the subsequent signs of that self-same action. Orthodoxus. But yet, the Evangelist Luke, he telleth us plainly, Luc. 9 42. that, while the child was coming to Christ, and, or ever that Christ began to adjure or command the devil to depart, the devil he rend and tore the child. Thereby declaring unto us, that, those cry aloud, those rendings and tearings, and that leaving as dead: are rather the undoubted true signs of Satan his actual possession, then of any his dispossession at all. So then, howsoever the Evangelist Mark doth put down those matters partly preceding, and partly succeeding the action itself: Very certain I am, it was never his purpose to have them esteemed as undoubted true signs of every the dispossessions of Satan whatsoever: but rather, to be taken as the infallible effects of that self-same special action, which Christ (at that present) performed. Otherwise, if these cry, these rendings, and this leaving as dead, must necessarily confirm unto us the certainty of every dispossession of Satan in whomsoever: then, how should we be assuredly persuaded concerning the certain truth of all other the dispossessions of Satan, in whom, those the aforesaid signs are not found? Math. 8. 32. Namely, of those whom Christ performed in the Gergesenes, Marc. 5. 13. of those which the seventy disciples effected, Luc. 8. 33. and 10. 17. and of that which Paul accomplished in the Pythonist, with sundry other beside: for, Acts. 16. 18. in no one of those the dispossessions of Satan, Marc. 9 38. are any of those your undoubted true signs reported, and yet we doubt not at all of their certain deliverances. The premises therefore considered, we may very fitly retort your reason upon you thus. In those adjurations whatsoever, where there was no crying aloud, no rending sore, nor no leaving as dead, there were no undoubted true signs of any dispossessing of Satan. But in all the adjurations which concern the aforesaid examples, there was no crying aloud, no rending sore, nor no leaving as dead: therefore in all the adjurations which concern the aforesaid examples, there were no undoubted true signs of the dispossessing of satan. Thus than it is very apparent you see, by all the premises, that (unless you will purposely fall into palpable absurdities) you may at no hand avouch, that those cry, those rendings and tearings, and that leaving for dead, are the undoubted true signs of the dispossessing of satan. No, you must rather persuade yourself, they were purposely reported for special and proper effects of that special and proper action of Christ: and, not considerately put down for perpetual, and undoubted true signs of all the actual dispossessings of spirits and devils in whomsoever. Notwithstanding, be it supposed (which will never be proved) that, yourself did undoubtedly drive forth a devil from the yoongman at Mahgnitton, and that, some cry aloud, some rendings sore, and some leaving as dead, were then also the special effects of that your supposed special action: do here tell us I pray you, after what special manner you effected the action? Whether only by means: or by a miraculous manner? Exorcists. Surely, Psellus, in lib. de daemonibus. even only by means: and not by any miraculous manner of working at all. Physiologus. Good Master Orthodoxus, let me argue this matter a little. Come on Exorcists, do you hold in good earnest, that devils may be driven forth from men: and that only by means? Exorcists. I am very confident therein I assure you. Physiologus. Make your mind plain, before we proceed. And tell me (I pray you) whether spirtts and devils (by very natural, or corporal means) may be truly dispossessed, and driven from men? Exorcists. Yea, even by very natural, or corporal means. Physiologus. Why man, Petr. Thyraeus, Thess. 590. spirits and devils, they are mere spiritual creatures. But, such is the proper condition of spiritual creatures, that, all corporal matters whatsoever, they come short thereunto by many degrees: and therefore, we may boldly conclude, that those corporal or sensible things, can work nothing efficiently in spirits and devils; can offer no violence at all unto them; nor possibly expel them from any their actual possessions. Exorcists. Yes sir, I am able to demonstrate this matter, by an argument of comparison, thus. There is one, and the self-same condition of spirits, Coelius Rhod. lect. antiq. lib. 1. cap. 29. and of living men's souls: for they are both of them spiritual essences. But, even by a mere corporal, or sensible means, may some violence be offered to living men's souls, yea, they may thereby, eftsoons be separated quite from their bodies: and therefore, even to spirits also (by means of some corporal or sensible matter) there may eftsoons, some violence be offered, and they also may be expelled quite, from their actual possessions in man. Physiologus. Your argument of comparison, it consisteth not of such pares as are equally alike in every respect; no, it halteth down right in that self-same point, whereupon it is more especially grounded: and therefore, it enforceth no necessary conclusion upon us at all. For, the condition of spirits, and of living men's souls (howsoever alike in spiritual essence) it is utterly unlike, respecting the bodies whereupon they both work. Souls, they are properly conjoined to their own proper bodies, as the very first essential form thereof appointed by God: howbeit, spirits (not by any propriety, but by usurpation rather) they are only actually there, as the afflictors, or tormentors permitted by God. So then (for those former respects) the souls of living men, do necessarily require in those their own bodies, some such certain dispositions and qualities, as the devils themselves (they being no true essential forms of those bodies) require not at all. And therefore, spirits or devils, they may actually afflict and torment those self-same bodies of men, how unfitly soever they find them: whereas the souls of men (unless those their said bodies be aptly proportioned and fitted thereto) they cannot inform them at all. Exorcists. Sir, howsoever you enforce a disparison between spirits and souls, concerning especially their dealings with bodies, and thereby would frustrate the force of my argument: very certain I am, that spirits or devils, they may be driven forth from men's bodies, and that only by means. Physiologus. But, by what means I beseech you? whether, by an uncreated: or by a created means. Exorcists. Not by any uncreated means at all. For how can I possibly practise that thing which is either uncreated: or not existing in nature? Physiologus. Then you do flatly conclude that spirits or devils they may actually be dispossessed, even by a created, or mere natural means. Exorcists. Yea, so much I flatly conclude, Physiologus. This than I must tell you for certain, Mediacreata, ad actiones supernaturales, effectiuè, se non extendunt. that you do very fond conclude you wot not what. For, this is undoubtedly true, that, no created or natural means whatsoever: may efficiently extend themselves to any such supernatural actions, as do any way concern the dispossessing of devils. Because, all such supernatural actions, they proceed not at all from any power of nature: but from the only power of obedience. By the only efficacy of which obediential power, Quidlibet, ex quolibet. even any thing, of every thing may easily be effected: although yet, in an only respect of the mighty jehovah himself, the sole and only efficient thereof. For, August. in Gen. 9 albeit the Saints of the Lord, namely Moses, and many others are said to effect supernatural actions: yet, Item, de trinitate, cap. 8. therein we must rightly understand, that only the Lord alone, he works that by his Saints, which he works by himself. And therefore in saying as you do, that spirits or devils they may be dispossessed from men, by any created, or natural means: you do therein, very ignorantly avouch, you wot not well what. Exorcists. Yes sir, I wot well what I say: and, am able to demonstrate the truth thereof, by many examples. Physiologus. Let us hear your examples, which make for this matter. Exorcists. With very good will. josephus, de Bello judaie. First therefore josephus very plainly reporteth, that when Titus and Vespasian besieged jerusalem: there was an Exorciste, that time in the host, who (by a certain stone in a ring) delivered many that were possessed of Satan. Moreover, Eleazar the Hebrew, (as the said josephus recordeth) he used certain Exorcisms which were invented and made by Solomon, for the expelling of spirits and devils: namely, rings, roots, herbs, and such other like sensible matters. But, the stone in the ring, those roots, and those herbs, they were only created, and mere natural means: therefore some only created, and mere natural means, it hath, and may have in itself, an actual power, for the dispossessing of spirits and devils. Physiologus. Why do you not also allege that which the said josephus josephus, de Antiq. judait. josephus de bello Iudai●. AElianus. and Aelianus also reporteth concerning the herb Cynospastus, being otherways called Aglaphotis, which hath (they say) a certain special operation for the powerful expelling of spirits and devils: for thereby also you might have borne us in hand, that herbs in times past, have been workers of miracles. Exorcists. Well sir, howsoever you would scoff out the matter: do answer josephus. Physiologus. I will. josephus, he hath heretofore so often been tainted in matters of more weighty importance, as we have the less cause to credit his pen in these his senseless reports. Besides that let this which he writes concerning these trifling toys, be esteemed for certain truths, I mean, that some such dipossessions were effected in some outward appearance: yet Wierus, he flatly affirms, Wierus, de praestigijs daemon. lib. 4. that josephus the jew, Vespasian the Ethnic, and Eleazar also the Hebrew: were every of them wonderfully bewitched with the juggling sleights of the devil. Who for the present, did purposely pretend the giving of place to an imagined virtue in rings, in roots, in herbs, and in stones: that (by means of such sundry his illusions) those persons themselves, might the more easily be brought to repose greater confidence in those trifling toys, then in the almighty jehovah, the only disposer and guider of all things. And for the furthering of this his devilish endeavour the better, he brought it also to pass, that all those his said Exorcisms, they were very confidently fathered upon Solomon himself, in an especial regard of his singular wisdom: that, by such legerdemains, he might win the more credit to all those his spiritual illusions. But seeing it is certainly true, Instrumenta creata, ad actiones supernaturales, non possunt se effectiuè extendere. that these created instruments could not effectively extend forth themselves to the powerful effecting of any such supernatural effects: what man will be so wilfully mad, as once to believe, or once to esteem those his trifling tales, for infallible truths? Again, sith Solomon the very mirror itself of heavenly wisdom, being usually accustomed (as the Hebrews report) to dispute of trees and of herbs, 2. King. 4. 33. from the Cedar of Libanon, to the very Hyssop itself, and (which more is) of beasts, of fowls, of creeping things, and of fishes (in the knowledge of all which there lieth hid from the world, much secret Philosophy for the admirable effecting of such admirable matters by mere natural means.) If Solomon (I say) disputing these matters, hath left no one monument at all of any such admirable skill, throughout the whole scriptures recorded: what wight is so sottishly minded, as once to imagine that wise Solomon himself was the first inventor of any such palpable fooleries: or, that he was the author of any such Magical enchantments, and superstitious Exorcisms, as are so injuriously, or rather, so blasphemously fathered upon him? Exorcists. How basely soever you esteem of these means which josephus reports: yet, Tob. 8. 2. 3. what say you to that which good Toby declareth, concerning the perfume made with the fishes liver; which expelled the devil from out of Sarah the daughter of Raguel. That perfume (you know) it was only a created, and mere natural means: therefore, an only created, and mere natural means, it hath, and may have in it, an actual power, for the dispossessing of spirits and devils. Physiologus. The book of Tobiah, Hieron. in prolog. Galeat. it is not Canonical, and therefore, not authentical enough, to convince, or confirm any matter in controversy. But, Otho Casman. be it supposed Canonical; yet thus then I answer the same. Augelograph. par. 2. cap. 17. Namely, that the forenamed perfume, so made of the liver, Quest. 10. it might lessen (in some sort) the present affliction: though, not utterly expel the devil his possession. For, that perfume, it might be some physical means to dry up or correct some bad disposition in Sarahs' brain, arising naturally from the variable disposition of the moon itself, over moistening her brain, and making it more apt for the present apprehending of satan his intended afflictions. Which said bad humour of hers, being by that means something allayed, the affliction withal, it would something abate: howbeit, utterly to expel the devil his possession, it could have no possible power at all. No, that supernatural action (if any such were) was supernaturally effected, by a supernatural power in the Angel. Tob. 6. 7. Who taught not Tobiah by any force of that perfume to expel the devil: but told him rather before, that so soon as the perfume was kindled, the devil should forthwith be expelled. Not, that the perfume itself should effectively procure any such supernatural action: but be rather an apparent demonstration of the admirable effecting thereof. For, even as it is not undoubtedly necessary that the washing of my hands should be an efficient cause of the moons eclipse, though the moon itself, at the very time of my washing be undoubtedly eclipsed: so, neither was it necessary that the forenamed perfume, should effectively procure of itself, that self-same supposed dispossession of satan, howsoever satan (at the very instant itself) was truly dispossessed. So then, the Angel he taught by that perfume what should then come to pass: not rendering any one efficient cause, Tob. 8. 3. why it so came to pass. As also the very text you allege, it telleth us not, that the perfume expelled the power of the devil: but, that it was rather the Angel himself who cast the devil forth, at the very same time the perfume was kindled. Now then, what was it I pray you that expelled the devil? the perfume which rose up from the liver? no, but the Angel that bound him. And how did he bind him? by any effectual means of that perfume? No, but at the very same season the liver perfumed, the Angel he bound the devil, in the utmost borders of Egypt. Giving Tobiah that self-same perfume as an infallible sign (but no effectual cause at all) of Sarah her happy deliverance. Thus than you plainly perceive, that, no created, or mere natural means, ●ath any efficient power of itself, for the actual dispossessing of spirits and devils. Exorcists. Well sir, howsoever you may justly challenge the authority of Tobiah, for not being authentical, I have one example from the canonical scriptures, to confirm the infallible truth of that which I hold herein. Namely, that admirable action of David: who only but played with his harp, and the evil spirit of the Lord departed from Saul. Howbeit, that harp, and that playing of David thereon, 1. Sam. 16. 23. were only created, and mere natural means: therefore, some only created, or mere natural means, may have in it naturally, an effectual power for the dispossessing of spirits and devils. Physiologus. In deed, if spirits and devils, had their peculiar bodies naturally united unto them, Apuleius. as Apuleius affirmeth: saying, that devils are living creatures, constituted of airy bodies, of passable minds, and in time also eternal: then, there would be no inconvenience at all, to hold that spirits and devils (by a melodious sound, or some other such sensible means) might be altered in their actions, and expelled from men. For, the Platonists, they flatly affirm that devils are a certain mean, between the intellectual spirits, who are of a pure spiritual substance: and between men, having bodies constituted of the four elements. Howbeit, because the sacred scriptures, and catholic faith do jointly avouch that spirits and devils are of an Angelical nature, and that (howsoever by malice corrupted) their natural faculties do still remain absolute in them: we may consequently conclude, that therefore, no sensible matter, or corporal virtue is able of itself, directly, or indirectly to effect in them, any such action, they being properly of a spiritual substance. So that, the devils themselves, they cannot (by any such created or corporal means) be compelled to any thing: much less may they be violently expelled from their actual possessions in men. Although yet, I dare not deny, but that (by a divine and supernatural power whether immediate, or mediate) they may be dispossessed, or driven from their hold. Exorcists. But the very text itself doth plainly avouch, 1. Sam. 16. 23. that, when David did play on his harp: the evil spirit of the Lord departed from Saul. Physiologus. My answer is this. It is generally doubted, and, ourselves do flatly deny, that Saul was ever essentially possessed with either spirit or devil. Howbeit, because you labour with tooth and nail, to prove the dispossessing of Demoniakes by an only created or mere natural means, and thereupon also, would threape upon us a supposed essential possession in Saul: go to, let it for arguments sake be granted (which will never be proved) that Saul in deed, was so possessed as yourself do happily imagine: what then infer you thereof? Exorcists. I infer from thence, his undoubted dispossession: and that also, by the only bare means of a melodious instrument. For, 1▪ Sam. 16. 23. David but played with his harp; and the evil spirit of the Lord departed from Saul. Physiologus. Howsoever yourself may conceive of the matter, it is doubted of some, whether the evil spirit did ever depart from Saul: neither is any man bound to believe the same as a certain truth. For, this is undoubtedly true, that, a man may be always actually possessed: and yet, not always apprehend the violent, or actual outrage of satan. Besides that, if Saul had been dispossessed in deed; yet, that self-same dispossession was effected, neither by the inherent holiness of David himself, nor, by any supposed help of his harp. For, a mere created nature, it hath of itself, no possible power to expel the possession of spirits or devils: as was showed before: no, that is only an extraordinary and supernatural work of the Lord. Exorcists. Yea, 1. Sam. 16. 23. but the text, it telleth us plainly, that, when David once handled his harp: the evil spirit of the Lord departed from Saul. Physiologus. That is, the evil spirit, he showed not his outrageous force, as before in Saul. Understanding thereby, that the torments of Saul (through the melodious sound of David's harp) they might for the time be something abated: though the evil spirit itself (if any such there) was not utterly expelled from Saul himself, and thus much also affirmeth the text. Namely, that when David did handle his harp: 1. Sam. 16. 23. king Saul was refreshed or eased. Yea, and the servants also of Saul, they accordingly advised him a little before, 1. Sam. 16. 15. 16. to procure to himself some excellent harper: that, when the evil spirit should vex him, the said harper might play with his harp. And wherefore I pray you? to expel the devil? nay, but to ease the king for the present. Exorcists. How should the king be eased at all: and, the spirit not expelled out of his body? Physiologus. Very well I assure you. For, this we may boldly avouch, namely, that by means of a melodious sound, or some other like sensible matter, such as are actually afflicted of Satan, they may have their afflictions, for some season abated: notwithstanding the actual possession of Satan itself be not utterly expelled, and this also in a double respect. First, because the action of all actives, Philosophus, in 2. de anima. are evermore actual in a predisposed patient: in such a subject (I mean) as is proportionably appliable and fitted before, Actus activorum, sunt in patient praedisposito. to the orderly apprehension of those self-same intended actions. For, spirits or devils, they cannot essentially alter any one quality in a corporal matter, when, and so oft as it pleaseth themselves: they only may effect some such kind of thing, johannes de Bromyard, in summa praedicat. E. 7. 11. by means of some corporal actives. And, for that self-same consideration, when they would afflict any man with their actual torments: they do eftsoons respect the natural disposition of some corporal matter, whereupon they may work their intended effects. Inhabentibus qualitates similimas: facilior fiat transmutatio. Knowing this by experience, that, in every such matter as naturally hath in it, the self-same natural qualities: a transmutation of qualities may more easily be effected by much. And, hereof also it is, that certain Lunatic persons are eftsoons very strangely, and diversly afflicted at some one time more than another: according to the variable disposition of the Moon itself, as was showed before. Because the Moon being predominant over all moist bodies, Plinius, in annotat. lib. 2. cap. 19 and the brain also of man, it being naturally more moist than any part else: the said brain is therefore more apt at one time, to receive the actions of Satan than it is at another, Musculus, in Math. 17. 15. according to the variable dispositions of the Moon itself, Beza, in Math. 8. 16. being then more effectual in them. ●uen as also we see by daily experience, that all shellfish in the seas, Aretius, in Math. 8. 16. they are at the increase of the Moon, very full: and, eftsoons again, by the only decrease thereof they become very empty. Calvinus, in Math. 17. 15. So surely, the devil, he observeth those self-same seasons, Hugo Card. in Math. 4. 24. wherein the bodies of men (being weak) are more subject to sicknesses: and, abuseth those times to his pestilent purposes. And therefore, even as by the only observation of mere natural causes, the devil he may aggravate his actual torments in men: so surely (on the other side) by the only bare means of a melodious harmony, or some other such sensible matter, there may be procured in the bodies of men, such an apt disposition, as is less subject by much, to those the operations of Satan. And so, by consequence, those sefesame afflictions, or torments which were actually inflicted upon them by Satan, they may very well be abated or lessened: notwithstanding the devil his actual possession be not utterly expelled. Lycanthropus. In what respect else may their said torments be abated? Physiologus. Secondly, this said mitigation of satan his actual torments inflicted on men, it may very easily be effected also if we but consider aright as we ought: that, to the actual afflicting of any, Pet. Martyr, in judic. cap. 5. there is required in the patient, an apt apprehension of the intended affliction. For, even as delectation or pleasure, is none other thing else but the conjunction of some convenient active, Item, in loc. come. clas. 3. tit. de musica & carminibus. to some convenient passive, with an apt apprehension of the present delight, in so much, as where there is no such apprehension, there is no delectation: Pythagoras. so surely, in affliction or heaviness, which is the conjunction of some convenient active, to some convenient passive, there must needs be an apt apprehension of the objected affliction, otherwise, where such apprehension is wanting, there the affliction is no affliction at all. Whereupon it doth necessarily follow, that, even as that which diminisheth the apprehension, diminisheth also the affliction itself: so surely on the other side, that which increaseth the apprehension, it increaseth also the delectation intended. But, a melodious sound or musical harmony, it draweth unto it the minds attention, and therewithal, retracteth the same from the offered affliction. And so, by consequence it might very well lessen those torments which satan did actually inflict upon Saul, in as much as it drew the minds attention unto it, and withdrew the same (for that present) from any such apprehension of the torments inflicted: but, by no means in itself, the same might utterly expel the actual possession of the spirit in Saul, if any such were. Exorcists. If those torments actually inflicted by satan, might something be lessened: then might they also be totally removed. For, seeing that spirits and devils (as yourself doth affirm) are unable, (at their own pleasures) to alter the essential qualities of any true natural matter to serve their own turn, but must do it by means of some corporal actives: it followeth consequently, that they are also of themselves unable to afflict any man actually, but, must do it by means of some such corporal actives as are able, very aptly to dispose the passive matter itself, to an apt apprehension of the afflictive action in the party possessed. And then, (according to your own reason a little before) such a disposition (by corporal or sensible means) may eftsoons be well procured in the body of man, as may make the same body become utterly unapt for the present, to apprehend any the actual torments of satan. As for example, the disease called mania, Damascenus, Philosophus, in 4. Ethic. which (as Damascene reports) is a perpetual fury, very mightily disposed to an alienation of mind: and so by consequence, a disease very apt to the speedy apprehension of any demoniacal affliction enforced upon it. Avicen. lib. 3. tract. 4. cap. 17. And yet notwithhanding, this said demoniacal passion proceeding thence, Phil. Barrough, de method. curandi lib. 3. ●●p. 27. as the same may (by sensible means, and physical medicines) be mightily abated: so may it (in like manner) be thoroughly and perfitly cured, it being (as physicians affirm) an infirmity, eftsoons very curable. But, the disease itself being perfitly cured, that former disposition of the body (which was naturally inclined to the speedy apprehension of those self-same demoniacal torments so answerable unto it) is in like manner removed or stayed: and so by consequence, the active affliction of satan, it may be utterly expelled from men, by an utter expelling before of the passive disposition correspondent thereto in the party possessed. Now then, if a melodious harmony hath in itself an apparent efficacy, for the present appeasing of passions and griefs of the mind, and for the timely procuring of present delights (as experience approveth, August. in 10▪ confess. and Augustine flatly affirmeth) it followeth consequently, that, that self-same melodious sound, which (by a sensible, or mere natural quality) did undoubtedly alter the mental passions in Saul: the same might also quite change the minds inclination, so farfoorth at the least, as that self-same disposition which was naturally inclinable before, to the speedy apprehension of satan his active affliction was utterly removed, and thereby also, the foresaid affliction it was thoroughly and perfitly cured. Physiologus. Well sir. Thus much first, you do fully confess in your answer: namely, that, by a melodious sound, or some sensible means, there may well be procured in the bodies, & humours of men, such an apt disposition, as the torments actually inflicted by satan, may undoubtedly be abated, or lessened. Howbeit, from thence also, you would further infer: that therefore, those the said torments actually inflicted by Satan, they may in like manner, be totally expelled. The reason of which your said inference, is undoubtedly this. Namely, for that, by an utter removing of the passive disposition apprehending those torments inflicted: the active operation of Satan, is likewise utterly removed. And so, when the devil (to our seeming) afflicteth no more: we must then be persuaded, that the evil spirit, is undoubtedly departed from thence, and the party possessed is quite delivered. This (I suppose) is the very sum of your inference: and the reason also itself, wherewith you would manage the matter. Exorcists. Yea sir, it is wholly the same. Physiologus. Then, this I must tell you for truth: that your assertion it is too too absurd, and grounded altogether, upon fantastical and idle conceits. For, first you imagine there can be no actual possessions at all: unless some natural disposition, or passion at least, do offer before hand a free passage thereto. This (I assure you) is utterly untrue, as may plainly appear in the person of Saul himself, 1. Sam. 9 2. of whom we entreat. For (he in all perfection of nature) excelled his brethren by much; or any man else in that age. He being a goodly young man, and fair, so as among all the children of Israel, there was none more goodly than Saul: being also from the shoulders upward much higher than any any in Israel. Thus than you see, there was no such redundancy of humours, nor no other such natural defects in Saul's constitution, as might make him the more naturally disposed to the speedy apprehension of any those actual afflictions which satan 1. Sam. 16. 14. inflicted upon him. And yet notwithstanding all this, the text, it telleth us plainly, that the spirit of the Lord departed from Saul: and an evil spirit was sent from the Lord, to vex him withal. Secondly, you do no less fond imagine again, that, the devil he is quite gone and departed: when he doth not apparently and actually afflict the possessed. Math. 11. 29. The untruth of this idle conceit, Luc. 11. 21. 26. we need not discover at all: it being more apparently evident, than the Sunshine at midday. For, the devil, Math. 17. 15. eftsoons he slippeth aside according to sensual appearance: Marc. 9 18. 21. when yet (in deed and in truth) he still continueth his actual residence. Luc. 9 38. 42. Yea, this your idle conceit, as it fighteth directly with the faith of those Scriptures, which affirm an actual afflicting but by times, See M. Dorels brief Narrat. in the disposition of William Aldred, the 5. deponent. and by turns: so doth it crack the whole credit of that your falsely supposed possession in the young man at Mahgnitton, who (as your own self confesseth, and many others can testify) was only afflicted by fits, and but at several seasons. Thirdly, you do as fond imagine, that the parties (howsoever possessed of satan,) they are never actually afflicted, See M. Dorels Apology, in pag. 31. unless there be naturally in them before, a passive disposition, for the timely apprehension of the intended actual possession: which is every way more false and untrue, than any of your other conceits. Because, neither the actual possession, nor the actual affliction do necessarily proceed from any affection, or disposition in nature, or from any the absolute power of the devil: johannes King, in jonath. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. but, from the only provident appointment, the powerful permission, and predominant purpose of the only omnipotent God. Who is ergon synergos, that is, a free, and effectual worker: Communitèr author fateor: sed, non nisi boni fautor. in the works of all sorts of workers. Commonly, and indifferently (I confess) an author, in a more common, and more ample signification: howbeit, a favourer only of good, and a director of all actions whatsoever, to the good of his children, job. 1. 12. & 2. 6. & 33. 26. and glory of his name. As more plainly appeareth in the person of job: whom the devil could no further afflict, than the Lord had appointed. By all that which is spoken, it is therefore very apparent, that (notwithstanding any thing hitherto heard) the actual affliction of Saul it might something be lessened: though the actual possession of satan (if any such there) was still continued. Exorcists. Well sir: I argue it further thus. If a melodious sound may effectually procure such an apt disposition in the mind of a man as may make it more able to receive and recover afresh, some supernatural gift, being lost before: then may it much more procure such an apt disposition in the body of man, as may even utterly disable the same from the speedy apprehension of any such natural affliction, as is naturally inflicted by satan. But, the first is undoubtedly true, as appeareth in Elisha the man of God, 2. King 3. 15. who, only by hearing a melodious harmony, recovered forthwith, the supernatural gift of prophesy: and therefore also, the other (in like manner) is apparently evident. For, Virtus activa, quae potest in maius: potest etiam in minu●. an active virtue, having an ability in that which is greater: it hath much more ability in that which is less. Yea, and this also very fitly acordeth with the text itself, which telleth us plainly: 1 Sam. 16. 16. that when David but handled his harp, the evil spirit departed forthwith from Saul. Physiologus. Howsoever your antecedent befitteth your humour, the same I assure you is utterly untrue. Tremelius, in 2. For first, the prophet Elisha, he had not utterly lost the supernatural gift of prophesy, Reg. cap. 3. vers. 15. nota. 10. as yourself very falsely and fond imagine: howsoever, being something disquieted in mind (by reason of the wicked king's presence) he perceived himself unapt for the present, 2. King. 4. 24. to any such spiritual enterprise. And, for that only respect, he purposely required that some cunning musician (by playing and singing before him) might quiet his troubled mind, and quicken his dulled spirits: for his better enabling afresh, to that so sacred, and so blessed a business. Again, if the Prophet (as you falsely affirm) had even utterly lost (indeed) that self-same supernatural gift: then surely, the sensible sound of a melodious harmony, had been utterly unable of itself to recover the same. Because, Virtus creata, ad actus, aut habitus supernaturales; se non extendit. created virtue, (such as that musical harmony was) it could not effectually extend itself to the timely apprehension of any such supernatural action, or habit, as prophesying is. Only, it might be some means to revive, and to quicken the appalled spirits of the prophet Elisha, for the better preparing of him to that action: but, again to recover that supernatural gift of prophesy (being utterly lost) it had been utterly unable. Notwithstanstanding all this, let us admit your antecedent for currant, which will never be proved so: yet, your consequent, or inference enforced from thence, is too too weakly confirmed by the rule you allege. Telling us inconsiderately, that any active virtue, having an ability in that which is greater: it hath an ability also in that which is less. This rule (I assure you) it concludes not your cause, no, it cometh short thereof by many degrees: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. in as much as the same is not universally true, but holdeth only in things essentially subordinate in one and the self-same kind, and not else. For, this is no good consequent: A man is able to beget a man: therefore, he is also able to beget an ass. Neither is there any sequel in this. A man is able to carry a great stone: therefore, he is able also to carry a great fire. Thus then, you may plainly perceive by all the premises, that, the actual affliction in Saul, it might something be lessened: though yet, the actual possession of satan, (if any such there) was still continued. And therefore, this the example of Saul (who was eased a time, by David his handling the harp) it concludeth no absolute dispossessing of spirits and devils, by any created, sensible, or mere natural means whatsoever. Exorcists. Well sir? how lightly soever you esteem of these matters, it is undoubtedly true, that, myself dispossessed the yoongman at Mahgnitton: yea, and this, only by means. Physiologus. By what means I beseech you? Exorcists. Even, by the only means of fasting and prayer. Physiologus. But, whether was it done by your fasting alone, or by your prayer alone: or, by your fasting and prayer together? Exorcists. Not by any means of either alone: but by a mutual concurring of both, in that self-same action. Physiologus. Put case you had attempted the work by your prayer alone: what then? would your endeavour therein have been void? Exorcists. Yea no doubt. For, by that extraordinary exercise of fasting, my prayer it became the more forcible: and, my spirit was made the more powerful in the timely performance of that admirable enterprise. Physiologus. So then, the whole efficacy of that self-same action (as your speech doth import) it depended especially, and only upon the extraordinary exercise of your fasting alone: as upon that which gave a power to your prayer, and which made your spirit the more apt to that enterprise. O absurd, and senseless opinion? This savoureth very shrewdly of the Montanists error, who did attribute so much to their voluntary exercise of fasting and prayer: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Tertullianus, Hieronimus. as (for that self-same respect) they invented, their adusting, and drying up diets, for the more forcible effecting of those there fond affected fooleries. Euseb. hist. eccles. lib. 5. cap. 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And were therefore, very fitly termed, temperate & continent persons. So surely, yourself at this present, in this your pretended dispossession of spirits and Devils, you make your extraordinary exercise of fasting, the only efficient cause of that self-same supposed dispossession of the devil at Mahgnitton. For first you dispossessed him forsooth, by the only means of fasting and prayer. But, your prayer (you say) it became the more forcible, and your spirit was made the more apt, by the extraordinary exercise of your fasting itself: therefore, the extraordinary exercise of your said fasting itself, Quicquid effici● tale: idipsum est magis tale. was the only efficient cause of that self-same supposed action. For, whatsoever doth make another thing to be such as it is: that same thing no doubt, is much more so it own self. But, your extraordinary exercise of fasting, it made your prayer more powerful, and your spirit more apt for that self-same dispossessing of Satan: therefore, your said extraordinary exercise of fasting, it was the only efficient cause of that self-same dispossessing of Satan. This, not only mannageth much, the Montanists errors (as was showed before) but (which more is) it doth very shrewdly support the superstitious and Popish opinions of fasting. Hieron. epist. ad Demetriad. tom. 1. Who, not only repose to much spiced holiness in the voluntary usage thereof: but, make it withal, very satisfactory for sin, and propitiatory, for the silly poor souls departed to purgatory. Gratian. q. 14. cap. 2. Anima. Whereas, the same is only a mere human exercise: Sentent. in 4. Pet. Martyr, loc. come. class. 3. cap. 10. sect. 23. not having in it own self, any sanctity, or holiness at all. Besides all this: that which you say is too to absurd. For, if the only exercise of fasting, be made an effectual means for dispossessing the devil: then may the same (in like manner) be made also, an effectual means, for the effectual suppressing of all those actual sins whatsoever, which the devil suggests into men. Because, an active uértue, which hath an ability in that which is greater, it hath an ability also in that which is less: that less especially, being essentially subordinate in one and the self-same kind, as are the actual sins (suggested by Satan) to Satan himself. And so by consequence, any other creature else (only but abstaining a time as you did, from meats and drinks) it may also be made an effectual means to dispossess the devil himself, and withal, to suppress his devilish suggestions. Exorcists. Nay sir, I make not my exercise of fasting, the efficient cause of that self-same admirable action: but, an assistant rather, in the fruitful performance of that forcible prayer, which forced the devil to depart. Not, that my said prayer had been unfruitful, without some such special assistance of fasting joined therewith: but for that (the flesh being thereby tamed the better) my spirit more fervently performed that self-same prayer, which then, and there, dispossessed the devil. Physiologus. Why were you then so fond to affirm at the first, that (without the joint exercise of fasting and prayer together) your prayer itself had been utterly frustrate, concerning especially that special action. Well then; let us proceed. It was not your exxercise of fasting then; but, your forcible prayer that forced the devil to depart. But tell me I pray you, do you not esteem of that self-same actual possession, as of an extraordinary, and a mere supernatural matter? Exorcists. Yes sir, I dare flatly affirm that the same was entirely and wholly, a mere supernatural matter. For had the same been any way natural, it should then have proceeded from some such natural causes, or wants in the party himself: as might have been otherways cured by physical helps, and mere natural means. Whereas this the actual possession in the yoongman there, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. See M. Darels Narration, fol. 5. pag. 2. it had (as Physicians affirm) somewhat Divine, or supernatural, the same also incurable by any human or ordinary skill: and, which could not otherways be possibly cured, but, by the only ordinary means of fasting and prayer. Physiologus. I like well your plainness. But, tell me yet farther I pray you, whether your said action of fasting and prayer, for that dispossessing of Satan: was any other thing else, but a created or mere natural action? Exorcists. Nay surely sir, that self-same action (as it proceeded from me, and was simply performed by me) it was no other thing else but a mere natural action. For, how could I possibly practise any uncreated, or supernatural action: being myself but a created or mere natural agent? Physiologus. Yea, but the effect which followed of that your said natural action, I mean, that extraordinary dispossession of satan, it was undoubtedly (if any at all) a supernatural effect: and so, you absurdly conclude, that, an only created, or mere natural cause, it may eftsoons ●ffect some supernatural actions. Exorcists. Do make of the matter what pleaseth yourself, very certain I am, that my prayer alone did effectually drive forth the devil. Physiologus. Well, be it supposed your very prayer alone, did effectually drive forth the devil, as you very fond imagine: wherein (I beseech you) consisted the efficacy, & force of your prayer? Whether in sound, or in voice, or in words? If only in sound, why might not then a tabret, or drum, have also effected, that self-same admirable action: seeing, as shrill, and as forcible a sound might have proceeded from them, as could possibly proceed from yourself? Again, if only in voice, why might not a lion, a bull, or a bear have effected the enterprise: sith they had been able, more terribly to have roared, bellowed, or brayed forth their voices abroad, than you your own self? Briefly, if neither in sound nor in voice, but only in words, why might not then, some prattling Parrot have driven forth that devil: sith she also might well have been taught to prattle forth words, if only bare words would have borne out the business? But perhaps you would have us imagine, that, the efficacy of your prayer did only consist in the words of a man: then must we withal, be thus much persuaded at least, namely, that the very bare words of a mortal man, albeit they vanish in the air as they are uttered forth: yet have they in themselves, such a secret force as is able to drive forth a devil: Oh, here is ●oughtie good stuff; if the world were once quick. Exorcists. You are highly to blame in blazing abroad as you do, such sharp Satirical quips, and girding taunts, against my admirable action, wrought at Mahgnitton. For (by disgracing that wonderful work of the Lord) the holy exercise of fasting See M Darels Narration, fol. 6. pag. 1. and prayer, is shamefully scorned, and brought into public disgrace. Physiologus. I neither disgrace the holy actions of God, nor scorn at any his sacred ordinances: no, I more truly esteem, and more sincerely reverence the holy exercise of fasting & prayer, than you do yourself by much. For, whereas I only approve of the power and practise thereof according to truth: yourself (by profaning the same in such falsely supposed actions) do make the holy exercise of fasting and prayer to be shamefully scorned of atheists, derided of papists, yea, and very shrewdly to be suspected with weaklings. So that, you your own self (by these your disordered dealings) do rather bring that holy ordinance of God, into public disgrace. Exorcists. Do I bring prayer and fasting into public disgrace; when I use them only in driving forth devils? Physiologus. Why man, you confess them but mere natural actions, as they were performed by yourself: and, you have heard it sufficiently proved before, that, no created or mere natural power, may possibly extend itself to any such supernatural actions, as is the extraordinary expelling of spirits and devils. And therefore (by abusing the holy exercise of prayer and fasting about such falsely supposed possessions of devils) what do you therein (in effect) but bring them directly into public disgrace; as I told you before. Exorcists. What you told me before it makes no matter: I, both know what I did, and what was my purpose in doing the same. Physiologus. In deed, it should seem you propounded to yourself some special purpose, flat opposite to the holy ordinance of God: and thereupon hath followed so bad an effect. Exorcists. Why sir, See M. Darel● apology, in pag. 32. hath not the Lord established prayer and fasting, as an ordinary perpetual means for the powerful expelling of spirits and devils? By using the same therefore (as I did) in that admirable action: I walked therein according to the holy ordinance of God. Orthodoxus. I may by no means, any longer endure your palpable untruths: or rather most blasphemous speeches. For, where hath the Lord established prayer and fasting as an extraordinary perpetual means, for the powerful expelling of spirits and devils? Exorcists. Even in the seventeen of Matthew, Math. 17. 21. Marc. 9 39 and ninth of Mark; where he telleth us plainly, that this kind goeth not forth, or can by no other means else be cast out, See M. Darels Narration, fol. 5. pag. 2. but by prayer and fasting. Orthodoxus. What conclude you from thence? Exorcists. This I conclude, See M. Darels apology, pag. 32. and very confidently hold: namely, that (one being possessed) prayer and fasting is to be used for the casting out of satan: as a means appointed of God to that special end. Orthodoxus. Do you hold that in good earnest? Exorcists. Yea, See M. Darels apology, pag. 32. in very good earnest. And, this I doubt not, but I am able to prove by the holy scriptures; and further to confirm the same, by the testimony, of ancient, and late writers, by the practice also of the primitive church in all ages, and the good success thereof. Orthodoxus. Then will I be bound, for one twelve months space, to keep your kine for nothing. Howbeit, because this point will crave a long discourse▪ and I feel myself somewhat weary with sitting; let us, go walk a turn or two in my parlour. And having revived our spirits by the singing of psalms: return again to our purpose. Physiologus. I for my own part, like well of your motion. Lycanthropus. The same I dare say for all the rest. Orthodoxus. Arise then, and let us depart. The end of the eight Dialogue. The ninth Dialogue. THE ARGUMENT. Whether Prayer and fasting, be established by Christ, as a perpetual ordinary means, for the powerful expelling of devils? Whether the power therein, be a vocal, or a personal power? Or, whether a true justifying faith (apprehending some supernatural power of God) doth effect that work? The speakers names. PHILOLOGUS. LYCANTHROPUS. PNEUMATOMACHUS. PHYSIOLOGUS. ORTHODOXUS. EXORCISTS. Orthodoxus. BLessed be the name of our God for these sweet recreations: oh, how they comfort the soul, and refresh the body. Surely, our crazy bodies, they would soon be enfeebled, were they not daily supported by such sanctified props: yea, and our souls also, they would languish every hour, were they not eftsoons comforted by such gracious refresh from God. Physiologus. It is undoubtedly so as you say: and therefore, how highly are we bound to extol his merciful kindness? Orthodoxus. Very true. But come Exorcists, let us lose no time. Hath Christ established prayer and fasting, for the perpetual expelling of spirits and devils? Exorcists. There is no doubt at all to be made of that matter. Orthodoxus. I am doubtful thereof I assure you: neither will you be able (I fear) to clear me of that doubt, so long as I have breath in my body. For, this I must tell you for certain, that if prayer and fasting be perpetually appointed by Christ, for the powerful expelling of spirits and devils: then must we necessarily esteem thereof, as of an holy established ordinance, for that self-same purpose. Exorcists. Yea, See M. Darels apology, pag. 32. no doubt, it is an holy established ordinance, for that very same purpose. Orthodoxus. If it be an holy ordinance, perpetually established by Christ, as you bear us in hand: then hath it also an apparent commandment appertaining unto it, for the authentical approbation of such a perpetual establishment: &, it hath also some certain Canons and rules, concerning out orderly directions therein. But, no such commandment or canon is any where extant in all the Scriptures: therefore, prayer and fasting is no perpetual ordinance established by Christ, to any such special purpose. Exorcists. I understand not your argument; it is so obseurely, and so intricately propounded unto us. Orthodoxus. It is apparent enough, if you were not wilfully blind: howbeit, I will repeat, and propound it more clearly thus. If prayer and fasting be such an established ordinance, than that establishment is apparently expressed in the Scriptures: but the latter is false: therefore also the first. Exorcists. Why sir? Math. 17. 21. hath not our Saviour himself put down an express commandment, Marc. 9 39 for the perpetual establishment of such an ordinance: See M. Darels Narration, fol. 5. pag. 2. where he telleth us plainly, that this kind goeth not forth but by prayer and fasting? What may be more clear than this? Orthodoxus. Do you call this a clear commandment, for the perpetual establishment of such an ordinance? Exorcists. What may be more clear? Orthodoxus. You do herein, too to fond bewray your gross ignorance: and make clear to the world, your want of judgement, concerning the purpose of Christ in that place. Which was only to make known the accidental impediment, in that self-same action: and, not to put down any essential commandment concerning the supposed perpetuity of any such sacred ordinance, as yourself do imagine. For, what manner of argument is this that you make? Math. 17. 21. This kind goeth not forth but by prayer and fasting: Marc. 9 39 therefore, from henceforth (saith Christ) I do solemnly establish prayer and fasting, as a perpetual ordinace, for the powerful expelling of spirits and devils for ever. This followeth fair and far of from the purpose you aim at. Again, if the holy ghost in that place, had either expressly, or implicatively intended to put down a commandment for the perpetual establishment of any such falsely supposed ordinance: then surely, it is not to be doubted at all, but that (in a matter especially of such sacred importance) he would never have left us at random, to deal therein as seemed good to ourselves, but (in some other place else at the least) he would have inserted such certain canons and rules as should more fuly have served for our orderly direction and guidance therein. Howbeit, Rom. 12. 6. etc. neither in the epistle to the Romans or Corinthians, neither yet, 1. Cor. 12. 28. in any of those to Timothy or Titus (where all church offices and officers are handled at lage) doth he give any 1. Tim. in al. Tit. in al. one rule at all, concerning the orderly practice of this your falsely supposed perpetual ordinance: and therefore, the same is no such ordinance established by Christ. Besides that, the apostle Peter, 1. Pet. 5. 8. 9 having purposely laid open the perpetual vagaries of satan to kill and devour, he maketh no mention at all of prayer and fasting, but only of a strong faith to resist him withal. Eph. 6. 11. 12. As also, the apostle Paul displaying purposely the complete armour of christians against the power of the devil whatsoever: he speaks not a word of prayer and fasting, for the timely withstanding of any his fiery darts. So then, sith (in all the canonical scriptures) there is neither commandment nor canon for the timely fortification of any such newfound ordinance: I wonder you blush not, to brave out the matter (as hitherto you have done) by pretending the authority of scriptures, the testimony of father's old and new, D. Apolog. pag. 32. the practice of the church in every age, yea, and the good success thereof, to manage the matter itself. Exorcists. I could prove the same, D. Apolog. pag. 32. in such sort as I say. You could so I confess; if you had wherewith all to do it: but, this lingering delay in doing the work, doth notably declare you a non proficient, or make your penury that way to apparent at least. For, it is full two years, since that your thrasonical vaunt was vented forth: whereas hitherto you have not set any one of those your braving huge barrels abroach, to give us so much as a taste of your further store. And therefore, it cannot possibly be, but that, either you are drawn dry of your proofs before you begin the banquet: or that they do at the least haerere in calamo, cleave so close to your pen, as all the power you have, is utterly unable to procure their public passage. Well sir, whatsoever be the want, we will (in special favour) attend with patience, your more convenient leisure, for the expected performance of that your bombasted and braving ability, concerning the irrefragable confirmation of this your imagined ordinance. In the mean time we think it good to give you an inkling of some one or two of the later writers, whose judgements are opposite to that which you tell us. First, joh. Calvin. in Math. 17. 21. Calvin upon those self-same scriptures, he telleth us thus. Whereas Christ imputeth their not prevailing against that devil, to some want of faith in his own disciples: he teacheth us plainly, to ascribe the whole efficacy of every such miraculous action, to the power of faith, and not to our prayer and fasting. Showing us therein, how ridiculously the Papists have constituted their actual fasting alone, as an effectual counterpoison for the powerful expelling of Spirits and Devils. Thus far Calvin. In like manner, Henr. Bullinger in Math. 17. 21 Bullinger upon the self-same place, he writeth thus. These words they are anagogecally, or ascendingly transferred from that inferior, to a superior consideration, or, from that one particular, to an universality, thus. The Lord (you see) he hath delivered this one Demoniak, or he hath expelled this one devil: doubt you not therefore of his further power, for the timely subduing of the whole kingdom of Satan. He saith not thus, the Lord by his immediate power hath driven out this one devil from the child: and therefore, all spirits and devils, shall from henceforth, be immediately expelled by prayer and fasting, thereby prescribing a perpetual Canon to Exorcists: no, he intended not any such matter at all. For, this kind (saith Christ) it goeth not forth but by prayer and fasting. Therein, very covertly deducing his speech from that one particular precedent, to all manner of arts, impurities, and temptations of Satan whatsoever: and not to a perpetual establishment of any such falsely supposed ordinance, for the powerful expelling of spirits, by prayer and fasting, as yourself doth falsely and fond imagine. Exorcists. Well, See Rhemish testament in Math. 17. 21. sect. 7. yet for all this, our Saviour Christ doth undoubtedly insinuate some secret force to fasting and prayer, for the powerful expelling of spirits and devils, even in those self-same words expressed before: otherwise, he would never have so precisely put them down in that place. And therefore, the Church from age to age, in their several Exorcisms, and we also at Mahgnitton, have dealt according to the sacred Scriptures; in practising prayer and fasting for the expelling of devils: because (besides that work of faith, which Calvin and Bullinger noteth) these also (in that place) are jointly required by Christ. Orthodoxus. Is this a good argument? Christ (by occasion) doth mention fasting and prayer in that place: therefore, he establisheth exorcizings by prayer and fasting, as a perpetual ordinance for the Church to observe. D. Fulke his answer to the Rhem. testament, Math. 17. 21. sect. 7. This jesuitical jest was fitly and fully answered by an excellent Doctor thus. The popish church (and you also yourselves) have to grossly abused the ignorant people, in making them believe you can cast forth devils: whereas you have no such power at all. Neither can you by all your prayers and fastings, conjure out one unclean spirit from a man: unless you have first (like sorcerers and witches) conjured them in. Exorcists. Let it be a jesuitical jest, or whatsoever you please, I make no doubt, but that prayer and fasting is an ordinance perpetually established by Christ: for the powerful expelling of devils. Orthodoxus. Be it even so as you say. But, do tell me withal I pray you, whether our Saviour Christ hath established the same as an ordinance generally for all to undergo: or, whether he hath only imposed the dispatch thereof, upon some certain special persons? Exorcists. I hold it an ordinance belonging indifferently to all, See. M. Darels Narration, fol. 1. pag. 1. both men and women. Yea, and I am fully persuaded that the faithful prayers of the party and his friends, See M. Darels apology, pag. 31. 32. might well have prevailed with God in this case, though no one preacher at all had been present: as in the dispossession of Thomas Darling was very apparent. Orthodoxus. If prayer and fasting (for the powerful expelling of devils) be an ordinance belonging to all (as you say) then, the undergoing thereof, is also a duty appertaining to all: and so, the party at Mahgnitton, as also his parents they failed greatly in doing their duty that way. Exorcists. I make no question of that. Orthodoxus. Very well. But, what warrant had you to undertake the timely discharge of other men's duties, in a matter especially of such weighty importance, and so nearly concerning themselves? you are not of this mind I hope, namely, that it is sufficient for men to discharge their duties, pierce, aut per alios. either by themselves, or by others? Neither yet that yourself is a second Atlas, appointed by God to undergo the whole weight of every man's duty: or that you are able to accomplish at full, any such supposed works of supererogation, as may fully suffice for the timely dispatch of your own, and other men's duties? Exorcists. No surely, I am free from either of both the opinions. Orthodoxus. How then comes it to pass, that yourself durst so boldly adventure upon the discharge of that duty, which (as you affirm) did properly appertain to the party himself, and his parents together: or, why did you not rather advise and exhort them, to the timely dispatch of the self-same duty, which (you say) appertained in duty unto them? Is not this the practice of a Polypragmaticall mate: yea, and to become a busy body in other men's matters? Exorcists. Nay sir, your collections they are over strict, and, your censures to sharp concerning my former speeches. For, albeit, I did, and do flatly affirm, that prayer and fasting (for the powerful expelling of spirits and devils) is (in deed) a general duty belonging to all the church: yet, I doubt not, but, that the same notwithstanding, doth more specially appertain to preachers, and pastors. Math. 7. 6. For, even as all men are generally bound to pray unto God for their forgiveness of sins, Luc. 11. 4. and yet, that general duty, Act. 8. 22. it doth not exclude the ministers or preachers from praying publicly, Act. 8. 24. for the remission of sins in all: so surely, albeit that prayer and fasting (for the powerful expelling of 1. Thes. 5. 32. spirits and devils) be a general duty enjoined generally to all the whole church, yet, that general duty, it doth not hinder at all, but that the ministers also, they may and must more specially undergo such a duty for others, so oft as they perceive those others to careless in discharging that duty themselves. Orthodoxus. Very true. But ministers, whensoever they put up their public prayers to God for such public remission of sins, they do not that work, by reason of the only general duty, which generally belongeth to every christian: but rather, in regard of their peculiar calling, and by virtue of a ministerial function, more especially imposed upon them, being therein appointed by God, Exod. 4. 15. 16. the public mouth of that public assembly. And therefore, do tell me directly, whether you enterprised that action, only as a common christian: or rather, as a public minister appointed of God? Exorcists. I undertook the whole work (I confess) as a public minister of God. See M. Darels. Narration, in the depositions of William Aldred, the 5. diponent, fol. 8. pag. 7. For, I both prayed, and preached publicly: yea, and that also, before such a public auditory, as (by my special, and only directions) was foreappointed, prepared, and purposely assembled together, in a public participation of that self-same intended action. Orthodoxus. Be it even so. But, tell me in what sort you effected the work: whether, as an ordinary; or extraordinary minister? Exorcists. Even only as an ordinary minister of jesus Christ. Orthodoxus. Why sir? were you called, and fully established an ordinary minister at Mahgnitton: or ever you undertook that enterprise? Exorcists. No sir, I had there no ministerial calling in any respect. Orthodoxus. Then (by your own confession) you could be no ordinary minister at Mahgnitton, if any at all. And therefore, how durst you so boldly adventure, to thrust your sickle into another man's harvest? My meaning is this. How could you so desperately undertake such an extraordinary work in another man's charge, you being not so much as an ordinary minister, nor having obtained before, some ordinary allowance thereunto at the least? Gen. 4. 4. Is this the approved practice of that wel-ordered discipline, whereof yourself, judg. 17. 5. 6. and some others so highly esteem? Or, must we (in any case) account that a wel-ordered ecclesiastical government, Numb. 16. 18. 1. Chr. 13. 9 10. which mannageth such an unwarrantable foisting in of monstrous disorders into the church of Christ? Act. 5. 36. 37. And, which more is, doth set open a door to such shameful confusion, and dareth privilege any (how irregular soever) after such peremptory and popelike manner to intrude himself into another man's ordinary charge: Rom. 12. 6. without some ordinary allowance at least, to any so weighty a work? Heb. 5. 4. For, be it supposed, that (by reason of the party, and his parents long negligence) the timely dispatch of that self-same business, did crave some public assistance, and must therefore, be forthwith transferred to the minister his public calling: how comes it to pass, that their own Minister himself (whom such a work more especially concerned) Act. 20. 28. did not (in all duty) undertake the whole convey 1. Pet. 5. 2. of that business? Or, if yourself, and some others had espied him to slothful therein, 1. Tim. 5. 19 20. why did you not (by some consistorial proceeding) convent him before you, convince his said slackness; advise and direct him in the orderly dispatch of that matter: rather, then thus disorderedly to rush headlong upon it yourself? Yea, and (which more is) how could you (in conscience) assure yourself of any other than the seven sons of Scevahs' success: Act. 19 15. 16. having neither calling, nor word, nor warrant, nor example, nor authentical allowance thereto? Exorcists. In deed sir, I earnestly exhorted the Minister there, to undertake the action himself, for that it belonged more especially unto him: howbeit, the man, he was mightily afraid to adventure upon it, because he was utterly unexperienced in such kind of matters. Orthodoxus. Would you bear us in hand, that, M. Aldredge master of Arts and an ancient authorized preacher. so reverend a man would take upon him a Ministerial function, being very able, but mightily afraid, to adventure upon the dutiful discharge thereof, in a matter especially, of such weighty importance? Or, must we imagine (for saving your credit) that the preacher at Mahgnition (a man of thirty years standing there at the least) should be utterly unexperienced in the orderly performance of prayer and fasting? Besides all this, if prayer and fasting (by whomsoever performed) is (as you say) an undoubted true means appointed of God, See M. Darels Narration, in the depositions of Thomas Haies, fol. 7. for the powerful expelling of spirits and devils: how comes it to pass that master Haies, master Ebins and others (performing that means) could not possibly effect the cure, they being Ministers as much, or more than yourself. Moreover, See Narration, ibid. pag. 2. sith master Aldredg the Minister there, might (with better assurance) expect from the Lord a blessing upon those his own labours, than yourself by much: how is it (I pray you) that he was unable to drive out the devil, he practising also the self same means at sundry times. Again, See the Narration in William Aldred his depositions, fol. 8. pag. 1. what hindered the driving out of that devil the night before: when your own self (with some others) so solemnly performed the appointed means? Yea, and (which more is) what might be the cause (I beseech you) that master Coldwicke, a preacher also in that self-same action when the devil was expelled, who prayed, and preached (in his course) before yourself: could not yet have the hap (with all the cunning he had) to conjure or cast out that perilous devil? If prayer and fasting be able to do it, by whomsoever effected: I wonder (I assure you) that so many good men (notwithstanding they prayed and fasted at sundry times) should never have the good hap to hit on the matter, and that it must light so just in your lot, to strike the Popiniay dead, and to do it yourself? Exorcists. Why should you wonder at all: See M. Darel his Narration, fol. 8. pag. 2. sith the very hour it self (wherein the Lord would glorify his word, and his work) was never till then? Orthodoxus. What man? was prayer and fasting by whomsoever performed, the only powerful means appointed of God, for the powerful expelling of devils a little before: and is the same effectual now, but by times, and by turns? Put case you yourself had been the first preacher in that disordered action: had then your said labours (how powerful and holy soever) been bestowed in vain? Or, put case the first preacher had taken your turn, and your text, had counterfeited your voice, and stood in such a place as the party possessed could neither have discovered his person, nor descried his speech: what than I beseech you? See M. Darels Narration, fol. 5. pag. 1. & fol. 8. pag. 2. would that preacher his handling those signs of possession and dispossession which you handled yourself, have constrained the possessed perforce, to act every thing handled, with such an apt correspondence, as he did, when yourself delivered those mystical matters? Yea and (which more is) when that preacher (being once come to the signs of dispossession) should have charged the devil to come out of the child: would the party possessed, so fitly, and so justly have vomited therewith, as he did when yourself entreated thereof? Exorcists. In very deed sir, Augustini epistola, 137. this I must freely confess with Augustine that (howsoever the Lord hath appointed prayer and fasting, an only effectual means for the powerful expelling of devils) he, notwithstanding all this, doth make a special choice of persons, of places and times, for the more orderly effecting of every such admirable enterprise. Orthodoxus. Your answers (without doubt) are suddenly fallen to such deadly debate among themselves, as, the one is ready to pull out the throat of the other: Memorem mendacem esse ●portet. by reason of some bad disposition, or present defect in your memory. For prayer & fasting (ere while) was the only appointed means to expel the power of the devil: and now, the efficacy thereof, is restrained to places & times. It was not long since, a public ordinance appointed generally for all men: and now, it is imposed upon some special persons. Not long since, it might well be effected by the party himself and his parents: but now the powerful dispatch thereof, is peculiar only to preachers and pastors. See. M. Darels Narration, fol. 1. pag. 1. Not long since, it was an ordinary power, incident to any godly Minister or others: but, no Minister now (how godly soever) hath the good hap to hit on that matter, save only yourself. Thus than you see, that, as the disease: so also the cure, it doth ebb and flow with the Moon. Howbeit, these doubtful uncerteinties, do savour very shrewdly of some legerdemain, at the least. And, howsoever yourself (avouching that God maketh special choice of persons, of places and times) would cunningly shelter your cause under Augustine's credit: very certain I am, Rhem. testament, Luc. 4. 23. sect. 3. that the same is only a jesuitical juggling devise, and therefore, it deserveth the self-same answer with theirs. For, be it that the Lord, (as Augustine saith) doth make a special choice of persons, of places and times, for the orderly effecting of every such admirable action: this proveth not, See D. Fulke contra Rhem. Luc. 4. 23. sect. 3. Item, ibid. 1. Cor. 12. 9 sect. 2. that the power of working miracles continueth still to this present. Only it showeth, that, whensoever the Lord worketh any wonderful work: he is free to make choice of persons, of places and times, as seemeth best to his wisdom. And therefore (admitting all this for a truth) do tell me withal, by what means you are certain that the Lord made special choice of yourself, for such special business? Exorcists. Why sir? the very effect itself, doth fully declare the truth of the matter: for, I cast forth the devil. Orthodoxus. Be it, that some such effect as yourself surmizeth did forthwith succeed your said enterprise: yet, forsomuch as yourself did no more in the matter, See M. Darels Narration, fol. 1. pag. 1. than was ordinarily incident (you say) to any godly preacher or others: how comes it to pass, that those other (performing the very self-same things you performed yourself) no such admirable effect should follow their labours? Was it, for that the rest of the Ministers were all, but ungodly wretches, in comparison of you? Or, was it so rather, 2. Thes. 2. Math. 24. 23. 24. for that (those Ministers fearing the Lord aright) the Lord would not suffer their innocent souls to be falsely seduced by any such sleights: or, for that you yourself (being at that time more destitude of grace) had (for the present) some power to effect such a false deceivable sign; to your greater condemnation, 2. Thes. 2. 9 10. without speedy repentance? Exorcists. Howsoever I may not impure a less measure of godliness to others, neither yet arrogate any more to myself, then to any of the rest: very certain it is, that, only myself had then the special power to expel the devil. Physiologus. Master Orthodoxus let me argue this point. Come on Exorcists. If your own self (as you say) had then a more special power to expel the devil by prayer and fasting, than any of the rest: that your said power, it must needs be a vocal, or personal power at the least. My meaning is, that such a special power, it proceeded either from your prayer; or your person, but not from your prayer at all: for, the others also, they prayed and fasted as devoutly as you did yourself, albeit in vain: and therefore, your prayer (of itself) it could have no more power than theirs, unless happily you have some special prayer, for that special purpose, beyond the rest of your brethren. Yea, and when all comes to all, it was not your prayer: but your preaching (it should seem) that expelled the devil. Again, if such a special power proceeded from your person alone: then surely, that self same personal power, it was either some natural, or, supernatural power at the least. Howbeit, a mere natural power it might not possibly be: because, no created, or mere natural power, may possibly extend forth itself to any such supernatural action, as hath been sufficiently showed before. Exorcists. That followeth not. For, the body of Christ, it was undoubtedly a created or true natural body, and yet notwithstanding, there went virtue or power from out of the same, for the admirable curing of people. And therefore (if it so seemed good to the Lord for the glory of his name) why might not some power (in like manner) proceed from my person: for the timely expelling of that spirit or devil? Physiologus. Besides your shameless pride in matching your body with the body of Christ: you do monstrously mistake the very point of your purpose. For, do you imagine, that, there went any power essentially, from out of the body of Christ, for the admirable curing of any? Exorcists. I make no question thereof. Luc. 6. 19 And, the scripture, it telleth us plainly, that, the whole multitude thronged to touch him: for, there proceeded virtue out of him, and healed them all. Physiologus. Though it be said in the text, that, virtue proceeded out of Christ, to the curing of many: yet, that must not be understood, as though any virtue (essentially existing in the natural body of Christ) did pass forth essentially from him unto others, in that self-same absolute number: no, In eodemn●mero. but this proceeding of virtue from the body of Christ unto others, is so far forth to be accounted a going forth, as the effect may be said to proceed from the cause. Or it is to be interpreted according to the manner of a cause, producing an effect. The which are said to go forth the one from the other: in as much as the very cause itself doth apparently shine forth in that self-same effect which it worketh. And, even after such a manner, we must understand this matter in question. Because, the Divine virtue itself (essentially existing in the person of Christ) did effectually procure present health to the parties oppressed. Otherways, how must that text be understood which telleth us, Wised. 7. 27. that the wisdom of God (being but one & the same) can do all things itself: that it reneweth all, and entereth eveh into the holy souls, making them the friends and prophets of God. Now sir, because it is said he entereth into the holy souls; must we therefore imagine, the holy spiri● of God to be any where now, where it was not before? not so; for the same of necessity (at all times and seasons) is every where present. Howbeit, because the holy spirit of God doth then more especially procure an apparent effect of spiritual graces to shinefoorth in some soul where they shone not before: therefore the spirit of God, may then be said truly to enter into such a soul, because the efficacy thereof doth more effectually, and more apparently break forth to the view of our eyes. And even after this self-same sort (I assure you) we are to understand (in this place) the virtue going forth from our Saviour Christ, Luc. 6. 19 to the curing of others: because the Divine virtue itself (perpetually existing in the person of Christ) at that very same instant, did more effectually cause health in those the diseased parties. So then, howsoever this place may serve very fitly, to show forth the efficacy of Christ his virtue in curing diseases: it helpeth nothing at all to underprop your pestilent opinion, of a virtue or power essentially proceeding from your own, or any man's person, for the powerful expelling of spirits and devils. Exorcists. But, tell me I beseech you, was that miraculous curing of people by those self-same touchings of Christ, a work of his Divinity only: or of his humanity also? Physiologus. This I must show you for certain, Leo, in epist. ad Flavianum. that Leo himself, very flatly affirmeth all the miraculous actions effected by Christ: to be effectually wrought by his Divinity only. For, seeing (saith Leo) there are undoubtedly in the person of Christ two distinct, or essential natures: the one Divine, which shineth forth by extraordinary miraculous actions, and the other human, which doth solely undergo all offered injuries. It followeth necessarily, that, look how the human nature applieth itself to the undergoing of injuries: even so, the divine nature disposeth itself to the effecting of miracles. But, the human nature alone applieth itself to the undergoing of injuries, because, to suffer at all, is a thing utterly opposite to the nature of the Deity: therefore, the Divine nature alone, it likewise disposeth itself to the admirable effecting of miracles, because, the effecting of such, surmounteth the compass of Christ his created humanity, Psalm. 136. 4. Opera miracu losa excedunt totam virtutem naturae creatae. according to that of David, Ichovah alone doth wondrous things. Again, the miraculous actions they do highly exceed the whole power of any created nature. But, the humanity of Christ, it is only a created nature: therefore, the humanity of Christ (of itself) can effect no miraculous actions. Lycanthropus. This I suppose, is undoubtedly true, and without contradiction at all. Physiologus. It is so I confess, being warily and wi●ely understood: else there may lie some exceptions against it. For, the comparison it holds very fitly in this one respect. Namely, that as the humanity of Christ alone, Phil. 2. 7. 8. was a reason or cause of his undergoing the offered injuries: Heb. 2. 14. so surely, the Divinity of Christ alone, it was also the reason, Eph. 1. 19 or primary efficient cause of his effecting the miraculous actions. Phil. 3. 21. Howbeit that self-same comparison, it holdeth not so currently in a second respect. For, howsoever it is no ways repugnant unto the humanity of Christ, Luc. 24. 19 to be also an effector of miracles instrumentally: yet is it quite contrary unto the Divinity of Christ to suffer afflictions in any respect. I mean, either principally or instrumentally: because, the divinity itself, is wholly impassable. Although yet I dare not deny, but that (in an only especial regard of the supposed identity, or communicable proprieties of both natures in the one person of Christ) that which is truly said of the one, may be as true said of the other. For first (respecting the whole person of Christ) it is not untruly Act. 20. 28. said, 1. Tim. 3. 16. that the Godhead did suffer: again (respecting the whole person of Christ) it may as truly be said, that this child (meaning Christ) created the heavens. Gen. 1. 3. 14. Because, Christ himself is that eternal word of the father, joh. 1. 1. 2. whereby all things (in the beginning) were created and made. And therefore, Col. 1. 16. that sentence of David; Psalm. 136. 4. who saith that jehovah alone doth wondrous things: it is not so to be taken, as happily you would have us imagine. For, the word (alone) in that place, it excludes not the humanity of Christ as any instrumental: but only as a mere principal agent in working wondrous things. Exorcists. But sir (notwithstanding this your cunning distinction) it is very apparent, Rhem. testament, Marc. 3. 10. sect. 1. that, even the humanity of Christ alone (as a principal agent itself) did work sundry miraculous cures, Math. 9 21. 22. in sundry diseased persons: for, Marc. 5. 27. and 6. 56. Luc. 8. 45. and 6. 19 so many as but touched his body, yea, or the hem of his garment, they were presently healed. Now then, if those self-same touchings of Christ, did not effectually work in those the aforesaid cures; it must necessarily follow, that Christ did something in vain. But Christ, he did nothing in vain: therefore, even those the aforesaid touchings themselves, did effectually work in those the forenamed cures. Howbeit, those sensible touchings, they were only mere actions of Christ his humanity: therefore, Christ his only humanity, did principally and effectually work in all those the forenamed cures which succeeded those sensible touchings. Physiologus. Christ, D. Fulke contra Rhem. testament, Marc. 3. 10. sect. 1. Ambrose in Luc. lib. 6. cap. 8. he healed so many, as handled him spiritually by the apprehension of faith: not all such as only but touched him corporally by corporal sense. Otherwise, if only a sensible touching of Christ or his garments, had principally and effectually been able of itself alone, to work those self-same cures: then, Math. 26. 49. judas that kissed him: Marc. 15. 17. 20. the soldiers that stripped him: the high priests servants that smote him: yea, joh. 18. 22. and the rest of the people that thronged and pressed upon him: Luc. 8. 41. 45. had been every of them also effectually amended of all their maladies. Howbeit (saith Beda) only, Beda in Marc. lib. 1. cap. 3. those men alone, do truly and effectually handle our Saviour Christ: who spiritually receive his faith, and his love in their hearts. So then, for a more plain understanding of our matters in question, it shall not be amiss, to proceed more exactly unto a more orderly consideration of all miraculous actions: and this also, in a double respect. Namely, either principally: or instrumentally. First, if we take due consideration of the working of miracles principally, I mean according to their primary, or proper efficient: then are we bound (without contradiction) to believe, and confess, that all miraculous and supernatural actions, do highly surmount the whole power of every creature whatsoever, Psal. 136. 4. and are only peculiar to jehovah himself, who alone doth wondrous things. Yea, this is undoubtedly true, that, no one supernatural action (how simple soever in show) may possibly be effected by any other power principally: but, by the only supereminent power of El-shaddai alone, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mammilla implens. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Acer●us bono●um omnium. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Suis uberibus omnia alens. I mean, that all-sufficient, Psal. 135. 6. omnipotent, and almighty jehovah himself. Who is an unmeasurable mountain of goodness: the only true cherishing dug that is never drawn dry: yea, and who only accomplisheth whatsoever he wills in heaven and in earth: at what time, in what place, and after what manner best pleaseth himself. Howbeit, if we respect the working of miraculous actions but instrumentally, I mean, only according to their secondary or instrumental cause: then must we (in like manner) believe and confess, that even Christ also (respecting only his humanity) and many other of the saints beside (in the powerful effecting of many miraculous actions) did ministerially, or instrumentally accomplish the same. Neither yet, do I account the humanity of Christ, and other the saints of God, as instruments equally alike in the working of miracles: but, distinguish them also according to their differing degrees. For, howsoever (distinguishing only the primary & instrumental efficients) I did sort them in one and the self-same rank: yet I acknowledge withal, an apparent plain difference even in those instruments themselves, respecting especially, their different manner of working. And therefore it will greatly enlighten our matter, if we do further declare, first, how the humanity of Christ is an instrument in the orderly effecting of miracles: and then next, how other good men, may also be said to be instruments. Lycanthropus A very excellent order: I pray you therefore proceed. Physiologus. With very goodwill. First therefore, although it be true, that jehovah alone is the primary or principal efficient of every miraculous action: yet, this also is as certainly true, that jehovah doth eftsoons effect those admirable actions, by some such chosen instruments, as seemeth good to his wisdom. Neither are those his said instruments of one and the self-same condition: for the instruments wherewith the Lord serveth his purpose, they are twofold: namely, either conjoined, or separated instruments. Act. 2. 2●. The conjoined instrument is jesus Christ: who, albeit he be God, and man; Act. 4. 30. yet is he not two but one Christ. And therefore the divinity, and humanity being inseparably united together in the person of Christ: the said humanity, it becometh eftsoons, a conjoined instrument, unto the divinity itself, in the powerful effecting of miracles. Aug. Marlorat. in Math. cap. 28. 20. Whereas all other men, else, howsoever they also may be the instruments of God in working of miracles: Act. 3. 12. yet are they only but separated instruments, Act. 5. 12. and not so nearly united unto the divinity itself in any those admirable actions, Act. 19 11. 12. as is the humanity of Christ, and therefore, though instruments also, yet no such excellent instruments, as is the humanity of jesus Christ. This (if it seemeth obscure to our sense) may very fitly be illustrated from the resemblance of a Carpenter intending, and effecting some admirable work: if we consider therein, the Carpenter's mind, his hand, and his axe. For first, the mind of the Carpenter (it being in perpetual motion) is the primary efficient cause of that self-same intended business: but yet, the Carpenter's hand is a conjoined, and his axe also a separated instrument wherewith he effecteth the purposed work. Now then, even as the Carpenter's mind itself, doth primarily effect the whole work, but yet so, as he useth withal, his hand as a conjoined, & his axe as a separated instrument to accomplish the same: so surely, the divinity alone doth principally effect●ech wonderful thing whatsoever, although yet the divinity itself (so oft as seemeth him good) doth use the humanity of Christ as a conjoined, and other good men, as a separated instrument, for the orderly accomplishment of many most admirable matters. And therefore, even as the axe can work nothing at all, but by the power of the hand, neither yet, the hand itself, but by the only direction of the Carpenter's mind: so surely, the holiest person on earth, can effect no admirable action at all, but in and by the power of jesus Christ, as by the hand of the Deity, neither yet the said hand, I mean the humanity of jesus Christ, (which is as it were a conjoined hand unto his divinity) it can (of itself) no further accomplish any one supernatural action, than the divinity alone doth dispose it, and direct it unto. So then, howsoever the humanity of Christ, and many other good men, did instrumentally effect many admirable matters, and therefore (in that self-same respect) were only but the organical instruments unto the divinity itself, the only true agent in all those actions: yet surely, the humanity of Christ, is a much more excellent instrument then any of the other beside, in an especial regard of that Unspeakable divinity, Hieronimus, Marc. Vigerius, Decachord. chord. 8. 45. fol. 191. whereunto it is inseparably united. By virtue whereof, it was wholly sufficient, for Christ (being perfectly God, and man) to say thus to the devil, I charge thee come out of the party possessed: whereas all others adjured him only in the name and power of jesus Christ to depart. Theod. Beza, ad Brentij argumenta, de carnis Christiomnipraesentia. Howbeit, whether those good men themselves, or the humanity of Christ (being solely, and only considered as they are in themselves, without any transcending respect of the deity) did by means of their own natural power existing naturally in them, effect any such admirable matters: that I suppose may justly be doubted. Lycanthropus. I pray you resolve us something herein. Physiologus. How may I dare to resolve you in that, which some others of singular account, hath left in suspense. For, Augustine (entreating of the manifold miracles wrought by the Saints) he leaves the matter undiscussed, August. de ●iui●at. Dei, lib. 22. thus. Whether the eternal God doth work these admirable matters by himself alone, or, whether he effecteth these things by his Ministers: yea, and even those self-same things also, which are wrought by his Ministers: or whether he doth these things by the spirits of Martyrs departed: or, by the bodies of good men yet living: or whether (by his Angels invisibly, immutably or incomprehensibly) he accomplish the same: or, whether by any other means else which may not be comprehended of mortal men: the faith of the resurrection to erernall life, will one day make it apparently evident. Lo, thus much saith Augustine: and so leaveth the matter. Exorcists. Yea, but Gregory, Gregorius, Dialog. lib. ●. he seems to determine the same in this sort. Those holy men (saith he) who clave fast to the Lord with a devout and religious mind, they were accustomed to work many miracles, both principally, and instrumentally: I mean, sometimes by prayer, and sometimes again, by an actual power permitted unto them. Physiologus. Gregory (you say) he seems to determine the matter. If this be all that he saith therein, then surely, he undertaketh more in a seeming show: then he is able to perform in any showing substance at all. For, that which you allege from Gregory, is no determination: unless you happily imagine that we may boldly believe it, because your Gregory doth but barely report it. Exorcists. Nay sir, he doth not barely report the matter; but, he proves it, very sound, by reason, and example both. Physiologus. Show us his reason first: that we may sound examine the soundness thereof. Exorcists. His reason is this. They to whom is granted a greater power in that which is more, it is no marvel at all, if a like power be eftsoons permitted unto them, in that which is less. But, joh. 1. 12. a power to be made the sons of God by adoption (which is more than the working of miracles) is freely permitted to all the Saints of God: and therefore, there is no wonder at all, though a like power be eftsoons permitted unto them▪ Math. 7. 22. 23. for the working of miracles, it being a faculty inferior to the other by much, yea, and such a power also, as the very wicked may have. Physiologus. The soundness of this reason, consisteth in unsoundness altogether: and therefore, the supposed soundness thereof, for the proof of your purpose, is nothing else in effect, but a festure incurable corruption, concerning both matter and form. For first, that it is faulty in matter, yourself may plainly perceive; in that it wholly relieth upon a very false exposition, concerning the word Exousia. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. For, whereas your Gregory, or yourself (in his name) do translate it a (power) the whole coherence, and circumstance of the text, Theod. Beza, in annotat. super joh. 1. 12. doth plainly declare, that, it ought rather to be termed a right, or prerogative. Yea and (which makes me to marvel) sith that self-same word is Gylberius Longolius in Lexic. Graec. diversly translated, according to the diverse occasions thereof, namely, sometimes a power, sometimes a faculty, sometimes a liberty, sometimes an authority, sometimes a care, a procuration, a right, or prerogative: It is too too strange that yourself (quite contrary to the true scope of the text) should so confidently cleave to the word (power) alone, above all the other rehearsed before. Theod. Beza, in annotat, super joh. 1. 12. Neither may I possibly perceive your purpose therein, unless happily you would jump with Castalio and the papists in their free-will opinion: a thing directly opposite to the holy ghost himself, johan. Calvin, in joh. 1. 12. as you may plainly perceive, both in that, and the verse immediately following. Where the Evangelist, acknowledgeth only such as are borne of God: to have the right or prerogative to be made the sons of God. joh. 1. 12. 13. Not understanding by the word Exousia (as yourself would falsely bear us in hand) any power of electing: but a power of apprehending the adoption of God by faith. Attributing wholly therein, the effectual working power of that self-same adoption, johannes Calin joh. 1. 12. 13. to the almighty alone: and, the power of apprehending that privilege, unto the saving faith of the adopted sons of God in jesus Christ. Yea, and thus much also yourself (at unwares) do flatly confess in your very assumption, saying, that they have power to be made the adopted sons of God: making them plainly (you see) very passives, and no actives at all in the work of adoption. And so, your own reason concludeth directly the contrary of that which you labour to prove: namely, that those good men of God, they had only a passive power in the working of miracles, that is, they had none other but an instrumental power therein, as we showed before. Secondly, your reason it is faulty also in form. For (besides that the same is in no good form) it concludeth only, a (may be) from a bare, or naked supposal: telling us (by a pitiful begging of the cause in question) that, if the Saints have an actual power in the greater, there needs be no marvel at all, if sometimes, they have also a like power in that which is less. Very true as you say, if the Saints of God have in deed, an actual power in that which is greater: then, the sequel of your speech might happily have in it, some more probability. But, whether they have in them such a power or no: your Gregory he hath not concluded as yet. Exorcists. Yea, but he illustrates the matter, by a plain example. Physiologus. How could he illustrate the thing that is not at all? For, it is not yet concluded (you see) that the Saints of God had ever in themselves, any actual power for the working of miracles: and therefore, he cannot possibly illustrate the same, by any example. Notwithstanding, propound your example: that so we may see whether it be any sounder than the reason produced before. Exorcists. That sundry devout and religious persons did effect many miracles, sometimes instrumentally, and sometimes principally: I mean, sometimes by prayer alone, apprehending the power of Christ, and sometimes also, by an actual power permitted unto them, it is very apparent (saith Gregory) by these following examples. First, the Apostle Peter, Act. 9 40. (instrumentally by prayer alone, apprehending the power of Christ) restored Tabytha again to her life. On the otherside, the self-same Apostle (more principally, and by an actual power, in himself, and without any invocation or prayer at all) did actually deliver Ananias to death. Act. 5. 5. By both which, it is very apparent, that the holy men of God, they had in themselves, not only instrumentally, but (which more is) even principally also, an actual power, for the powerful expelling of spirits and devils. Physiologus. That, some holy men of God have had an especial power permitted unto them, for the admirable effecting of miracles; no wise man will ever deny: because the Scripture itself doth plainly avouch, 1. Cor. 12. 10. that, unto some there was given the operations of great works by the spirit of God. Howbeit, this we must hold withal, that, such a power whatsoever, it was only an instrumental: and no principal power at all. Psal. 136. 4. For, seeing the sacred Scriptures do flatly affirm, that jehovah alone doth wondrous things: we must therefore, very conscionable confess and acknowledge, that, D. Fulke in Rhem. testament, Act. 3. 12. sect. 4. 5. jehovah alone is the author, and man but the instrument of all those admirable actions whatsoever, which he (by their hands) doth so powerfully accomplish. Touching therefore your vain surmise of Peter his principal power in the actual delivery of Ananias to death: the Evangelist Luke (a little after) doth flatly avouch, Act. 5. 12. that, Peter was only the hand, whereby the Lord himself (with his sceptre, or two edged sword) did wound Ananias his soul unto death. Yea, and it is very apparent by the story itself, joh. Calvin. in Act.▪ cap. 5. 5. that Peter he had only a Ministerial power in that action: he being but a Minister, and no Master of that self-same word of the Lord, which is undoubtedly, a savour of death unto death, 2. Cor. 2. 13. 14. in them that perish. Howbeit, because that self same death of the soul cannot possibly be discerned by our corporal eyes: the Lord therefore he saw it exceedingly good joh. Calvin. in Act. cap. 5. 5. (even by the ministery of Peter therein) to give an extraordinary visible token thereof, on Ananias his body. To the end, that so many as then beheld, or should from thenceforth but hear of the same, might tremble at the majestical power of the word: and humble themselves to the authority of God. Isa. 11. 4. Who having plainly foretold by the mouth of his prophet, that, he would smite the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips destroy the ungodly: did even then (by the ministery of Peter) exhibit unto us, an experimented trial thereof. So then, howsoever Peter himself (he being the special instrument of jehovah in that most admirable matter) might (by virtue of the principal agent itself) attain to the admirable acting of that, which highly surmounted the whole faculty or power of his own proper person, even as we also may see, Philosophus lib. 2. de anima. that, a natural heat (by a power in the soul) begetteth flesh: yet had Peter (as hath that natural heat) only an instrumental, and no principal power in effecting the action itself, as we showed before. Being therefore but only a bare instrument, the instrument (how absolute soever in itself) is unable to give any further essential form to any such admirable matter: then the principal efficient itself, doth powerfully dispose, and direct it unto. Exorcists. Well sir, Rhem. testament, in Marx. 6. 13. sect. 7. if none other but a bare instrumental power doth proceed from the instrument itself in the powerful effecting of admirable actions: joh. 9 6. why then doth the Scriptures so carefully record the spittle of Christ: Luc. 8. 44. the homme of his garment: the anointing with oil: the shadow of Peter: Marc. 6. 13. the napkins brought to the body of Paul: with many other such signs, Act. 5. 15. & 19 11. 12. & 5. 12. and wonders, which were wrought by the only hands of the Apostles, and of other the saints of God? Physiologus. All those ceremonial matters (how many, D. Fulke contra Rhem. testament in Marc. 6. 13. sect. 7. or how marvelous soever) they had (in their own nature) no actual or miraculous power, for the powerful effecting of miracles: but, were only external tokens of an extraordinary grace of God, dispensed unto men in the usage of them. Item▪ ibid. in Marc. 7. 33. sect. 4. And therefore, we may not grossly imagine any such essential power, or holiness in ceremonies, or creatures in sensible, as is able to effect any thing actually of themselves: but seeing it so pleaseth the Lord (by himself, or his saints) eftsoons to use such sensible matters, as mere testifying tokens to us, and no exhibiting signs in themselves, of that his infinite power in the acting of miracles: we must therefore (by the help of those sensible signs) endeavour forthwith to transcend, or mount up beyond the shallow reach of our reason, Psal. 135. 6. Math. 26. 26. to jehovah himself, the primary, and only efficient, and (by the only apprehension of faith) be fully persuaded, that, joh. 6. 52. Jude 10. he alone is able to do whatsoever he please, in heaven, and in earth. Otherwise we shall with the grunting papists, and the carnal Capernaites, (being beasts without reason) but, lie altogether groveling upon those earthly ceremonial signs: in, and by which we should (as it were by windows, or grates) Cant. 2. 9 pry through, Exod. 33. 20. 22. and espy with our spiritual eyes, the beloved himself, who standeth behind our wall, joh. 1. 18. 1. Tim. 6. 16. and cannot be seen without sensible eyes. How be it, this your needless fantastical doubt concerning miraculous actions (the same arising as it doth, from one only sensual view of some external difference in the doing of those self same miraculous actions) it may soon be discussed, if you would but consider aright (as you ought) those miraculous actions themselves in a double respect. Namely, in respect first, of the active virtue effecting them: and then next, of the actions effected thereby. Lycanthropus. How first I beseech you, in respect of the active virtue effecting? Physiologus. Why thus. If we duly consider of all sorts of miracles in an only respect of the active virtue itself, which actually effecteth those miracles: we shall plainly perceive, that no one of them all (how admirable soever in our carnal account) is in itself more excellent, or greater than any of the rest. Because they are all of them, equally effected, by the only divine, and infinite power of jehovah himself: and are such, as do wholly surpass the power of every created nature, how holy soever. So that (in this only respect) there appeareth no difference at all among any the miraculous actions of God: because, those self-same actions, are all equally effected by that uncreated infinite power, which, is evermore but one, and the same. Pneumatomatichus. And, how also (I pray you) in respect of the actions effected thereby. Physiologus. Surely, even thus. If we duly consider again, the only actions, so powerfully effected by that infinite power of God, without any such transcending reach, to the principal author himself: then shall we as plainly perceive an apparent external difference in all those the miraculous actions. Whether we respect the effected actions themselves: or the manner of effecting the same. For first, if we respect but the only effected actions themselves; then no doubt, there may some one of them appear more excellent than another by much. Aug. Marlorat. 〈◊〉 joh. 14. 12. As for example, the raising of dead men to life, doth outwardly exceed the curing of leprosies: and, the curing of leprosiès, doth sensibly surmount the curing of some sudden new sickness. Again, if we also respect the external manner of effecting those admirable actions: we may likewise perceive an apparent difference therein. For, it is outwardly, more admirable to cure a leprosy by word, then by touching or handling: and, more wonderful by much, to heal the diseased by a passable, or vanishing shadow, then by an audible, or sounding word. Because, such a sounding word, is some matter, proceeding powerfully from the party that speaketh: whereas, the vanishing shadow, it is no matter, proceeding from the party himself, but only, a privation of light, by an interposition of the party his body. Thus then, by all the premises it is very apparent, that, neither the humanity of Christ in itself, nor, any one else of the saints of God, either had, or, could possibly have any other, then only an instrumental power in the powerful effecting of miracles: and therefore, it is too too absurd, that yourself should dare to challenge a personal power, for the expelling of devils. Exorcists. How cunningly soever you seem to conclude: very certain it is, myself did personally and powerfully drive forth the devil. Orthodoxus. You could not possibly effect such a work, by any your own natural power as hath by Physiologus been handled at large. For, if the humanity of Christ (it being a conjoined instrument unto the divinity itself) could not possibly accomplish any such admirable matter: much less may any supposed personal power (existing but naturally in your proper person) be able to do it. Exorcists. I perceive you have hitherto mistaken my words. For, my meaning is not, that I (of myself) did personally accomplish that work, by any mine own faculty, vigour, or strength: but, I did the same rather, through the virtue and power of the almighty creator. Orthodoxus Oh, than I perceive you are almost quite ferreted forth from all your starting holes, and are now brought in a manner before the very mouth of that masking not, which will so entangle your tongue, as you shall never be able (with all your windings and turnings about) to work forth yourself. For, tell me (I pray you) did yourself cast forth the devil by means of some supernatural power from the Lord: or the Lord rather drive forth the devil by your hands? Exorcists. A very superfluous and needless question. Orthodoxus. But, the answer is needful: and therefore, answer unto it. Exorcists. Why sir? the Lord drove him forth by my hands. Orthodoxus. It should seem your wits are bewitched. For, not long since, you said that yourself did cast forth the devil by means: but now (perceiving all means to fail) you flee to the power of God. And so still, you do make the power of God but a means, and yourself the main or principal actor: that, thereby you may arrogate to yourself, the glory due unto God. Exorcists. That is no part of my purpose. And, howsoever the Lord alone, be the only efficient of every such admirable action: yet (in sundry scriptures you know) it is an ordinary use with the Lord, eftsoons to grace his Ministers, with that self-same glory of the work, which is proper alone to himself. Orthodoxus. We are not ignorant of the course of the scriptures concerning that point. Howbeit, when you seem (as hitherto you have done) to speak of yourself besides the scope of the scriptures: you must pardon us then, though we esteem not your words as canonical scriptures. But, go to, you cast forth the devil (you say now) by the power of God. Do tell me therefore (I pray you) whether you acknowledge not that self-same power of the Lord, a mere supernatural power, and much beyond the shallow reach of any your natural faculty, to attain unto? Exorcists. Yes, I acknowledge so much. Orthodoxus. By what means then, did yourself so effectually apprehend: that self same supernatural power of God? Exorcists. By the only means of my prayer and fasting; as I told you before. Orthodoxus. And I also did verily suppose you had heard enough before, concerning the insufficiency of that self-same means, considered alone in itself. But, go to, you apprehended that supernatural power of the Lord (you say) by the only means of your prayer and fasting. Do tell me therefore, where you have any promise throughout the whole scriptures: that, your prayer and fasting (for an effectual apprehending of that power of the Lord in any such extraordinary actions) shall be effectually heard of the Lord? Exorcists. Why sir, our Saviour Christ, he hath given an infallible promise concerning every such action, saying, joh. 16. 23. Whatsoever you ask the Father in my name he will give it unto you. Orthodoxus. Do you imagine, that, those words of Christ, contain such a promise as tendeth directly, to an absolute warrant for every such enterprise: how extraordinary soever? Exorcists. I do more than imagine: for I make no question thereof. Orthodoxus. Well then, put case you yourself Luk. 9 54. (by prayer and fasting) should undertake to entreat the Lord forthwith to send fire from heaven, for the admirable destruction of antichrist himself, and all his adherents: would that self-same petiton be granted unto you, in an only regard of your prayer and fasting. Exorcists. The prophet Elijah; by his only prayer, 2. King. 1. 10. obtained as great a matter as this from the Lord. Orthodoxus. You wot not (I perceive now) what spirit you are of. Luc. 9 54. Do first prove directly unto us, that you have Elijah his spirit: and, then proceed (in God's name) to Elijah his practice & spare not. Howbeit, because (from this general promise of Christ) you do grossly imagine that very self-same warranted assurance, for the powerful expelling of spirits by prayer & fasting, which Elijah obtained against Azariah and his servants, by that his special prayer to God: 2. King. 1. 10. I am willing you should dwell in that your preposterous opinion, so you can demonstrate the truth thereof, by any probability or reason, and therefore, do frame your own argument, from that self-same promise. Exorcists. I frame it thus. joh. 16. 23. Whosoever asketh any thing of God, in the name of Christ, he shall undoubtedly obtain his request: But, so many as (by prayer and fasting) do crave an extraordinary power for the powerful expelling of spirits, they ask something of God in the name of Christ: therefore, they shall undoubtedly obtain their request. Orthodoxus. The very frame of your argument, is scarce in good frame. For your assumption now (as all men may plainly perceive) is absurdly fallen into a fearful consumption. Because, howsoyour own self (by these preposterous practices) presumed most grossly to profane the name of Christ, as hitherto you have done: very certain it is, that such a request may not truly be said to be either made, or put up in the name of Christ. For, to ask any thing truly in the name of Christ, Musculus in joh. 14. 13. is, either to ask that which only appertains to the glory of his name and kingdom alone: or else, that thing especially, which (for our special good) we hope to obtain at the hands of our God, through the gracious prerogative of Christ his name. 2. King 1. 10. Act. 4. 30. After the first manner of ask Elijah he called for fire from heaven, and the Apostles (being fearfully threatened) entreated the Lord to stretch forth his arm, that healing, and signs, and wonders, might be done by the name of his holy son jesus. Math. 9 11. 12. 13. After the second manner of ask, Marc. 9 24. do all the faithful entreat the Lord (by prayer and fasting) for such spiritual graces, Eph. 6. 18. 19 as do necessarily concern their own and others salvation in jesus Christ. Coloss. 4. 2. And hereunto only, that, the forenamed general promise (made by Christ) 1. Thes. 5. 17. 23 hath a more special relation. ●. Thes. 3. 1. Now then, that first manner of ask things in the name of Christ, being only peculiar to such as have some special motion from the holy spirit of God for such special requests: it specially behoveth yourself (in these your admirable enterpizes) to be undoubtedly assured of some such special motion from that self-same spirit of God, or ever you give the adventure so boldly, upon such an extraordinary practice of any your prayers and fastings. Otherwise, this promise of Christ it appertaineth no further unto you, than you have an apparent warrant (from the word itself) for the ordinary disposing of those your second manner of suits, by the gracious prerogative of Christ's name. Exorcists. Why sir, I had the plain word of Christ for my warrant, where he telleth us plainly, Math. 17. 21. that, that this kind goeth not forth, but by prayer and fasting. Orthodoxus. I was verily persuaded, you had taken your fill of that text before. But, seeing you will fasten upon this portion of scripture afresh: I am very well willing you shall have your full pleasure thereof. And therefore, do tell me plainly I pray you, whether by the words (this kind) in that place, you do only distinguish spirits and devils from all other creatures: or, whether you do severally consider those devils themselves, according to their sundry conditions? Exorcists. Nay sir, Musculus in Math. cap. 17. 21. I do thereby severally distinguish spirits and devils among themselves: understanding by the words of Christ, only those principal spirits, which can no otherways be expelled, but by prayer and fasting. Orthodoxus. And, have all sorts of spirits; or but only those principal devils, an actual possession in men? Exorcists. Undoubtedly, See M. Darels Apolog. in pag. 32. all sorts of devils have an actual possession in men, and may by a commanding power be compelled to depart: howbeit those principal spirits whereof Christ more especially entreateth, See M. Darels Narration, fol. 5. pag. 2. they cannot possibly be expelled but by prayer and fasting, as an ordinary means appointed of God. Orthodoxus. As in this answerless answer you would have men imagine, that a bare ordinary means (by your ingenious handling thereof) is able to effect many extraordinary matters: so, it seems again by your speech, that the Apostles of Christ were never acquainted before with any of those principal spirits, which made them so unready in that unwonted occurrent wherewith they were then overtaken. Besides that, a man might greatly wonder how yourself should so readily perceive the devil at Mahgnitton, to be a devil of that self-same kind, in meeting with him so fitly (at the first onset of all) by your prayer and fasting: were it not, that (by your long experience) you are now grown such an experimented practitioner concerning the Infernal hierarchy, as both you know how to convent before you, each several devil in his several kind, and which way to convince him by his special name. Neither may this be deemed any matter impossible for yourself to effect at this present: who a dozen years since at the least, M Darel was said to cast 7. devils out of Katherine Wright: if you list to believe him therein, and to note each devil by his several name. could conjure forth seven at a clap, by their several names. Telling the beholders thereof, in what moment of time, each devil took his leave: and by what special name he was properly called. Surely, this makes many wise men imagine, that, either you are a man profoundly experienced in the Cabalistical craft: or that else, you have too too strangely, a long time deluded the simpler sort. In bearing them falsely in hand, that (only by your prayer and fasting) you do fully apprehend an extraordinary power, from the Lord, for the powerful expelling of devils: Math. 17. 21. whereas Christ (the true wisdom of the father) doth tell us, Luc. 17. 6. that such an extraordinary power, is only apprehended by a special faith. Affirming withal that this special faith, it hath prayer and fasting annexed unto it, as the only supporters thereof, and no actors at all, in the admirable effecting of any such accident. Exorcists. Oh, than I perceive you have a long time mistaken my meaning. For, howsoever I urged the holy exercise of prayer and fasting as an appointed means for the powerful expelling of spirits: my purpose therein was never to exclude the action of faith, it being an effectual apprehender of that self same extraordinary power of the Lord, which so powerfully effecteth the work. Orthodoxus. If this be your meaning, we shall have you at a non plus before it be long. For, seeing now you make faith an actor in that your preposterous enterprise: do tell us directly what faith you mean? Whether the historical, the justifying, or the miraculous faith: for the dead faith, I am certain it was not. Exorcists. Neither could it be the historical faith: because, that hath only a special relation but to the bare history of the Bible itself, without any apprehension at all of the power of God. As for the miraculous faith, that is thought to be ceased long since. And therefore, it was, and is only a justifying faith which apprehended that power of the Lord: by virtue also whereof any godly Minister, or others, might as effectually have performed that action, as I did myself. Orthodoxus. I am just of your mind, for that matter. Howbeit, if an only justifying faith may effect such an action: then hath that faith some certain word concerning such works, with a special promise of such an effect. But in all the whole Scriptures neither word nor promise concerning such purpose, is any where extant: and therefore, the justifying faith could not possibly effect such an action. Exorcists. Yes sir, the justifying faith, it hath an apparent word, and a promise both, concerning such matter, and that also from our saviour himself: Marc. 9 23. who told the possessed child's father, that, if he could believe it, his faith should undoubtedly have an effect, because, all things are possible to him that believeth. And therewithal (upon the profession of the father's faith) our saviour did presently expel the evil spirit from his son. Orthodoxus. You huddle up your reckoning without your host: and must therefore be enforced to reckon afresh. For, be it supposed our saviour (in that place) doth undoubtedly speak of a justifying faith: yet is it certain, that Christ meaneth not there the Exorcists faith, but the faith of the parties possessed. And so (by consequence) it was not your own, but the yoongman his faith at Mahgnitton, that drove forth the devil. Exorcists. Very true, his faith apprehending: but, my faith effecting the action. Orthodoxus. You do over grossly forget yourself. For not long since it was the supernatural power of the Lord, that effected the action; your own faith apprehending only, that effectual working power. Howbeit, your justifying faith now (it being but a bare apprehender before) is become the powerful effectour: and the possessed man's faith, the bare apprehender of that admirable action. Notwithstanding, whatsoever you dream of Christ's words, concerning faith for the action, he speaketh there only of a faith in the party: the very want whereof, was that which hindered his own disciples from effecting the work. And for this only respect, our saviour (in that partly alone) reproveth the incredulity of that faithless generation: who having had so long experience of his divine operations, were yet no better in the faith then the heathenish infidels. Math. 13. 58. Yea, such a gross Marc. 6. 5. incredulity was also the very main cause why our Saviour himself at Nazaret; Bullinger, in Math. 13. 58. either could not, or would not work many miracles. Calvin, in Math. 13 58. Not, that his inevitable power was unable (of itself) to overswaie their palpable impiettie: Gualther. in Math. 13. 58. but for that (the Lord having solemnly decreed the powerful effecting of those admirable actions by an interposition of the parties own faith apprehending his power, and by other good means correspondent thereto) their own unbelief and hardness of heart, Musculus, in Math. 13. 58. had (so much as they might) very fearfully foreclosed the bottomless fountain of those his spiritual graces from flowing among them. Math. 9 22. Whereas on the otherside, he readily yieldeth to the timely requests of such as believe: Marc. 5. 34. whatsoever they crave concerning those admirable actions. Luc. 8. 48. By all the premises then, it is too too apprantly evident, that Christ (in this place) he speaketh only of the parties possessed, and not of the Exorcists faith at all. Exorcists. But Christ afterwards told his Disciples, that, their own unbelief was the cause why they could not cast forth the devil. Protesting withal, Math. 17. 20. that, if they had but so much true faith as one grain of mustard seed: Luc. 17. 6. they should have been able thereby, to remove mountains out of their places. Orthodoxus. Do you understand Christ's words in that place, of the justifying faith alone? Exorcists. Yea, why not? Orthodoxus. Ask you why not? Why man, by this means you would bring us in doubt of the Apostles justification: and which more is, you do very blasphemously derogate from the authority and dignity of their authentical writings. Exorcists. Nay sir, I call not their justification in question, but do only declare what was the principal stoppage to that special action: namely, the not effectual working power of their own faith for the present. Orthodoxus. Well yet, by the tenor of your speech you would have us imagine at least, that the justifying faith of Christ's disciples did oftentimes ebb and flow with the moon: because (howsoever the same was always inherently dwelling within their hearts) the efficacy thereof (for that present) was suddenly fallen to a very low ebb. And (which more is) we must (by the purport of your speech) be further persuaded, that very many whom Christ (in the general judgement) will finally, Math. 7. 22. and justly reject as workers of iniquity: 1. Cor. 13. 2. they had once (notwithstanding) the true justifying faith in themselves, howsoever they finally fell from the same. Heb. 6. 4. 5. 6. For many of them also, did (in Christ's name) as effectually, and as powerfully drive forth the devils from people possessed, as did any of the rest, how holy soever. And so (by consequence) howsoever the callings and gifts of God to salvation be without repentance: very many notwithstanding, they may and do lose their justifying faith, Heb. 6. 5. 6. and finally fall from the grace of God. This as it strengtheneth very shrewdly the popish opinion of falling from grace: so doth it mightily weaken that undoubted assurance of the saving faith in all the elect. Exorcists. Let it strengthen, or weaken whatsoever it will: very certain I am, that the justifying faith may effect such a work. Orthodoxus. If you mean such a work, as your faith effected at Mahgnitton of late, we are grown to an issue. Howbeit, if you imagine that the justifying faith may miraculously drive forth a devil: then, all the elect (how unexpert soever) they also are sufficiently able to cast forth spirits and devils if they please. For, they are all mutually interessed in the self-same justifying faith: and do jointly participate with all the prerogatives thereof whatsoever, as well as any of the rest. Yea, than those other preachers also, who severally, and at sundry times did deal with the party possessed: they might as effectually have dispatched that matter as you did yourself: unless haply you imagine them but reprobates concerning the faith. Besides all this, if the driving out of devils from men, be (as you would have us imagine) the undoubted effect of a justifying faith: it must necessarily follow, that, so many as cannot effect such a work, they may doubt of their justification in jesus Christ. Yea, and those other Preachers also (who eftsoons before, and with your own self at that present) attempted the matter in vain: they may begin to make some scruple of conscience, concerning the soundness of their justification, for their faith could effect no such work. Briefly, if the powerful expelling of spirits and devils be in deed (as yourself doth avouch) the essential effect of a justifying faith: then surely, that self-same effect (so highly surmounting very many of the rest) it would undoubtedly have been reckoned up in some one of those places at least, where the other effects of that faith are purposely registered by the spirit of God. Rom. 5. 1. 2. 3. Howbeit, this powerful expelling of devils, 2. Pet. 1. 5. 6. 7. is not any where mentioned amongst those other essential fruits of justifying faith: and therefore, Heb. 11. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. the same is no essential effect of any such faith. Exorcists. But in the xuj. of Mark, this powerful expelling of spirits or devils is principally put down as an infallible effect of the faith of the Gospel. Marc. 16. 17. 18. For, after our Saviour Christ had spoken these words, he that believeth and is baptised, he shall be saved, he that believeth not, shall be damned, than he addeth forthwith▪ and these tokens shall follow them that believe. In my name, they shall cast forth Devils: speak with new tongues: take away Serpents; drink any deadly thing without hurt: yea, and but even lay their hands on the sick, and they shall recover. Lo, all these (you see) are most admirable eflects. Yet such (I assure you) as do undoubtedly succeed a justifying faith in jesus Christ. Orthodoxus. I do greatly mislike your assurance: for, Pet. Martyr, in 2. Cor. cap. 12. 11 these matters (how admirable soever in show) they are no essential effects of a justifying faith. Item, in loc. come. class. 1. cap. 8. sect. 20. Neither were they at any time, absolutely or simply, but after a sort (as it were) the signs or tokens of faith: and served only for that primitive age, wherein the Gospel of Christ was first to be preached abroad in the world. That self-same primary preaching of the Gospel, having (by the unsearchable providence of God) such signs and tokens even purposely annexed unto it, as trumpets or criers to summon all sorts of hearers unto the kingdom of Christ. For even as Moses his law (in mount Sinai, and throughout the wide wilderness) did gain a wonderful authority unto itself, by reason of the manifold miracles effected by Moses and Aaron: which said miracles notwithhanding (so soon as the people of Israel possessed the promised Land) did forthwith determine. So surely, those self-same miraculous actions, which in the primitive church did credit and grace the Gospel of Christ: so soon as the Gospel itself was universally published abroad in the world, they forthwith did cease and grow out of use. Aug. Marlorat. in Math. cap. 28. 19 By all which it is very apparent, that, those admirable effects, they were only but temporary and personal prerogatives, more especially appertaining to some special persons: accordingly as it seemed good to the Lord to bestow them himself, in the several distributions of those his several graces. Howbeit, because those special graces johannes Calvin. in Math. cap. 28. 19 (thus personally bestowed on some few) did publicly tend to the public profit of all the elect, and for that those admirable actions, so admirably effected by some one peculiar person, did generally serve for an undoubted confirmation of the faith in all: it therefore pleased the holy Ghost in that place, indefinitely to name the believers themselves, as though that which was done by some one, or a few, had been generally effected by all the faithful. Exorcists. Howsoever he speaks but of one, or a few of the faithful: very certain I am, that the miraculous actions mentioned there, they are such essential tokens, as do undoubtedly succeed the saving faith of the Gospel. Orthodoxus. That, those tokens succeeded the preaching of the Gospel, we do never deny: but, whether they do follow the preaching of the Gospel, as the essential effects of that justifying faith, which mutually belongeth to all the elect, is the very issue of the question between us: the which I am willing (if you please) that Master Beza do determine for us both in this sort: 1. Cor. 12. 9 To another is given faith, by the same spirit. Theod. Beza, annot. in 1. Cor. 12. 9 editione 4. This is not that faith (saith Beza) which belongeth indifferently to all the believers in Christ, for, the Apostle (in this place) entreateth only of some certain special gifts of the spirit: and therefore, this special faith, it hath a special relation unto the effectual power of God in working of miracles, so far forth especially, joh. Calvin in 1. Cor. 12. 9 as some special persons (endued with that special gift) were especially directed therein by some secret motion from the spirit of God. This therefore, is that faith, which we call (in the schools) the miraculous faith: Math. 17. 20. whereof an express mention more especially is made, Marc. 16. 17. in the seventeen of Matthew: Luc. 7. 6. the sixteen of Mark: and, in the seventh of Luke. This miraculous faith is plainly distinguished, Math. 7. 22. yea sometimes separated quite from that true saving faith, 1. Cor. 12. 9 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , whose proper object is the good-pleasure of God the father for, and concerning the justification and glorification of all the elect in Christ, effectually apprehended before by that their aforesaid saving faith. Finally, this self-same miraculous faith, she hath also her several doubtings and sundry imperfections: Numb. 20. 12. as may plainly appear in Moses and Aaron, Math. 17. 20. and in the disciples, and for the which also even Peter himself was sharply rebuked of Christ. Math. 14. 31. Thus far Master Beza. Where he maketh (you see) those signs and tokens, such only effects as follow the preaching of the Gospel for the confirmation thereof: but, no essential fruits of a justifying faith, as yourself very fond imagine. Exorcists. Whatsoever Master Beza or yourself may imagine, very certain I am, that Christ speaketh there of that saving faith which doth orderly succeed the orderly administration of the word and sacraments: Marc. 16. 15. saying thus. Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature. He that believeth, and is baptized, he shallbe saved: he that believeth not, shallbe damned. And even then (upon this so solemn a determination concerning the saving faith of the Gospel) he addeth forthwith (by the copulative (and) the infallible tokens undoubtedly succeeding that saving faith; Marc. 16. 17. saying thus. And, these tokens shall follow them that believe. In my name they shall cast out devils, and so forth. Demonstrating very plainly unto us, that, the effectual power for expelling spirits and devils: is an undoubted effect of the justifying faith. Orthodoxus. No such demonstration at all. For, Christ (in that place) doth only declare what tokens should follow the preaching and faith of the Gospel, but, puts down no essential fruits or effects of a justifying faith as we showed before, and which may yet more plainly appear, if you rightly consider his main purpose itself, and the orderly course of his speech concerning the same. The main purpose of Christ, Hugo Cardinal. in Marc. cap. 16. 17. was to allure the elect to a timely entertainment of the saving faith of the Gospel: and this he endeavoureth to do, partly, by an infallible promise of eternal salvation to all the believers, and partly, by an inevitable threatening of eternal damnation to all the unbelievers thereof. And now next (for their further confirmation in that self-same saving faith of the Gospel) he addeth certain temporary and personal privileges, as infallible tokens and pledges of that his eternal saving power: I mean, the powerful operation of many most admirable & miraculous actions. The which said personal prerogatives, our saviour Christ did purposely bestow upon some certain special persons: not that he would have those personal prerogatives reputed as essential effects of a justifying faith, but, to be rather esteemed as temporary pledges or seals for the perpetual establishment of his glorious Gospel. According to that in the end of the chapter, where it is said that the Apostles went forth and preached every where; Marc. 16. 20. the Lord working effectually in every of them, and confirming the word with miracles following. Thus than you may plainly perceive how Christ putteth down those tokens, as temporary pledges or seals of the perpetual truth of his Gospel: and no essential effects of the justifying faith. And therefore, if you have none other word else for your purpose, but that one place of Christ where he telleth us, that this kind goeth not forth but by prayer and fasting, the same (You see) will not serve your turn: it being not meant at all of a justifying faith, as hath been sufficiently showed before. Exorcists. Howsoever you conclude at your pleasure: I will never be persuaded, but that, those tokens put down by our saviour there, they are undoubtedly, the very essential effects of a justifying faith. Orthodoxus. I conclude not at pleasure concerning this point: neither do I put down my own private opinion, but, the public consent of many most singular persons, as may further be seen by their following testimonies. First, Chrysost. in Math. 17. 20. chrysostom (upon that seventeen of Matthew) saith plainly thus. Seeing these miraculous signs are not now wrought by the Church in our days: shall we therefore conclude, that so many of the Christians as cannot possibly do the like miracles, they are utterly destitute of faith: God forbid we should so hardly censure the dear children of God. The justifying faith is now present among us: but, that faith which was called the miraculous faith, is ceased long since. Again, Sebast. Meyer, in 1. Cor. cap. 12. 9 Sebastian Meyer, he saith, it is necessary we should distinguish this faith of miracles, from the justifying faith: because of that which our Saviour saith concerning some at the judgement day, who alleging for themselves the miraculous faith, shall (notwithstanding the same) be rejected of Christ. Bullinger in like manner he writeth thus. Bullinger, in Math. 17. 20. Some understand this place of the power of miracles, and do hold the faith which is spoken of here, for a particular faith, appertaining to the Apostles themselves: whom especially it behoved to confirm the preaching of the Gospel, by their working of miracles. Again, Moses Pellach. Analys. typic. Math. cap. 17. 20. Moses Pellacherus upon the self-same Scripture, doth make the miraculous faith, an undoubted efficient cause of expelling the devil from the possessed child. Again, Aretius, in Math. 17. 20. Aretius, he telleth us plainly, that, that which our Saviour speaketh there, of the removing of mountains, and of nothing impossible to them that believe: it must necessarily be understood of that miraculous faith, 1. Cor. 13. 2. , whereof the Apostle elsewhere entreateth. Master Calvin, joh. Calvin. in Math. cap. 17. 20. he saith that our Saviour (in that place) speaketh properly of a particular faith, the which (as occasion requireth) hath from the Lord, it secret motions: and is the same with that whereof the Apostle makes mention saying. If I had all faith, so as I could remove mountains out of their places, and have no love: I were nothing at all. Briefly, Musculus, in Math. cap. 17. 20. Musculus he writeth thus. The casting out of devils (whatsoever men think) is an action of faith. Howbeit, it would be considered, Pet. Martyr in loc. come. class. 1. cap. 8. sect. 14. of what faith the Lord speaketh. For we know there be three kinds of faith. The first is that faith, whereby we believe things to be such, as they are in the Scriptures propounded unto us: as we hear in the Scriptures, that there is but one only true God, and the same an almighty Creator of all things. This we believe by the Scriptures: and this faith is properly called an historical faith. There is another faith whereby we believe the promises of God, and do truly apprehend his great mercy and grace in jesus Christ: this properly is called the instifying faith. The third kind of faith, is that, whereby we do firmly believe, that there is nothing impossible to God, and whereby also the mind itself (by a special motion of the spirit of God) is forcibly moved to the powerful effecting of some admirable matters: and, this is properly called the faith of miracles. The first kind of faith is most general, and reacheth even to the reprobates: in so much as satan also himself is thought to enjoy it, jam. 2. 19 according to that of james. Thou believest there is one God, thou dost well: the devils also they believe and tremble. Tit. 1. 1. The second kind of faith, is only that saving faith of the Adopted sons: by which they are firmly incorporate, & saved in Christ. Of this faith the Evangelist speaketh not here: neither yet can they that have this saving faith, effect any miracles by virtue thereof. Aug. Marlorat. in Math. cap. 17. 20. The third kind of faith, is only a particular faith, in some certain special persons: and the same not always in force, but hath her special times, and peculiar reasons annexed unto her. joh. Calvin. in Math. 17. 20. This kind of faith, may fitly be called a particular, or singular faith: it being the singular gift of the holy Ghost, and having from thence her singular directions, 1 Cor. 12. 9 as the Apostle declareth saying, to another is given faith by the same spirit. The which (without doubt) must in no wise be understood of the justifying faith: because (this being peculiar to some one, or a few) the justifying faith, it belongeth indifferently to all the elect. This miraculous faith, it saveth none, nor changeth the mind: Pet. Martyr, loc. come. clas. 1. cap. 8. sect. 14. neither is any man bettered thereby, the worth of one hair. (Yea, and it is also eftsoons bestowed upon many reprobate persons, who will say unto Christ in the general judgement; Math. 7. 22. Lord, Lord, have we not by thy name prophesied, and by thy name cast out devils, and by thy name done many great works: to whom he will answer, I never knew you, depart from me ye workers of iniquity. 1. Cor. 13. 2. Again (saith the Apostle) If I had all faith, so as I could remove mountains, and have no love, I am even as nothing. Of this faith our Saviour speaketh in the place you allege saying. Math. 17. 20. If you had faith so much as is a grain of mustard seed, and should say to this mountain remove hence to yonder place, it should forthwith obey you. By all these testimonies, it is very apparent, that Christ (in that parcel of Scripture which you produce for your purpose) speaketh nothing at all of the justifying faith in jesus Christ. Exorcists. Howsoever yourself do conclude, and those your contests may seem to confirm: those tokens which Christ puts down in that place, they are (I am sure) the essential signs, or effects of a justifying faith. Orthodoxus. Although (by reason of a self conceit) the judgement of learned divines be unable to oversway your settled partinacie concerning this point: yet let the absurdity of your own speech, enforce you (at the least) to forsake such a palpable error for shame. For, if the tokens put down in that place be (indeed and in truth) the essential and ordinary effects of a true justifying faith, as you would bear us highly in hand: then surely, this palpable absurdity must necessarily ensue so absurd an assertion. Namely, that, either there are none (now in these days of the Gospel) who may truly be said to be justified: or that (now at the least) we have the true justifying faith in another edition, quite differing from that which was then in the primitive Church. For, very certain I am, that, no Christians now (how holy soever) are able (by the only efficacy of their justifying faith) to drive out a spirit or devil in any possessed: howsoever yourself durst so boldly, (I will not say blindly) adventure upon such a wonderful work. Exorcists. Sir, you do over grossly abuse me with girding quips: I would you knew it, I did not blindly undertake that admirable enterprise, as yourself doth bluntly imagine. Orthodoxus. My imaginations herein are nothing so blunt, as the bluntness of your cause doth require. For, if the undertaking of such an admirable enterprise, without some apparent directions and warrant from the word, be but a walking in darkness, yea, a very desperate, and a blind rushing upon the work itself: then I hope I do not grossly abuse you with girding quips, because it is lawful to call darkness, darkness. But yourself did undertake that admirable enterprise, without any apparent directions, or warrant at all from the word, as hath been sufficiently declared, and therefore you rushed but blindly upon that wonderful work. So then, (the premises you see being duly considered) you are now enforced perforce to confess, that, either you drove forth no devil at all from the yoongman at Mahgnitton: or that else, you drove him forth (at the least) by the only means of a miraculous faith. Howbeit, the miraculous faith you may at no hand avouch in that action: because you disclaimed the same but even now, as a thing ceased long since. Exorcists. Not so. I only affirmed, that the miraculous faith, it was thought (of some) to be ceased long since: but told you not what opinion I hold my own self, concerning that matter. Orthodoxus. Are you opinionate then concerning this point? Let us hear (I beseech you) your proper opinion: and tell us without any doubling, whether you hold for certain, that the miraculous faith is yet still continued in these days of the Gospel? Exorcists. If I avouch the continuance thereof, it is no heresy I hope. Orthodoxus. A man (by the course of your speech) may give a shroud guess concerning the length of your foot. Howbeit, the night is far spent, and I am over weary to hold out the controversy without a breathing fit at the least. Let us therefore break off for a little short space: and then set upon it afresh. For, I am unwilling to give over the conference now, before the matters be brought to some better perfection. Lycanthropus. God's name be blessed for your Christian care in doing us good: and we willingly yield to your motion. Orthodoxus. Arise then, & let us go walk a turn or two in my parlour. Philologus. We attend on your person. The end of the ninth Dialogue. The tenth Dialogue. THE ARGUMENT. Whether a miraculous faith (apprehending the power of God, for the powerful expelling of Devils) be yet still continued? What a true miracle is? And whether the working of miracles, be now fully determined in the Churches of Christ? The speakers names. PHILOLOGUS. LYCANTHROPUS. PNEUMATOMACHUS. PHYSIOLOGUS. ORTHODOXUS. EXORCISTS. Orthodoxus. A Pennie-woorth of ease, I perceive is worth a penny: Oh how this little recreation hath revived my wearied spirits? Do not you also, very sensibly perceive the self-same effect in yourselves? Physiologus. Yes sir, blessed be God for the same. For my own part, I feel myself as lively in body, as sharp in conceit, yea, and as fit for the conference, as I was at the first beginning. Lycanthropus. The same I dare say for myself and the rest. Orthodoxus. Let us then go roundly to work. Come on Exorcists, tell us in good sadness, do you hold it for certain, that the miraculous faith, is yet still continued in these days of the Gospel? Exorcists. What reason have you to imagine the contrary? Orthodoxus. What reason? I will give you one reason (for this once) in stead of a thousand, thus. The working of miracles is ceased long since: and therefore also the miraculous faith. Exorcists. Why sir? D. Apol. 32. 33. to remove the devil by prayer and fasting is no D. 1. Narrat. pag. 10. miracle at all. D. doct. pag. 59 Physiologus. Master Orthodoxus, do rest you a little, and let me argue this point. Come on Exorcists: and answer directly. Is the driving out of devils by prayer and fasting, no miracle I pray you? Exorcists. It is no miracle at all. Physiologus. Well, than I perceive, we are of necessity enforced to declare plainly unto you, first, what a miracle is, with the sundry kinds of miracles: and then next, we will exactly consider of your action at Mahgnitton, to see, whether the same (pretended to be done by yourself as it was) may truly be termed a miracle, in any respect? Lycanthropus. I pray you proceed in your purposed course. Physiologus. With very good will. Wherein first, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Psal. 139. 14. for the word (miracle) itself, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Psal. 118. 23. we have to consider, that, that thing which we commonly account a miracle, is named of the Hebrews (niphlah) I mean, a most admirable or, a marvelous matter. Or rather (niphlath) if you will: that is, a wonder quite hid from our eyes. And therefore, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Exod. 34. 10. all those obscure and admirable matters which do highly surmount the reach of our reason: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 job. 37. 16. they are commonly called (niphlaoth) that is, very strange and admirable actions. Or rather (miphleoth) I mean, such hidden, and such secret occurrents, as cannot possibly be conceived by the narrow compass of our common, and natural sense. They do fitly proceed from the radical word (palah) or (niplah) which is as much to say, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, yell 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. as, to be veiled, obscured, quite hidden, difficult, and very highly surmounting the shallow reach of our reason. Because, every miraculous action, is always some such kind of matter, as is over much veiled, obscured, hidden, and difficult, beyond our common capacity: yea, and such an unwonted occurrent, as seemeth most admirable, and very hard in our present apprehension. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In like manner, the Grecians, they entitle it (thauma) that is a marvel, or wonder. And, it cometh of the verb (thaumazo) which signifieth to admire, to marvel, or wonder. The latins, they call it miraculum, Miraculum, q. oculi mirum. quasi occuli mirum, the wonder of the eye, for that it seemeth a marvel in every man's eyes: and therefore, they do oftentimes expound it, Prodigium, portentum, monstrum. a prodigious, a monstrous, or, an admirable matter, for that the Lord by such an umvoonted means, doth extraordinarily foreshow some admirable accident, quite contrary to the accustomed order of nature herself. So then, by all the premises it is very apparent what a miracle is. Namely, A miracle, What it is? it is by the extraordinary working power of the Lord, some such unaccustomed action, as very highly surmounteth the whole faculty of every created nature: and is therefore thus admirably effected, to the end it might the rather affect the beholders with an admiration thereof, & might the more certainly confirm their faith in the truth of the word. In this definition we may easily discern all the essential causes of miracles. For first, The efficient cause. the efficient cause of every such admirable action, is an extraordinary working power of the Lord. The material cause, are all those admirable actions themselves. The formal cause, The material cause. is the unaccustomed manner of effecting those actions. The final cause, The final cause. is partly to affect the beholders with some serious admiration concerning the omnipotent power, and wisdom of God: and partly, to confirm their faith in the truth of the word. By all which you may plainly perceive what a miracle is. Lycanthropus. Very true: but, what be the sundry kinds of miracles? Physiologus. They are those variable and differing sorts of admirable actions: which both may be, and are diversly discerned according to their divers and sundry conditions. And these sundry sorts of miracles, Two kinds of miracles. are twofold: namely, either true, or false miracles. Philologus. Which are the true miracles? Physiologus. They are all those admirable actions whatsoever, A true miracle, what? which (both for their matter and form) are rightly and truly effected: and which also, are wholly directed to their certain determined ends, namely, the glory of God, and credit of his glorious Gospel. And, such are all those admirable actions (how sielie soever in show) which were miraculously accomplished, either immediately by the Lord alone: or mediately at least, by his extraordinary ministers. Pneumatomachus. Which are the false miracles? Physiologus. They are all those admirable matters in show, A false miracle, what? which either are not (in deed and in truth) the self-same thing they seem to portend: or which else are effected, not by any supernatural power surmounting the reach of our reason, but, by some such natural faculty of nature herself, as is hidden and secret from the present apprehension of those that behold the same. Yea, and which also are eftsoons directed to some such specialpurpose, or sinister end, as is directly opposite to the glory of God, and the truth of the Gospel. False miracles may be effected three manner of of ways. These later sorts of miraculous actions (how admirable soever in sensible appearance) they may without any extraordinary help of the Lord, be easily effected by Angels, by divets, and expert persons: even only through some hidden faculty of nature herself three manner of ways. 1. For first, very certain it is, that Angels, devils, and men (expert in natural philosophy) having a deep insight into the hidden secrets of nature: and being thoroughly experienced in the powers thereof: they may and can easily apply those said natural powers, to some such perexisting matter, as hath in itself, a natural disposition to every such action intended. For, from the natural conjunction of some such perexisting matter with some proffered efficients, there will even naturally succeed, some such undoubted effects, as the party (procuring such natural conjunction) propounded before. Yea, and those also upon the sudden, and beyond the expectation of all the beholders thereof: which doth eftsoons enforce them to admire at such rare, and unwonted events. For, the devil himself, as also, those experienced persons in nature's secrets, they do very well know, that frogs, worms, yea, and also some serpents, are easily engendered of some putrefied matter perexisting in nature: especially, if there be added to every such putrefied matter, and of heat; by such certain degrees as is correspondent thereto. Now then, this the foresaid conjoining of putrefied matter, an active heat together, being not very difficult for devils, and for cogging companions to effect if they please: they therefore eftsoons do attempt the timely effecting thereof, Aug. de trinit. lib. 3. and all to cirumvent and deceive the beholders themselves. Even as did jannes' and jambres, the Egyptian sorcerers: if Augustine's judgement be adjudged Canonical. 2 Secondly, the devil himself, and so many beside as have any insight at all into the secrets of nature, they do very well know, Philosophus, de som. & vigil. libr. that some sudden commotion of the natural spirits, of blood, and of humours, do mightily disturb and distemper the bodies of men. Insomuch as the imaginations, the forms, and representations of things raised up and conserved in those self-same commotions: are eftsoons exhibited to the fantasy or imaginative faculty, at the very same instant the commotion was made, yea, and eftsoons also, even in that self same manner and order wherein it pleaseth the disturber of our spirits and humours to convey those self-same representations. By which said means very many and sundry visions do forthwith appear to the fantasy: as we may plainly perceive in so many as are fearfully affected with Phrenesies. Yea, and (which more is) the matter itself may be brought to such issue, as those self same representations which are inwardly conserved in the imaginative faculty: they may, and are eftsoons recalled to the external senses themselves. In so much as the party (preposterously affected therewith) doth very strongly imagine that he undoubtedly beholdeth those self-same things with his eyes, which were apprehended before, in the fantasy, imagination, or common sense, and are conversant wholly therewith: whereas (in deed and in truth) there was never any such matter existing essentially in outward appearance. 3. Lastly, many like admirable matters may very easily, and (as it were) with a trice, Magister sentent. lib. 2. dist. 7. fol. 87. be forthwith effected both by devils and by cogging companions: either by the assistance of some precompacted confederacy, or through the only supply of some local motion. Wherein (partly by watchwords, and partly also by the present exchange of one thing for another) many admirable actions (in an outward sensible seeming, and by a nimble conveyance) both may be, and are eftsoons effected by seducing makeshifts, Haet autem omnia, ratione nostri, vel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, appellantur miracula. and juggling mates. Now then, all these the forenamed sundry manners of working many admirable matters in outward show: how strange soever they seem to the beholders themselves, they are simply no miracles at all: howsoever (respecting our shallow reasons, and stinted judgements) it pleaseth the Lord eftsoons to entitle them so in the sacred scriptures. Come on therefore Exorcists, now that you have sufficiently heard what a miracle is, Applicatio praemissorum, ad praesent negetium. as also of the sundry sorts of miracles: do tell me with whether of both these sorts of miracles aforesaid, you do range your supposed admirable action wrought at Mahgnitton? I mean, whether we must esteem the same a true, or false miracle? A true miracle you may not affirm it to be: both because the same is utterly destitute of all those the former essential causes of miracles, and for that, no such thing at all was ever effected, as hath been, and shall be showed at large. Again, a false miracle (I believe) you will never avouch it to be: for fear of being forthwith concluded some such cunning Impostor, Act. 8. 9 as hath (only by juggling sleights and false legerdemains) a long time bewitched the minds of the 1. Cor. 11. 3. simple. Gal. 3. 1. Exorcists. I account it no miracle in any respect. And surely, See M. Darel● Apolog. pag. 32. if yourself, or any other have conceived thereof, as of a miracle, and thereupon also have thought hardly upon it, for that the miraculous actions are thought to be ceased: you are therein (by your patience) very deeply deceived. Physiologus. Why sir? is not the driving out of Devils a miracle? Exorcists. In deed, to cast out devils by a commanding word so as one no sooner commandeth the spirit to go out, See M. Darel● Apolog. pag. 32. but forthwith he departeth, as Christ and his Apostles did: this I confess, is not only a miracle, but of them the greatest. Howbeit, by means of prayer and fasting to drive out Satan, Math. 28. or rather, to entreat Christ (to whom all power is given in heaven and in earth) to cast forth Satan: is no miracle at all. Physiologus. And, why so I beseech you? Exorcists. Because of the means that is used. For, See M. Darels Apolog. pag. 33. whatsoever is brought to pass by means, that same is no miracle (because of that said means) be it never so wonderful: as might be showed (but for brevities sake) by a thousand instances. Physiologus. You are either a great friend unto brevity: or brevity a good shelter to your wether-shaken cause at the least. Notwithstanding, for that you go about (by a bare pretence of means) to make a mere nullity in many miraculous actions, as shallbe showed hereafter: this I must be bold to tell you (as it were) by the way, that either I wholly mistake your meaning, or, yourself do utter you wot not what. For, if by the word (means) you understand such a means, as hath essentially in it own self, some energetical force, either naturally, or artificially, for the orderly effecting of matters: namely, such a means as hath in itself naturally some natural consonancy concerning the action intended (as hath natural food, for the orderly conservation of our natural being) or if otherways, you understand such an artificial means, as hath in itself artificially, an apt correspondency unto the purposed business (as hath the carpenters axe, to the hewing and squaring of logs) than you say true. Because, any thing effected by such essential means, hath in it ●elfe no extraordinary or supernatural power, (how admirable soever in show) but is ordinarily effected by mere natural, or artificial means at the least: and therefore, howsoever a wonder, yet no miracle in any respect. Howbeit if by the word (means) you understand some such supposed fantastical means as, neither naturally, nor artificially hath in itself any ability, disposition, or aptness at all to any such action intended, as are all created, or mere natural means whatsoever, to every of those extraordinary and supernatural actions which wholly concern the powerful expelling of spirits and devils: then, this your speech (respecting especially the point of our question) is too to absurd and senseless. Neither shall you ever be able (though you set brevity aside for the present, and take what leisure best liketh yourself) to give us herein, so much as one only true instance, out of all those your pretended thousand instances, whereof you so bravely vaunted before. Exorcists. You go about I perceive, very slightly to overslip the main point of my argument: by this your cunning new-coined distinction of means. Physiologus. Nothing less I assure you. And therefore (seeing you are so resolute) do frame your own argument: that you may forthwith receive an answer directly unto it. Exorcists. I frame it thus. Whatsoever is brought to pass by means, See M. Darels Apolog. pag. 33. that is no miracle. But, the driving out of devils by prayer and fasting, is brought to pass by means: therefore, the driving out of devils by prayer and fasting, is no miracle. Physiologus. First, make plain the ambiguous term (means) in your mayor proposition: and tell me plainly, whether you understand thereby, any such essential means, as, either naturally, or artificially at least, hath in itself, some energetical force, for the powerful expelling of spirits and devils. Exorcists. I understand not any such essential means at all: but such a means rather, as doth accidentally befall the action intended: that self-same accidental means, not having any further force in itself for expelling the devil, then pleaseth the Lord to bless it withal. Physiologus. This than I dare tell you for truth: that, your assumption is utterly false. For, the powerful expelling of spirits and devils, was never effected by any such means, but, by the only supernatural power of the Lord, as hath been sufficiently proved long since: and therefore, every such action (notwithstanding your often pretended means of prayer and fasting) must needs be a miracle. Exorcists. Nay sir, See M. Darels Apolog. pag. 33. when satan is cast out by prayer and fasting, the whole church, or any member thereof, it worketh no miracle: because, she cannot (in using the means) be assured to prevail. For, See M. Darels Doct. in pag. 59 although the assurance is, and may be great in this case: yet, we cannot be sure that the party shall be delivered, the means being used: because, God is at liberty, to bless the means he hath appointed to this end: or to withhold his blessing from it. And, in this latter case: what will any means profit or prevail? Physiologus. Your mind (it should seem) is mightily amazed with the matter in question: your speeches they are so fearfully distracted among themselves. For the assurance (you say) is very great in this case: and yet, you cannot be assured of the party's deliverance. Because, the whole success of that business, doth wholly depend upon the great blessing of God: without which the means cannot possibly prevail, or profit in any respect. Oh, here are crowded up closely together, an huge company of crazy conclusions: the one of them proferring the canuizado, or countercheck directly unto the other. Insomuch, as if they be not all bound the sooner unto the good behaviour: some bloody massacre will undoubtedly fall forth among themselves. But go to: what if your said means should be blessed of God? My meaning is this; What if the Lord, even at your prayer and fasting be entreated to drive forth a devil? Were that work, thus effected (as you fondlly imagine) by means: no miraculous action at all? Exorcists. It is then, See M. Darels Apolog. pag. 33. mirandum, non miraculum: that is, a wonderful work, but not a wonder. Physiologus. Oh, than I perceive, the very period of time is now plainly expired: wherein that old verse must needs be fulfilled, which saith: Miranda canunt, at non credenda Poetae.— The Poets many wonders sing: Which are not worth the crediting. For, tell me I pray you, whether you account this your new combed distinction of mirandum, and miraculum: as a sound, and a currant distinction? Exorcists. Yea, why not? It being the very same which the holy Ghost observeth in sundry places of Scripture: where he putteth down these two distinct words, namely, signs, and wonders. By signs he understandeth all those miraculous actions whatsoever, which are called miracula: and by wonders he meaneth all those admirable matters, which, in an only regard of their great unwoontednes, are fitly termed miranda. Physiologus. This new-coined Logic, or rather, this coie-kinde of distinguishing causes, you have learned I perceive from nice mistress Merchant: who (with as great probability of reason) hath told us long since, that Pepper is hot in operation, and cold in working. Making operation and working, the divident members of her pepper in sale: as you make your wonderful work, and your wonder, the several kinds of admirable matters, and, all this, to manage (if possibly it might be) your woonderles wonder wrought at Mahgnitton. And thus you would cunningly cast a mist if you could before the eyes of the simple: to make them believe, that a wonderful work were no wonder at all, and that no wonder at all were a wonderful work. And so, it cometh eftsoons to pass (especially among such as are desirous of novelties) that, signs and wonders must be esteemed, either as true wonders, or no wonders at all, whensoever, and so oft as it pleaseth yourself to make of a woonderlesse wonder, a wonder of wonders. Howbeit, because this new phantasied distinction of signs & wonders, is be come (at this present) the fairest flower in your garden, to furnish forth your faint-hearted cause: it shall not be amiss first to put down the very true meaning of those two several words: and then next, to lay open your palpable impudency, in so grossly abusing the same, to serve your turn. Lycanthropus. I pray you proceed in your purpose. Physiologus. Content. First therefore (for signs and wonders) the Hebrews, Numb. 31. 9 10 and 26. 10. they have usually Oath, and mopeth, saving, that eftsoons for the word oath, Psal. 74. 4. they do use the word Lanas, which signifieth a sign, Isa. 13. 2. and 30. 17. or a banner set up for a token, as in sundry places of Scripture it is very apparent. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ex 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 By the word oath, they understand such a sign as portendeth some rare matter to come, or rather a wonder, whose prediction is hard at hand. Exod. 4. 8. It springeth from the radical verb, Athath, which is as much to say, as to come speedily, to make haste, Deut. 13. 1. 2. 1. Chro. 16. 12. or to run: Psal. 105. 5. because every miraculous action, (surmounting the ordinary course of nature, and coming to pass beyond the common expectation of people) is eftsoons in place as it were on the sudden, and within the beholders view before they begin to imagine thereof, as we may plainly perceive by the very use of the word itself, in sundry places. Again, Exod. 7. 3. & 11. 9 10. by the word Mopeth, they understand some prodigious or seldom seen thing, Deut. 13. 1. 2. some unwonted, or perswasorie matter, yea, 1. Chro. 16. 12. or some such persuasive sign, as very easily procureth credit with all the beholders. Ezec. 12. 6. 11. It comes of the word iaphah, and hath an affinity with pathah, joel. 2. 30. which signifieth to persuade, or entice: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ex 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because, every such admirable matter (how unwonted soever) it hath in itself such a persuading: Cognationem habet cum. or an enticing power as prevaileth with men. And, hereof it came to pass that the third son of Noah, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, i. persuasit, ut very fitly was named japheth, Gen. 9 27. for that he and all his posterity (by the admirable promises put down in the Gospel) were so easily persuaded or enticed to dwell in the tents of Shem, unto whom the Saviour was promised. The which dwelling with Shem, may fitly be called Mopeth, that is, a wonderful matter: by reason of that wonderful effect which it wrought upon japheth, R. D. Kimhi. Pagnin. in thesauro sanctae linguae. and all his posterity. These two words (Oath and Mopeth) do differ the one from the other, in this, namely, for that the word oath, is used in many places where the word Mopeth may not be used: because Mopeth, it evermore respecteth the effect or the end, which is to procure an admiration with men: and therefore it is very apparent, that a wonder (respecting especially the beholders themselves) is no less admirable, than a wondrous work: howsoever it pleaseth yourself to distinguish the one from the other. Exorcists. Not I, but, the holy Ghost doth distinguish them so, in sundry places, Deut. 13. 1, 2. especially in Deuteronomie: where he putteth down signs and wonders, distinctively. Understanding by signs, such miraculous actions as are only effected by the supernatural or commanding power of the Lord: and by wonders, such strange operations as do (for their strangeness) make men to admire, albeit not wrought by any supernatural, but only by natural means. These latter, they may (for their strangeness) be fitly called a wonder, but, no wondrous work: because, they be effected by mere natural means, and so my distinction (your may see) it is currant. Physiologus Were you not shameless, you would blush for very shame, thus shamelessly to brand the holy Ghost with a lie, and all to uphold your Legerdemaines: which cannot possibly stand of themselves, but must needs be underpropped eftsoons withlying distinctions. For, whereas you would make signs and wonders, two distinct or several matters, because of the distinctive particle (or) put down in the text, and thereupon would have us imagine that by (signs) are meant miracles, and by (wonders) is understood a wonder forsooth, but no wondrous work: may it please you to consider a little better with you self, how that the holy Ghost (in that place) doth use those self-same two words, not as several matters distinct in themselves, but rather, as mere Synonyma, that is, words of one and the self-same signification, exegetically put down, the one to explain, or express the other, according to that in the Psalm, where the Prophet saith thus: Remember the marvelous works which the Lord hath done: his wonders, Psalm. 105. 5. and the judgements of his mouth. Putting down the wonders and judgements of his mouth, to show what he meant by the marvelous works rehearsed before. As if he should say thus, would you willingly know what I mean by the miraculous or marvelous works of the Lord? I mean, all those his wonders and judgements, which (so expressly and after such a speaking manner) do declare his extraordinary working power: to the great admiration and wonder of all the beholders thereof. Howbeit, because the disjunctive particle (or) is so precious a pearl in your eyes, what say you to that place in Exodus, where the very self-same words are expressly put down to the self-same purpose with that in Deuteronomie; albeit not disiunctively, Exod. 7. 3. but rather copulatively thus. And I will multiply, eth-oththai, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. veeth-mopthai: that is, my signs and my wonders. Here the holy Ghost, he useth (you see) the copulative (and) and not the disjunctive particle (or) and yet, to one and the self purpose with the text you insist upon: which plainly declareth, that signs and wonders, they are no such several matters distinct in themselves, but were synonyma, the one put down to express the other. Exorcists. If signs and wonders be mere synonyma, and indifferently put down for a miracle, than David (it should seem) he became a miracle, especially then, when he was reputed the wonder of men, according to his own testimony: telling us plainly, that he became a monster unto many, Psalm. 71. 7. which (by your exposition) must be understood a miracle to many. Howbeit, the purpose of David, was only to express his present distressed estate; by the word mopheth declaring plainly unto us, that he was no less abhorred of wicked men, then if he had been a monster in nature. By the which it is very apparent, that something may truly be termed a wonder: and yet, the same no wondrous work. Physiologus. You do very absurdly abuse the word mopeth itself: and most grossly mistake the true meaning of David in that portion of scripture. For first, the word mopeth there, it doth not necessarily conclude, that David was simply a monster: but rather, it noteth unto us, that he was generally reputed with many, as an admirable sign, or token of the extraordinary care of God towards all the chosen in Christ. And, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, nam, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, est litera similitudinis. Et exponitur, periudè, sicut, quasi, velut, veluti, ut, ita, sic, etc. so much, the letter (●caph) prefixed before mopeth, and making it kemopeth: very plainly importeth unto us. For, that letter, it is (as every one knoweth right well) a letter of similitude, or likeness: and therefore, it must be translated, in like sort, even as, even so, as it were, in like manner, and so forth. Whereupon you may plainly perceive (if you please) that, the reading, it ought to be thus. I became (as it had been) a miraculous sign, Non simplicitèr sed secundum quid. or token to many. Not that the prophet was simply so, but rather, esteemed so; yea, such a one in respect, and after a sort. Neither was it the purpose of David (in that place) to make any mention at all, of any his present distressed estate: but rather, to express the admirable mercies of God, concerning his extraordinary working power, in so miraculously protecting the person and state of David. As, if he should say. O Lord, thou hast with such faithfulness and truth, preserved thy poor servant from time to time, that, very many (in an only consideration of my miraculous deliverances) do not only admire at thy extraordinary power in protecting my person: but (which more is) they are mightily moved (by the example of thy manifold mercies in me) to depend altogether upon thy wonderful providence. Titleman. in Elucidat psalm. Psalm. 70. 8. That this is the true meaning of the word mopeth there, not only the very coherence of that scripture itself, but also the other like places where that self-same word is purposely applied to any man's person, Tremel. in Psal. 71. 7. annotat. 7. doth plainly declare. Howbeit, if by the word mopeth we must necessarily understand a bare wonder forsooth, Ezech. 12. 6. 11. but no wondrous work: do show me your opinion concerning another text in joel. Where the Lord saith he will show wonders in the heavens and in the earth, joel. 2. 30. 31. blood, fire, and pillars of smoke. The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great day of the Lord come. Do tell me I beseech you, whether these wonders in heaven and in earth, this blood, this fire, these pillars of smoke: whether I say, this turning of the sun into darkness, and the moon into blood, are not every of them to be esteemed very wondrous works? I hope you dare not, very certain I am, you may not deny them for such: and yet the holy Ghost (notwithstanding this your new-coined distinction) he useth the very self same word mopeth, which you simply translate a wonder, but no wondrous work, saying thus. I will show mopthim, that is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wonders in heaven and in earth. Moreover, where as the Lord in Ezechiel observeth the very self-same word mopeth, which you simply esteem as a wonder, but not a wondrous work: the very purpose and coherence of that scripture itself, very plainly declareth, that it may not (especially in that place) be well translated a wonder: but rather, a foreshowing sign or token of Israel's captivity among the Chaldeans, saying thus: Ezech. 12. 6. I have constituted or ordained thee, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ki-mopeth nethattiack lebeth Israel. that is to say, a foreshowing sign or token to the house of Israel. And a little after in the eleventh verse, thus, say thou unto them, emor ani mopethkem: that is, Ezech. 12. 11. I am your foreshowing sign or token: as I have done, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ▪ so shall it be done unto them, they shall go into bondage and captivity. By all the premises than it is very apparent, that those two words (signs and wonders) which yourself would seem to distinguish: they are not (throughout the old testament) put down (concerning this question) for any such several matters distinct in themselves, but rather, as synonyma, and the one to express the other. Licanthropus. But, how are they used in the new Testament? Physiologus. Even as before in the old. For else, either the holy Ghost should be contrary to himself: or that which we concluded before is utterly false. And therefore, for the Hebrew words Oath, and Mopeth: the Grecians in the new Testament (for the most part) they use Semeion and Teras, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. that is, signs and wonders miraculously effected by the extraordinary power of the Lord. Although, I deny not, but that now & then they use other words equivalent with those, as did also the Hebrews before them. For so it appeareth in Luke, that after the curing of the palsy sick, the people with a wonderful amazedness cried out, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. and said: doubtless we have seen Paradoxa, this day: Luc. 5. 26. using (instead of those other we named before) Paradoxa: which word, the vulgar translateth mirabilia, Erasmus incredibilia, Tremellius prodigia, Pagnine, Beza, and Montanus, inopinata, that is, wondrous, incredible, strange, and unlooked for things, or things beyond our common expectation. Again, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. they use eftsoons also, the word Thaumaston, as appeareth especially in Matthew; Math. 21. 15. where (after the admirable curing of the blind, and the lame in the temple) it is said of the high Priests and Scribes, that when they beheld Thaumasta which some interpret mirabilia, some miranda; I mean, Mart. 12. 11. the great marvels and wonders which jesus did) they were highly offended. joh. 9 30. The like use of this word appeareth elsewhere in sundry places of Scripture. Apoc. 15. 1. 3. Thus than the holy Ghost (you see) he useth for this matter, such variety of words as seemeth best to his wisdom: although for the most part he putteth down Seimeion, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. & Teras, as I told you before. And, Mat. 12. 38. 39 by Seimeion, he understandeth especially, all those foreshowing signs or tokens, Luc. 8. 11. 12. which are by the only miraculous power of the Lord effected: Luc 11. 16. 29. as very plainly appeareth throughout the whole Bible. joh. 4. 48. But by the word (Teras) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. he doth more peculiarly express all those admirable matters of the mighty jehovah, Math. 24. 24. which do suddenly procure admiration with men: Marc. 13. 22. as may very evidently be seen in every Scripture, joh. 4. 48. where the said word is in use. By all which it is very appant, Act. 2. 43. & 4. 30. & 5. 12. & 6. 8. & 7. 36. & 15. 12. 2. Cor. 12. 12. that the Grecians also (howsoever in the new Testament, they use several words concerning this question) they do understand thereby, no such several matters, as are essentially distinct in themselves: but rather all those miraculous actions which are entirely accomplished by an extraordinary, or supernatural power of the Lord. Exorcists. Howsoever you frame expositions to fit your own turn, the holy Ghost, he knoweth best how to interpret himself: who telleth us plainly in the second of the Hebrews, that, God gave testimony to the Gospel, Heb, 2. 3. 4. both by signs, and wonders, and by divers miracles. In which place, either he doth plainly distinguish miracles from signs and wonders: or else he makes but a needless tautology at the least, which were absurd to avouch. And therefore, my former distinction of wonders, and wondrous works (by this portion of Scripture) is canonised currant. Physiologus. See how vainly you vaunt of a triumph, before any stroke be stricken, concerning the sense of that Scripture. For, whereas you are in very great hope, thereby, either to confirm your new-found distinction, or to taint the holy Ghost at the least, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 3. iteratio, traductio: eiusdem verbi, aut sermonis repetitio. with a needless tautology, I mean with an idle repetition of one▪ and the self-same matter: you do therein, first of all, very fond bewray your intolerable pride: who (rather than you would submit to the truth) are not ashamed at all, very insolently to school the holy Ghost, concerning the right use of a Tautology. Howbeit, 2. Sam. 18. 33. as Tautologies are very frequent and ordinary throughout the whole Scriptures: Psalm. 2. 3. 4. so are they not needless, or idle, Ezech. 7. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9 10. as yourself doth idly imagine. No, they are rather a more evident demonstration, that the matter itself, so declared by them, Dan. 9 19 is the more constantly confirmed unto us: according to the testimony of the patriarch joseph. Who, Gen. 41. 25. 32. directly told Pharaoh, that his double dreams, did both of them tend to one end: and that therefore, his said dream, it was the second time doubled, because the matter itself foreshowed thereby, was certainly established by God. So surely, in that place to the Hebrews, the often repetition of miracles by those several terms of signs, of wonders, and of sundry powers, it is no needless Tautology, as you do triflingly tell us: but rather a most necessary doubling, and trebling of the matter itself by those self-same terms, to the end, that the newly taught Gospel confirmed thereby, might the more firmly be testified unto us, according to the good purpose of God. And therefore, this place to the Hebrews is so far of from proving your distinction a currant distinction: as it rather confoundeth the same. Notwithstanding, if you will in no wise be persuaded, but that (howsoever) some difference there is concerning those several words: this than I must tell you for further truth, that, there is no difference at all as touching their primary efficient, for they were all extraordinarily effected by a supernatural power of God. joh. Calvin. in Heb. 2. 3. 4. But the difference (if any at all) respecteth their ends or effects: which was, to draw men into a reverend admiration of that self-same power of the Lord. Theod. Beza, in annotat. ad Heb. 2. 3. 4. As for example, first, Edw. Dearin, in his 7. Reading, Hebr. 2. 3. 4. the holy Ghost doth call miracles, signs: because they were authentical significant seals, and testimonies unto us, that, the doctrine delivered before, was truly from God. Again, he calleth them wonders: because they were strange in themselves, and showed forth such an unwonted work, as was utterly unknown unto men. Lastly, he calleth them powers: because they had in them, an evident proof of the extraordinary power of the Lord. Lo, this is the whole difference that may be discerned concerning these matters. The which as it truly declareth unto us, the unchangeable purpose of God, in an undoubted confirmation of the Gospel thereby: so doth it utterly disannul your idle distinction of wonders, and wondrous works, as may more plainly appear, by an orderly conferring of this place to the Hebrews, with that in the xuj. of Mark. Marc. 16. 20. Where the Evangelist affirmeth, that the Apostles went forth and preached every where: the Lord working together with them, and confirming the word with miracles following. From both which places of Scripture, I do frame this following reason. Whatsoever matter did extraordinarily succeed the Apostolical preaching of the Gospel, for a further confirmation thereof to the world, Heb. 2. 2. 3. 4. that was an undoubted true miracle. But, divers signs and wonders, and powers, did extraordinarily succeed the Apostolical preaching of the Gospel, for a further confirmation thereof to the world: therefore, those signs and wonders, and powers, were every of them undoubted true miracles. By this than it is apparently evident, that, either you accomplished no wonderful action at all, as touching any your supposed most admirable matters wrought at Mahgnitton: or if (as yourself do affirm) the same was truly and indeed a true wonder, than was it also a wondrous work, I mean, a true miracle howsoever you shelter the same. Exorcists. It was only a wonder, See M. Darel his Apology, pag. 33. but no wondrous work, as I told you before: and only because of the means. For whatsoever is brought to pass by means, that is no miracle: because of the means, be it never so wonderful. Physiologus. But, do you speak in good earnest? Exorcists. Yea, in very good earnest. Physiologus. Then, Exod. 7. 20. tell me what you esteem of the turning of waters into blood by Moses his rod: Exod. 8. 6. of the Egyptian frogs: of the swarms of lice which came upon man and beast: Exod. 8. 17. of the Egyptian scabs and botches by the sprinkling of ashes: Exod. 9 10. of the thunder and hail, Exod. 9 23. by the stretching out of Moses his hand: Exod. 10. 13. of the Egyptian grasshoppers, Exod. 10. 22. ouerspredding the whole land: of the palpable darkness, Exod. 14. 21. throughout the whole land of Egypt: of dividing the red sea, Exod. 17. 6. by the hand of Moses: of the rock that gushed out water, 2. King. 2. 24. by the stroke of the rod: of Elijah his making the bitter waters sweet, 2. King. 5. 14. by casting in salt: of the curing of Naaman his leprosy, 2. King. 6. 6. by washing in the waters of Iorden: joh. 9 6. of the swimming of iron by Elisha his means: yea, Luc. 8. 44. what shall we think of giving sight to the blind, by a plaster of spittle and clay, first tempered together: of helping to health by touching the hem of Christ's garment: Marc. 6. 13. of curing very many by anointing with oil: Act. 5. 15. by the shadow of Peter: yea, and by napkins brought to the sick from the body of Paul. Act. 19 12. In every of these actions there was used some means: and yet, you dare not deny, but that they were every of them miracles. Exorcists. These were every of them but dead, or rather quite contrary means to the work which was wrought: and therefore, whatsoever was brought to pass by such impotent means they were notwithstanding, true miracles. Howbeit, prayer and fasting (being instituted of God to that work, performed withal, by the power of the spirit, and having moreover, many promises annexed thereto) it cannot possibly be, but that (with the orderly observation thereof) there goeth some ordinary power for accomplishing the purpose pretended: and, therefore, the casting out of devils, or, the powerful effecting of any other admirable matter by that special means, is no wonderful work, but a wonder, as I told you before. Physiologus. And, I told you likewise before, See. M. Darels Apolog. pag. 33. that prayer and fasting hath no power of itself to drive forth a devil: yea, you your own self affirmed even now, that, the whole efficacy of that wonderful work dependeth wholly upon the good blessing of God. Without which, the means itself (though never so duly performed) prevaileth nothing at all. But (to wink a while at these gross oversights) do tell me in good sadness, whether the driving out of the devil by prayer and fasting, be any miracle at all? Exorcists. It is then, See Apolog. pag. 32. no miracle: because of the means. Physiologus. If the only use of that means, may make a flat nullity in miracles, my meaning is, if prayer and fasting is of sufficient force to cause, that miraculous works become no miracles, and only because of such means: Exod. 8. 12. 30. then, tell me I pray you, what you think of removing the egyptian frogs and lice, Exod. 17. 11. by the prayer of Moses: of Israel's prevailing against Ameleck: of Elijah his reviving the widow of Zarephthas' son: 1. King. 17. 20. 21. of Elisha his raising the Shunamits' son unto life: 2. King. 4. 33. of the admirable opening of his servants eyes: 2. King. 6. 17. yea, joh. 11. 41. what think you of the raising of Lazarus from death: of Peter his restoring of Tabytha again unto life: Act. 9 40. of the earthquake, and shaking of the prison, Act. 16. 25. 26. wherein Paul and Sylas were stocked: Act. 20. 10. of Paul his reviving of Eutychus: of the curing of many, by the prayer of the elders. jam. 5. 14. 15. These were all effected by prayer you know: were these therefore (I pray you) no miracles? Moreover, what must we account of all the miraculous dispossessings of spirits and devils in the primitive church? If, because they were every of them effected by prayer and fasting, they were therefore no miracles: than it followeth by necessary consequence, that there were never any actual possessions, nor dispossessions of devils, at any time since the Apostles days. Because, those dispossessions, (how admirable soever) being effected by prayer & fasting, they could be no miracles (by your account) in an only respect of that means: whereas, the possessions, and dispossessions of devils (notwithstanding that means) they were always reputed true miracles with the Church of God. And therefore if yourself did drive forth a devil at Mahgnitton by prayer and fasting, as you bear us in hand: then surely, the same was not simply a wonderful work, but also a wonder, I mean, a true miracle, notwithstanding any such your supposed means. Exorcists. If signs and wonders must every of them be esteemed true miracles indeed: it followeth then, that, not only the false Christ's of every age, Math. 24. 24. but Antichrist also himself may truly be said to accomplish true miracles: 2. Thes. 2. 9 10. because, they also from time have been able to work many strange and wondrous things. Physiologus. I told you before, Danaeus in physic. christiana, tract. 4. cap. 34. fol. 174. there were two sorts of miracles: namely, either trué, or false miracles. The first sort is, when as a mere natural matter, is either restored, or cured, or wrought by the only application of mere natural means. Howbeit, those said natural means, either they are not altogether the same which we commonly use: or, they are not used after the self-same manner and way. After this manner, the devil, the Egyptian sorcerers, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. the false Christ's, yea, and Antichrist also himself, they have done, and may daily effect many wonders. And, in an especial regard of the strangeness thereof, they also (abusively and after a sort) may be said to be workers of miracles: because they accomplish such matters on the sudden, as do make men admire. Howbeit, this kind of miracles, they cannot truly be esteemed, true miracles indeed, because either they are not truly effected, or, not to a true end at the least: although yet, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. they may very fitly be termed terata, that is, wondrous actions, because of the sudden wonder succeeding the same. The other sort of miracles are properly called Seimeia, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. that is, significant or foreshowing signs: and those are only effected by jehovah himself, Psal. 136. 4. who alone doth wondrous things. Yea, and that also, either without any means at all: or quite contrary to the power of all natural causes, and of nature herself. For, as the mighty jehovah hath created nature of nothing: so is he able (when it seemeth good to his wisdom) to alter, Aug. de civit. Dei, lib. 21. to incline, Hieron. ad vitalem. and to overturn the orderly course of nature in any one thing whatsoever. Neither hath the said nature any power to withstand the creator and Lord of nature. Come on therefore Exorcists, let us go strictly to work. Either you wrought no wonder at all: or you wrought a wonder at least in the yoongman at Mahgnitton? If no wonder at all: then did you grossly delude the world, by making them to stand gazing and wondering so long at a matter of nothing. On the other side, if you wrought a wonder at least: then was the same, either a false, or true wonder. If only a false wonder, than you effected the same, either as a false Christ, Math. 24. 24. to draw silly souls into a falsely conceited holiness, 2, Thes. 2. 9 10. concerning your person: or as a minister of Antichrist, to establish underhand, some pretended devise of your own besides the authority of Christ. Howbeit, if that which you wrought at Mahgnitton, was (in deed and in truth) a true wonder, such I mean, as the Scriptures do understand by signs and wonders: then surely (whether the same was effected by means, or without means) it was an undoubted true miracle. And therefore, you are now perforce constrained, to confess that either you did nothing at all but juggle with men, in that your pretended action: or, must flatly acknowledge, that you wrought a true miracle. Because the expelling of spirits and devils (whether with means, or without means) is no less admirable now, than it was in the primitive Church. Exorcists. Nay sir, See M. Darels Narrat. fol. 5. pag. 2. the miraculous curing of fevers, Ibidem, a little after. palsies, leprosies, and other diseases by Christ, & his Apostles, in those days gave credit to the Gospel: but if God (by prayer and fasting) should heal the falling sickness or frenzy, or should grant rain drought, victory, or such like requests, were this a miracle. Physiologus. If I should but imagine the contrary, men might very well think I were not well in my wits: for, what hath prayer in itself, for the orderly effecting of any such action, without the extraordinary working power of the Lord, which was ever reputed miraculous? Howbeit, See M. Darels Apolog. pag. 32. a miracle you may never avouch it to be; both because you disclaimed the same before: and for that the working of miracles is ceased long since. Exorcists. Howsoever you urge the ceasing of miracles: there is no determination See M. Darels Narrat. 1. pag. 10. thereof in the holy scripture. See his doctrine for this, pag. 30. Physiologus. Why man, the two main causes of working miracles, namely, the testification of Christ his Deity, and the confirmation of the Gospel, are long since determined by the sacred scriptures: and therefore, the working of miracles, are thereby also determined. The first, it was undoubtedly determined by Christ himself, Math. 12. 39 40. where he saith, that the evil and adulterous generation require a sign: Howbeit, jonah. 2. 17. no sign shall be given them, joh. Calvin. in Math. 12. 39 but the sign of jonah the Prophet. Erasm. Sarcerius in Math. 12. 39 For as jonah was three days, and three nights in the Whale's belly: Item, in Act. 4. vers. 30. so shall the son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. Christ there declareth unto us, that his death and resurrection should be the last sign, wherewith he would testify to the world the truth of his Deity. The other I mean the confirmation of the Gospel, it also was long since determined by the spirit of God in the sacred scriptures, as may very plainly appear, by conferring the sixteen of Mark, with the second to the Hebrews. For first, in the sixteen of Mark he speaketh of a power from the Lord for confirming the word with miracles following. Putting down in that place, Marc. 16. 20. the confirmation of the Gospel in the present time, saying thus. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The Lord Bebaiountos, that is, confirming the word, as if the said confirmation had even then been in working. Howbeit, in the second to the hebrews he speaks thereof as in the preter time: telling us plain, the Gospel was ebebaioothei, Heb. 2. 3. that is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. confirmed unto us. Declaring thereby, that, the confirmation of the Gospel by miracles, was then so fully accomplished, and so finally determined, Heb. 2. 2. 3. 4. as now to let slip the certainty of that truth which they had heard before, for want of a further confirmation thereof by miracles: they could not possibly escape the just recompense of such a preposterous negligence. By the premises then, you may plainly perceive, that, those two main ends of miraculous actions being long since determined: the working of miracles was even then also determined. And therefore, although you had wrought a true miracle at Mahgnitton in deed: yet had the same been merely superfluous. Exorcists. This I suppose is your argument. The Gospel, it was fully, and finally confirmed before by miracles: therefore, the further confirmation thereof by miracles now is merely superfluous. Physiologus. It is even the very same. Exorcists. Then, the sequel (I suppose) is unsound. For, why may there not be as much need of such a miraculous confirmation in these days of atheism, See M. Darels Narrat. fol. 5. pag. 2. as ever before? Sure we are, that the scripture, the deity, and all religion, is by some among us no less called in question now, than it was in any the former ages: as, the ecclesiastical courts can testify, and daily experience approveth unto us. Physiologus. This your irreligious insinuation, concerning some supposed necessity of miracles now, in these days of the Gospel: as it doth very blasphemously derogate from the absolute wisdom of God, in not foreseeing (as it ought) the future necessity of miraculous actions in every age: so doth it dangerously undermine the certeinety of that saving faith which was only confirmed unto us by former miracles. For, that faith could never be fully nor finally confirmed before, if any future necessity of confirming the same afresh, be eftsoons admitted: even as that princes broad seal, may at no hand he accounted authentically currant, which needeth eftsoons to be iterated or imprinted afresh. Besides that, this pestiferous insinuation of yours, it doth open a wide gap to all manner of juggling knaveries, and crafty legerdemains. For, if (upon every such insinuation) the working of miracles be once freely permitted: then, every cogging companion (under an holy pretence of miracles) may foist into the church at his pleasure, whatsoever best pleaseth his fantasy, and so, the certain truth of our hoped salvation, should never be certain unto us. And therefore, tell me plainly I pray you: whether you hold the continuance of miracles in these days of the Gospel? Exorcists. Whether I hold, See M. Darels Narrat. fol. 5. pag. 2. or not hold the continuance thereof it makes no great matter: because that article, in this action is not to be controversed at all. Physiologus. If not in this: then in no one action whatsoever. Howbeit, because you are very loath (I perceive) to acknowledge that truth, which you must needs be enforced at length, either openly to confess, or else utterly to disclaim your admirable action wrought at Mahgnitton: let me here, what one apparent reason or end, you are able to propound, for the continuance of miracles in these days of the Gospel. Exorcists. Alas sir, See M. Darels Narrat. fol. 6. pag. 1. an urgent necessity (in these days of atheism) requireth the same. Physiologus. Oh, than I perceive, your judgement concerning this matter, it jumpeth justly with the rich man's in hell. For, he also (being utterly destitute of all other relief) did very instantly desire that Lazarus might forth with be sent▪ from the dead, to his father's house; to forewarn his five brethren of that place of torment. Seeing then you thus jump in your judgements, I were loath you should jar in the answer: and therefore, do tell you plainly, that, the atheists of our age, they have Moses and the prophets, Luc. 16. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. to testify unto them, the truth of such matters as concern their salvation: whom if they will not faithfully here and believe, neither would they believe at all, notwithstanding they should see a thousand strange miracles. Exorcists. Yea, but such a miraculous expelling of satan by prayer and fasting, See M. Darels Narrat. fol. 6. pag. 1. it would (notwithstanding all this) very powerfully silence the papists: who do confidently affirm, that spirits and devils cannot possible be driven out by any the Protestant ministers. Physiologus. The papists and yourself, it should seem are in very great hope to delude the world afresh by your feigned false miracles: and that makes you so earnestly to urge the continuance of the gift of miracles: as though the same were yet still to be executed by some special persons. But, if they, or yourself would either win, or continue your credits by the working of miracles, you must not bring in those your counterfeit cranks, out of whom you would make us believe, Reginald Skot in his discovery of Witchcraft. D. F●lke, in 2. Thes▪ ●. sect. 15. B●stow. you have conjured spirits and devils, not unlike to the possession of Mildred in Kent, 1574. nor to the miraculous restoring of Margaret jesop again to her limbs: not to the vision of the black dog, with other like fables reported by Bristol: but you must bring us in, some such miracle-workers, Marc. 16. 17. 28. as are able extempore, to talk with new tongues: to take away serpents: or, to drink any deadly thing without danger: for so your credits might haply be deemed the greater: although yet, if you taught not the truth, we would take you for Antichrist. As for the Protestant Ministers, they never durst, nor now dare profess themselves to be miracle mongers. Both, because the doctrine they teach, it hath been sufficiently and finally confirmed before by the approved miracles of Christ and his holy Apostles: D. Cooper, in his sermons, pag. 78 Math. 7. 15. and 24. 23. 24. and for that also, if there be yet still a continuance of any power in men for the working of miracles: that power (they confess) it belongeth to Antichrist, and his Antichristian ministers, of whom they are precisely warned by Christ to beware. These therefore, they are silly poor causes (you see) to prove the continuance of miracles. Exorcists. But yet, See M. Darels Narrat. fol. 6. pag. 1. the holy exercise of prayer and fasting (which with the profane is so shamefully scorned) it would (by this, and such other like admirable actions) be notably confirmed. Orthodoxus. Why man, if prayer and fasting, be an ancient true ordinance of the eternal God, than the truth there of was sufficiently confirmed before, by the undoubted true miracles contained in the word, so as it needeth not the accursed supply of any such patched and paltry confirmations. Howbeit, if the same were a new, and never known ordinance in the Primitive Church: then surely all the feigned miracles and signs in the world, would never be able, either to shelter the same from the scorns of the wicked, or to procure it estimation among the godly. In consideration whereof, you your own self have been highly to blame; thus badly to abuse so sacred an ordinance. For these your preposterous courses concerning the practice thereof, hath more hindered that holy and orderly exercise, than all the scorns of the ungodly could ever have done: and therefore, forethink it in time. Exorcists. Should I forethink me of that, which is so generally held of all for an infallible truth? yea, See M. Darels Narration, fol. 4. pag. 2. and (which more is) should I most cowardly disclaim that Christian cause, which many great Divines do confidently hold, and have so constantly offered (by public disputation) to uphold against all men? Offering not only to prove the continuance of actual possessions: but which more is, the perpetual establishment of this self-same continued means, for the powerful expelling of spirits and devils from time to time. Orthodoxus. If these matters were so generally held of all for an infallible truth: yourself could never have been so judicially convented, nor so justly convicted a gross male factor, for but putting an infallible truth in practice. As for the proffered disputations by those your approved Divines; I do verily believe, that you have borne yourself much more bold (in presuming thus partly upon the prop of their persons) than your commission will warrant. Otherwise, those your great Divines having heard long since (at a Commencement in Cambridge) this question disputed, and determined negatively: they might, and they would without doubt (at some one time or other since then) have taken occasion (either by disputation, by writing, or by preaching at least) to manage the truth of that matter, which so directly concerned their open pretended challenge. Especially, if they either held the same an infallible truth: or, had so publicly offered a public dispute, as you would bear us in hand they have done. And therefore, by this their so long continued silence, we must either account of your speech, as of a Canterbury tale: or at leastwaies imagine, that those your approved Divines, they have had (like good Christians) their second cogitations, concerning the truth of your matters. For, we will never believe, that they would (by any their purposed silence) so unconscionably betray a professed infallible truth: especially, if they so approved thereof as you tell us they did. Howsoever, this (I must tell you) is a very gross, and a palpable folly; namely, that you yourself or any man else, should so confidently, 1. joh. 4. 1. and so fondly rely upon the persons of men, job. 32. 9 without any due trial or proof of their spirits: because, great men they are not always the wisest, neither do the aged at all times understand judgement. For, howsoever there is a spirit in man: job. 32. 8. the inspiration of the almighty, it giveth men wisdom. Being therefore but a young Novice myself, in regard of those great Divines, job. 32. 6. 7. and ancient Fathers: I doubted, and was a long time afraid to afford my opinion. For I said, surely the days shall speak, and the multitude of years shall teach men wisdom. Howbeit, job. 32. 11. 12. having a long time waited upon their words, and perceiving withal, that no one of those your great Divines have hitherto had in their mouths any answer at all to reprove your adversaries, nor, found forth their forcible reasons to manage your cause: I was inwardly moved to answer in my turn. job. 32. 18. 19 20. 21. 22. For, I am full of matter: and the spirit within compelleth me. Therefore, now will I speak, that I may take my breath. Neither (in speaking) will I accept the persons of men: for fear (if I should fond give titles to men) my maker would suddenly take me away. Go to therefore Exorcists, do either show us more probable reasons for the perpetual continuace of the miraculous faith: or grant now at length, that the same was long since determined. Exorcists. I will never acknowledge the determination thereof: before it be better, and more directly proved unto me. Orthodoxus. Why man? Musculus in joh. 20. 29. Christ hath put a final end to the miraculous faith, as I told you before: and (in ending the same) he hath also established for ever, the faith of hearing. Yea, and which more is, the last miracle of all for confirmation of that faith to the world: Act. 1. 22. was the death and resurrection of Christ: This his last miracle, the Apostles they saw, and testify unto us: so that now, Luc. 11. 28. there only remains a true faith in hearing, and believing their testimony, joh. 20. 29. with a promised blessing of eternal salvation. Besides all this, of those only true miracles which be purposely and truly put down by the blessed Evangelists, were and are evermore fully and finally sufficient to confirm a true saving faith to the world: joh. 20. 31. then all other your supposed miracles since, they are that way merely superfluous: but the first is true, and therefore also the later. Moreover, if the working of miracles had been truly esteemed, and reputed necessary indeed, for any one Church succeeding the Apostles age, then more especially necessary for those new-sprong visible Churches, wherein the Gospel (overwhelmed with ignorance) was to be newly revived, through the extraordinary preachings of some special persons, raised up by the Lord, to that special business, as, of Zuinglius, Hus, Oecolampadius, Luther, Rhem. testamen. in joh. 15. 24. sect. 7. and calvin. But, the working of miracles it was not in use at all, in any one of those visible Churches wherein they conversed and preached (as the papists report, and yourself shall never be able to gainsay) therefore, Item, 2. Cor. 12. vers. 12. sect. 5. the working of miracles it is not perpetually necessary, for any the visible Churches of God. In like manner, if the use of miracles, had (for any supposed respect) been necessarily required in any one age of the world, since the days of Christ, and his own disciples, then, more especially necessary for the Churches next, and immedidiately succeeding the Apostles themselves; and thereupon also, the Apostle Saint Paul, he would undoubtedly have delivered some Apostolical canon, or Council at least, concerning the perpetuity, 1. Tim. 3. 14. 15. & 4. 15. 16. & 5. 7. 21. & 6. 13. 14. and orderly observation of that the supposed necessary use. But neither in his Epistle to Timothy or Titus, (where he purposely handleth all offices and matters, Tit. 1. 5. & 2. 1. 15. & 3. 8. 9 any way concerning the ecclesiastical discipline) doth he make mention of one Canon, or Council concerning the use of miracles: therefore, the use of miracles is not now necessarily required at all, for the Churches of God. Furthermore, Rhem. testam. in Math. 17. 19 sect. 5. if the continuance of miracles might possibly be proved in any the protestant churches since the Apostles days: then, Item Marc. 13. 21. sect. 3. that one main argument of the papists against our religion, for not being confirmed by miracles, were merely superfluous: for, Item 2. Thes. 2. 9 sect. 15. they do flatly affirm that not one among us, can work any miracles. Besides that, if the working of miracles be still continued with the churches of Christ in these days of the Gospel, then, D. Cooper in his sermons, pag. 78. one principal mark, Deut. 3. 1. 2. for discerning the Antichristian churches from the true churches of Christ, Math. 24. 24. would be mightily obscured, yea, even utterly extinguished: for, Marc. 13. 2. 2. the Scriptures do advisedly, and purposely put down the admirable effecting of false signs and wonders, 2. Thes. 2. 9 10. as an essential, Apoc. 13. 13. 14. & 16. 14. & 19 26. and undoubted true mark, to discern aright, the one from the other. Moreover, if the doctrine of Christ and his own Apostles be now sufficiently able, Psal. 19 7. to make the man of God absolute & perfect to every good work, 2. Tim. 3. 15. without the working of miracles, then, the working of miracles for that purpose, is merely superfluous. But, the first is undoubtedly true: and therefore also the latter. In like manner, if the admirable effecting of miraculous actions, be a spiritual gift successively continued in the true Church of Christ, than it is very probable, the same gift would have been purposely imposed upon the pastor and Doctor, as an extraordinary support to their ordinary ministery, and so, the said gift would have been carefully recorded among those other qualities and properties, which purposely concern their ordinary elections. But, no such gift is either required or recorded in any Ecclesiastical Canon, that essentially concerns the ordinary elections of pastors and doctors in these days of the Gospel: therefore no such spiritual gift, is now successively continued in the true Churches of Christ. Furthermore, if the working of miracles, be such a spiritual gift, as is necessarily required in some one or a few, for the further edification and comfort of the whole Church of Christ: then, the Apostle Paul, he would undoubtedly have exhorted the Corinthians (among other like spiritual gifts) to have laboured likewise for that. But, he maketh no mention of that gift at all: and therefore that is no such spiritual gift, as is now necessarily required in any, for the further edification and comfort of the whole Church of Christ. Again, the miraculous expelling of spirits and devils, was but a temporary and personal privilege, Math. 10. 7. and, is purposely ranged among those self-same personal privileges, Marc. 6. 7. & 16. 20. which (by the foreseeing wisdom of God) were long since determined: Luc. 10. 9 17. and therefore, it is a folly of follies, for any to imagine, that the miraculous expelling of spirits and devils, should not (in like manner) be determined long since as well as the rest. Briefly, the uniform consent of all Christian Churches, and the approved judgement of soundest Divines do generally accord and conclude, that the working of miracles is ceased long since. By all the premises, I hope you may see it apparently proved, that, the working of miracles was ceased long since: and therefore I doubt not at all, but that, the very force of your own enlightened conscience, will compel you, forthwith to subscribe to the determination thereof. Exorcists. Let me hear the judgement of your sound Divines concerning this matter. Orthodoxus. With very good will. And because the night is far spent: I will afford you the testimony of some four, or five in stead of the rest. 1 First therefore, Augustine telleth you thus. Unless you see August. Confes. lib. 10. cap. 35. signs and wonders, you will not believe. Herein (saith he) the Lord endeavoureth to lift up the minds of the faithful, so far beyond the visible view of all mutable things: as he would not have them, so much as once to inquire after the external contemplation of any true miracles, notwithstanding they should be wrought by the Lord himself. 2 In another place he saith thus. These miraculous actions, Aug. de ver● relig. lib. 11. cap. 25. they are not permitted to any in these days of the Gospel, lest the mind should be always inquiring after visible things: and for fear that men should grow cold, Item, retract. 1. cap. 13. by the continued custom of those self-same admirable matters, whose only novelties, (at the first) did set them on fire. 3 chrysostom, he saith thus. There be some in our days, Chrisost. in joh. 2. hom. 22. in fine. that ask why signs and wonders, are not now also effected by Christians? Surely, if thou believest aright, if thou lovest Christ in such sort as he is to be loved, thou shalt stand in no need of miracles: for, miracles are given to them that believe not. 4 In another place thus. The working of miracles, Chrysost. in Math. 24. hom. 49. is now ceased with christians, and found especially among such as are counterfeit christians: for, unto Antichrist is given power, to work lying signs and wonders with men. 5 Again, Item, in 1. Cor. 2. homil. 6. he saith thus. The working of miracles in times past was undoubtedly necessary: but, now it is not so. 6 The ordinary gloss saith thus. If we work not miracles now: Glos. ordinar. in Marc. 16. 17. is it, because we want faith? not so. The working of miracles in the very first spring of the church, was wonderful necessary, to confirm the true faith: but, that faith once confirmed, they are now, no more necessary. 7 Lyra saith thus. In the primitive church, the true saving faith, Nich. Lyra, in Marc. 16. 17. it was to be nourished, and confirmed by miracles: and therefore, the gracious gift of miracles not only, was very freely bestowed upon the apostles themselves, but, eftsoons also, upon many simple believers. 8 Hugo saith thus. Hugo Cardinal. in Marc. 16. 17 Miracles (in the first sprout of the church) were wonderful necessary for the nourishment of faith: howbeit, not now necessary at all, because the true faith is already, very fully confirmed. And therefore now (in stead of signs and wonders) the good works of professors must freely break forth, to make their holy profession more resplendent and shining. 9 Isidore, Isidor. lib. de sum. bono. cap. 25. he saith thus. The working of miracles must utterly cease, before the manifestation of antichrist: to the end, that (by such the churches supposed baseness in comparison of those former miraculous seasons) antichrist himself, might the more boldly presume to persecute some unto death. For even therefore, there must necessarily appear in the christian churches, such an external baseness by the ceasing of miracles: that the patience of persecuted saints might more clearly shine forth: the inconstancy of scandalized reprobates, more evidently appear: and the cruelty of bloody persecutors, become more outrageous. 10 Master Beza saith thus: Theod. Beza Annotat. in Marc. 6. 13. That oil wherewith the sick persons were specially anointed, it was an undoubted true sign of the admirable power of God: and, no ordinary medicine, for the curing of men's maladies. Item, in james cap. 5. 14. Seeing therefore, the special gift of such a miraculous curing is ceased long since: to what end should the ceremony thereof, be yet still so fond retained? 11 Master Calvin saith thus. M. Calvin. in joh. 20. 31. Seeing the true miracles effected by Christ, and written down authentically by the blessed Evangelists, are fully sufficient to confirm the true saving faith: those men whatsoever, who (for any other respect) would foist in new miracles, they show themselves wicked, and such curious brains, as (not contenting themselves with eternal salvation) do desire to leap beyond the limits and bounds of the kingdom of heaven. Bee-hyve of the Rom. church, cap. 2. fol. 233. 12 In the Bee-hyve, it is thus written. The Prophets and Apostles, they had a special gift for the working of miracles, and driving out of devils to confirm their preaching thereby: and therefore, they joined to that self-same gift, some apparent ceremony or sign, as may plainly appear. 2. King. 4. 34. Howbeit, that power being ceased long since: the sign also, 1. Cor. 12. 28. it must cease with the power. Act. 20. 10. 13 D. jam. 5. 14. Cooper saith thus. The working of miracles now, D. Cooper, in his sermons, pag. 78 it would shake very shrewdly, the certainty of that truth which we preach: because (being confirmed afresh by miracles) it should now be confirmed by that self-same deceivable means, which is wholly reserved to Antichrist. Yea, and it would mightily strengthen the Papists, & give them an advantage against us: by making them in this sort to object and say. If the Gospel you teach, be the undoubted truth: why do you confirm so sacred a truth, by that self-same means which you so sharply condemn in us? But if the Gospel you preach, be an inveterate falsehood: why then do you show yourselves to be Antichrists, in thus labouring (as you do) to confirm your inveterate falsehood, by such deceivable signs and wonders? 14 Doctor Fulke saith thus. D. Fulke to the Rhem. test. Mat. 17. 19 sect. 5. There is now, no such ordinary function in the Church of God, that men should have power to cast out devils, more than to heal all manner of diseases, speak with new tongues which they never learned, or, to work other miracles. Which spiritual gifts, God gave in the beginning of the preaching of the Gospel, to confirm the credit thereof among the jews and Gentiles, but, of long time have ceased among Christians: who are now to be directed by God's word, whereunto also their profession doth bind them to give credit, without any further confirmation by miracles, then that which is testified unto them in the holy Scriptures. 15 Again, he saith thus. Item, ibid. in Marc. 13. 22. sect. 3. We know the gift of miracles is ceased long since in the Church: and we mean not to counterfeit that gift, as you do, and have done. Our faith being approved by the Scriptures, is confirmed by all the miracles of Christ, and his Apostles, expressed in the Scriptures. 16 Briefly, M. Dearing, his 7. Reading, Heb. 2. 4. Master Dearing saith thus. We know very well that all the miracles of God, were given to confirm his word: other signs or wonders then those, neither we, nor our fathers have known. And now, that the use of miracles is fully performed unto us, and we do believe the Gospel, in token that our faith is freely accepted with God: he hath taken away signs and wonders from us, which served us fitly before, when we were unbelievers. And surely, our faith is never so honourable, nor we so highly in the favour of God: as when we have said both to heaven and earth, we seek no signs from you. Or, when the word of God hath such a persuasion in our hearts: Isa. 30. 22. that we have now taken fast hold of all the good promises of the Math. 12. 38. Gospel, and said unto miracles, get you hence. The jews seek a sign (saith Paul) surely, 1. Cor. 1. 22. we that be Christians seek for none. When they were offered of God, he showed his compassion upon our infirmities: Math. 15. 28. but now that he hath taken them away, he bestoweth a greater mercy, in accepting our faith. Let us hearken therefore to the word of Christ: for, by it we shall live. Luc. 16. 29. 31. If we believe not his word, 1. Cor. 14. 22. neither would we believe all the miracles in the world: though dead men do arise and preach them unto us. Behold now Exorcists, you have heer● a graund-iurie impanelled concerning this point: what say you unto them? Exorcists. I know not well what to think of them. Orthodoxus. If you either doubt of their credits, Pet. Martyr. in 1. Cor. 12. 11. or suspect their consciences; you may have a tales among these that follow. Namely, Peter Martyr, joh. Calvin. in Act. 14. 11. john Calvin, Musculus, Bullenger, Gualther, Erasmus Sarcerius, Musculus, in joh. 1. 37. with sundry other beside: Bullinger, in Math. 10. 1. who all do jointly and confidently avouch the ceasing of miracles in these days of the Gospel. Exorcists. I challenge no one of your former jurours: Gualther, in Math. 8. 16. but do jointly hold them for good men and true. Erasm. Sarcer. in Act 4. 30. Orthodoxus. Are you then content, to submit to their censure? Exorcists. Not before I have heard their verdict. Orthodoxus. Well then, Augustine (you see) he is the foreman of the jury: let him therefore (if you please) deliver up the verdict, for himself, and the rest. Exorcists. That liketh me marvelous well. Orthodoxus. This then is that which he saith for himself, Aug. de verit. accles. cap. 16. and his fellows concerning these matters. Away with those feigned miracles of lying men: or rather, those wonders wrought, by enchanting devils. Exorcists. This I am sure is a partial verdict, suggested before, by some sinister means: and therefore, I will either sue forth an attaint against the whole jury, or remove the judgement, by a writ of error. Orthodoxus. Oh, I pray you be patient: and let the verdict pass currently, without your coutroulement. Exorcists. What reason have you, to persuade me to that? Orthodoxus. Tertullian doth yield you the reason thereof. Because, Tertul. con●. Martion, lib. 3. Christ (saith Tertullian) hath undoubtedly taught us: that, the faith of signs and wonders, (which are easily effected by false Christ's and hypocrites) is very rash, and uncertain. Exorcists. This reason, concerns only the good of the soul. Physiologus. We hope man, you have that in far greater regard, then, either the credit of your person: or the welfare of your worldly estate. Exorcists. Though that be certainly so: yet the other also, it must be respected. Physiologus. Very true. Howbeit, Hippocrates. See Skots book of the discovery of Witchcraft. fol. 453. because you are carried to much a way with carnal respects: let Hypocrates his reason suffice for that course, who saith thus. Those persons which boast, that they can cure, or remove the infections of maladies, by sacrifices, conjurations, invocations, enchantments, & such other like magical means, they are but beggarly and needy companions, wanting promotion or maintenance. And, for this only respect, they refer their speech to the devil: because, they would be thought, to know somewhat more than the vulgar sort. Lo this is Hipocrates reason. Exorcists. I way not his reason, a rush. Physiologus. Never say so for shame: lest you make men imagine that you neither respect your credit, nor conscience. Exorcists. Men may imagine what pleaseth themselves: howbeit, the Lord alone, Psal. 7. 9 he knoweth the heart. Lycanthropus. Good Exorcists, be not too singular. Exorcists. Why man, 2. Cor. 13. 8. I may do nothing against the truth but for the truth. Pneumatomachus. Well, well, be not wedded too much, to your will: neither do make (I beseech you) an idle of your own wit. Exorcists. I hope sir, I am neither wilful nor foolishly wise: whatsoever yourself, or some others imagine. Physiologus. Then would you not be so wise (as you are) in your own conceit: Prou. 28. 26. but rather yield and submit to a more dexterity. Exorcists. Alas sir, I have not hitherto heard any such sound dexterity, to submit me unto. Orthodoxus. Well, well Exorcists, there is something that sticks in your stomach, which makes you so loath to relent: it is not I hope, a vainglorious conceit of yourself. Whatsoever it be, we will hope the best. Let us therefore give over for the present, and go take our natural sleep. It may be (when you have taken counsel at your pillow) you will change your opinion. If therefore it seemeth good to yourself, I will spend with you again one hour more in the morning before you depart, and give you the best directions I can. In the mean time, I wish you good rest, and betake you all (body and soul) to the gracious protection and providence of the Almighty. Physiologus. Come then, let us arise and depart. The end of the tenth Dialogue. The eleventh Dialogue. THE ARGUMENT. A summary Recapitulation of all the premises, concludently repeating, and proving the precedent purpose: with a pathetical persuasion to subscribe to the truth thereof. The speakers names. PHILOLOGUS. LYCANTHROPUS. PNEUMATOMACHUS. PHYSIOLOGUS. ORTHODOXUS. EXORCISTS. Orthodoxus. GOod morrow to you all, my dear brethren: what news I beseech you, from Exorcists this morning? Lycanthropus. Surely sir, (so far as we can perceive) his Evensong and Morne-song, they are one and the same. Nevertheless, we have (by our urgent, and often entreaties) prevailed so much with the man, as that he is now exceedingly willing to accept of your Christian offer, concerning one half hours conference before our departure: and is here come for that purpose. Orthodoxus. The Lords name be blessed for this your good news. For surely, so long as he will not obstinately refuse to confer: there may be great hope of his happy conversion. Come on therefore Exorcists, what say you to our matters this morning? A verdict: or no verdict? Exorcists. No verdict at all: for any thing hitherto heard. Orthodoxus. Oh, than I perceive you have either carelessly overslipped; The necessity of recapitulating the premises. or not carefully observed those things which you heard: and therefore, it shall not be amiss, very succinctly to recapitulate the whole course of our conference. That (by this means) the matters themselves being fitly reduced to your remembrance afresh: you may either be constrained to consent to the truth, or be otherwise destitute of all excuse, by having one, and the self-same truth, now the second time testified to you. 2. Cor. 13. 1. For in the mouth of two or three witnesses, the truth of these matters, they must be so judicially, and so firmly established, as, all the sworn adversaries thereof, may judasly be ashamed, and finally confounded. Exorcists. Well sir: go an end in your purpose. Orthodoxus. With very good will. A summary abridgement of the first Dialogue. Wherein you must call to remembrance, how that (upon the very first entrance into these our Dialogicall discourses) we took a due consideration of the essential being of spirits and devils: and then next of their undoubted dominion or power. That there are essential spirits and devils, we proved directly from their essential creations, and effectual operations: answering withal, those beastly anthropomorphites, and swinish Saducees, who (in these our days) do impudently deny, that, there is either Angel or devil. And this (in effect) was the sum of our first conference. Exorcists. It was so, I confess. Orthodoxus. The next, A summary abridgement of the second Dialogue. (concerning the undoubted dominion or power of the devil) it was likewise apparently proved; that spirits and devils, they have no such possession in men, as the world doth fond imagine. Both, because the word (possession) is nowhere (in any such sense) to be found throughout the whole Bible: & for that also, if the same were so to be found, yet must it be taken metaphorically, for, so only the Scriptures do demonstrate their nature, operation, and power unto us. Admitting you therefore, the word possession in a metaphorical meaning: we confessed that self-same dominion or power of spirits and devils, to be twofold. Namely, either a power of possession: or a power of obsession. By their power of possession, we understood that their authentical authority, jurisdiction, or interest, which they usurpingly (by the operative permission of God) do exercise over some special men, in afflicting, tormenting, and vexing their persons. And, this their said power of possession, it must needs be (we told you) either real, or actual. By the real possession, (we told you) was meant an essential, or personal entering in men: the which we utterly rejected as a palpable untruth, absurd in Philosophy, and unsound in Divinity, as by unanswerable arguments, authentical authorities, and plain evidence of Scripture was apparently proved unto you. Telling you further, that, if such a real possession be granted, the same must be either a mental, or corporal possession. The real-ment all possession we flatly denied. Because else the possessed man's mind, it must needs be a locall-receptacle, essentially, and substantially comprehending the devil for the present: which (by the very sway of arguments, the authority of writers, and plain evidence of Scriptures) we fully confuted. And this also (in effect) was the very sum or scope of our second conference. Exorcists. I remember it well. Orthodoxus. Then next, A summary abridgement of the 3. Dialogue. concerning the reall-corporall possession, that also we rejected, as fond and frivolous: it being a matter never purposed by the Lord himself, in the first creation of bodies. For, else the mind itself must be unjustly charged, to answer all those her animal, and organical operations, which (without any her consent, and approbation) are violently enforced upon the possessed man's body: or, if (the possessed himself being freed from those operations) the devil alone should be called to account for the guilt of those actions, than something (concerning the possessed himself) should be acted by him to no purpose. Besides that, such a real corporal possession (the devil being only a spiritual substance) cannot possibly be perceived of the possessed himself, but only effectively: and therefore there can be no sensible perceivance of any such essential possession, unless we retain the Platonists opinion, concerning corporal devils. A thing directly opposite to reason, to the testimony of writers: and the plain evidence of sacred Scriptures. And, this also (as I take it) was in effect, the sum of our third conference. Exorcists. I may with no good conscience deny it. Orthodoxus. Then next (because yourself so earnestly insisted upon the real corporal possession) it was further declared unto you, A summary abridgement of the 4. Dialogue. that (if the same should be granted) the devils then, they must necessarily have such a kind of possession, either by assuming to themselves some true natural body: or, by transforming themselves into some true natural body at least. Their assuming of true natural bodies we flatly rejected, as an opinion too too unreasonable, absurd, and most senseless: whether we understand the same of bodies created before, or of bodies, than forthwith to be created. And that therefore the devil his tempting of Eva by the Serpent, the Angel his delivery of a sensible speech, by Baalam his Ass, the devil his supposed assuming of samuel's body, with such other examples and Scriptures, which very many do most ignorantly urge for this matter: they are too too grossly and fond abused, as we proved unto you by arguments, by writers, and by the sacred scriptures. And this also (if I be not foully deceived) was in effect the sum of our fourth conference. Exorcists. I dare not deny any part thereof. Orthodoxus. A summary abridgement of the 5. Dialogue. Then next (for the devil his transforming of himself into any true natural body) we declared unto you, the impossibility, and most palpable absurdity thereof, notwithstanding the Sorcerers rods transformed as you thought) into true natural serpents, the supposed transfiguring of Nebuchadnezzer into an ox, with such other examples. Showing you withal (by the conference of places) that, that place of Scripture which speaketh of Satan his transforming of himself into an Angel of light, was misunderstood of the most. Neither may the same, or any like places of scripture, be literally understood of any essential transformations; because that work was never in the power of a devil. No, he cannot possibly transform himself into any true form whatsoever, if Christ his argument (concerning the non visibility, and palpability of spirits and devils) be without contradiction: which it could not be, if the devil was able (but only in outward appearance) to transform himself into any true form whatsoever, as we proved by reason, by fathers, and by the canonical scriptures. And this also, was (in effect) the sum of our fifth conference. Exorcists. I will (at no hand) contradict your report. Orthodoxus. Having thus dispatched the supposed real possession of spirits A summary abridgement of the 6. Dialogue. and devils: we entered then into a like serious consideration of their actual possession: showing you first, what it was: and then next, the several parts thereof. Namely, either, a mental afflicting and grieving: or, a corporal tormenting and vexing. We showed you further, that this actual possession, was only in use in the days of Christ and of his disciples. Howbeit, the main ends thereof (namely, the declaration of Christ his deity, and the confirmation of his glorious Gospel) being in those days very effectually accomplished: the possession also, it was (by our Saviour himself) very fully, and finally determined. Yea, and the determination of this actual possession we confidently avouched, notwithstanding any one matter pretended by you, for the perpetuity thereof: as was directly proved by force of argument, by the plain testimony of ancient writers, and the inevitable evidence of the sacred Scriptures. And this (in effect) was the sum of our sixth conference. Exorcists. It was undoubtedly so as you say. Orthodoxus. And then next (because you insisted still upon the perpetuity of actual possession, A summary abridgement of the 7. Dialogue. by an argument drawn from common experience in all that beheld your supposed action, wrought at Mahgnitton) we proved directly unto you, that this their supposed experience, it could be accounted no currant experience in deed. Both, because many like admirable matters may be demonstrated from mere natural causes, effects, and diseases: and for that also, a mere natural experience (when the same is brought to the best) it may be no competent judge in such supernatural matters. A thing opposite to Divinity, to Philosophy, to Physic, to Nature, to Law, and to Conscience, as may very plainly appear: whether we respect the action itself, or the manner of doing the same. Then after all this, we came to entreat of Satan his power of obsession: which consisteth especially, in an outward assaulting and circumventing, or, in an inward suggesting and tempting. And this also in effect, was the sum of our seventh conference. Exorcists. The whole truth thereof, is without contradiction. Orthodoxus. Having thus handled the power of spirits and devils whatsoever: A summary abridgement of the 8. Dialogue. we came next to entreat of that extraordinary working power, whereby their said power was subdued. Showing you directly, that the same was either immediate in Christ the stronger: or mediate, in some certain special persons, extraordinarily moved to that self-same business. Again, the mediate power we told you, it was either Apostolical, I mean, in the Apostles themselves, an admirable extraordinary good means, to confirm their extraordinary preachings: or else Ecclesiastical, that is, in the seventy Disciples, and some others succeeding. And that therefore this Ecclesiastical power, it was more especially to be considered again, in respect either of the Churches primitive: the Churches I mean more immediately succeeding the Apostles themselves: or in the Churches successive at the least. And here we handled at large the continuance, and compass of that Ecclesiastical power: declaring plainly unto you, that this self-same Ecclesiastical power (howsoever most eagerly attempted, and apishly imitated of some in every age) it consisted not in any created, or mere natural means whatsoever, neither yet, in the only bare practice of prayer and fasting: as was sufficiently showed by force of reason, authority of writers, and the apparent evidence of canonical Scriptures. And this also in effect was the sum of our eight conference. Exorcists. You have very faithfully abstracted the same. Orthodoxus. Then next, A summary abridgement of the 9 Dialogue. for the practice of prayer and fasting, we proved directly unto you, that, the same was never put down by Christ as any ordinary perpetual means, for the powerful expelling of devils. That, if any such power should effectually proceed from the practice thereof: The same must needs be either a vocal, or a personal power at the least. The vocal power we rejected as too too 〈…〉 The personal power, we told you, it must more especially proceed, from either the party who prayeth: or the party that is prayed unto. The party that prayeth, we told you, he hath no such personal power: howsoever you laboured to support that opinion, from a personal power in Christ. The party that is prayed unto (namely the Lord) although he undoubtedly hath such an absolute supernatural power, as is able forthwith to effect such a work: yet, the participating therewith must needs be effected by the timely apprehension, either of a justifying or miraculous faith. The apprehension of that power, by the means of a justifying faith we flatly denied, it being an opinion too too preposterous, as we showed you by reasons, by writers, & by the canonical scriptures. And this in effect was the sum of our ninth conference. Exorcists. It were too to absurd for myself to deny it. Orthodoxus Then next, A summary abridgement of the 10. Dialogue. for the effectual apprehending of that self-same supernatural power of God by the only means of a miraculous faith: that apprehension also, we flatly refuted. Telling you first, what true miracles are. And declaring withal, that this your supposed action wrought at Mahgnitton, if it were in such sort effected, as you bear us in hand: then surely (howsoever you would cunningly suppress the appearance thereof by your new coined distinction of mirandum and miraculum) the same undoubtedly it was a true miracle. And that therefore, either you must utterly disclaim the whole action itself, as a mere sophistical practise of some: or acknowledge (at least) that you effected a miracle. Which (we told you) you might in no wise avouch: because the working of miracles was long since determined. All which we proved directly by the very sway of argument, by a grand-jury of ancient fathers: and by the unmeasurable true evidence of the canonical scriptures. And this in effect, was the very true sum (as I take it) not only of our tenth conference, but of all these our dialogical discourses. Tell us therefore directly your answer unto them. Exorcists. My answer in few words is this: I cannot gainsay the undoubted truth of any your summary abridgements of these Dialogicall discourses. Orthodoxus. Seeing then you have hitherto heard, that the word (possession) is not any where to be found (respecting this Question) in all the Canonical scriptures. Seeing, albeit such possession of spirits and devils should be admitted in an only metaphorical meaning, yet there was never any real, but only an actual possession: seeing such actual possession was only but temporary for some special respects, and long since, even actually also determined by Christ: seeing moreover, that the dispossessing of spirits and Devils (whatsoever, and by whomsoever attempted) was evermore effected by an extraordinary power of the Lord either immediately or mediately: Seeing the mediate power was only peculiar, and peculiarly applied by some special persons for special respects: seeing that power is now finally restrained from men, because those the former respects are fully accomplished: seeing also the working of miracles is ceased long since: briefly, seeing the improbable affirmation of any thing opposite to any the precedent points, is not only absurd in Philosophy, but also unsound in Divinity, as hath been declared at large: we doubt not, but that the truth of the premises (breaking forth now as it doth, like the Sun in his strength) the same will now be so precious in your eyes, and so far forth prevail with your judgement at least, as that (in an holy approbation thereof) you will willingly submit and subscribe to the same. Exorcists. Nay sir, howsoever I do happily jump with yourself in the soundness of judgements concerning the sound truth of every thing handled before: yet may I by no means submit to your motion for many respects. Orthodoxus. What man? do never say so for shame. Shall any respects (how substantial soever in outward appearance) so much overswaie your enlightened judgement, as that they should forthwith enforce your unruly affections against your own conscience, against the common consent of writers, yea and which more is, against an apparent truth? God forbid that so gross a corruption should ever discover itself. But go to lay open unto us those self-same respects. Exorcists. First, by such a submission, I should be discredited much, be deemed too to inconstant, yea, & accounted but a cowardly dastard: in, now growing weary under that self-same cross, which I have hitherto, so confidently, and so courageously endured. Orthodoxus. Oh, now I perceive, what hath hitherto with held you from submitting yourself to authority: namely the paltry respect of your worldly estimation. But, go to, let us sound examine the several points of this your primary respect. First therefore (concerning your supposed discredit, by such an holy submission) do know this I beseech you, and believe it for certain, that, it is undoubtedly a good Christians praise before God, and his church, to cease to do evil, Isa. 1. 16. 17. and to learn to do well: and which more is, to submit himself, his senses, his reason, his will, and all his affections to a sounder dexterity in all things, and to be only constant in that which is good. As for valour and courage, we must hold this for infallible truth; namely, that only in good matters, it is good to be fervent and zealous, whether the Apostle (I mean any of the godly) be present, or absent. Yea, and to be highly ashamed of the ignorance of your own soul: but, not ashamed at all, to submit to the truth. As for constancy under the cross, consider. I pray you, whether that which you suffer, be the true cross of Christ, or a just scourge for your sins. Aug. in Psalm. 34. part. 2. There were three (you know) on the cross at once: the first a saviour, the second to be saved, the third to be damned. All these, they endured the self-same pain, but, did not all undergo the self-same cause. So then, it is not the martyrdom itself, but, the cause of the martyrdom that maketh a martyr. Math. 5. 10. You are not therefore, simply to rejoice in suffering: but; in suffering especially for righteousness sake. 1. Pet. 3. 13. And, who is it (I pray you) that can harm you at all, if only you follow the thing that is good? On the other side, what praise is it unto you, if, when you be justly buffeted for your own faults (as herein you have been) you take it patiently? But, 1. Pet. 2. 20. if when you do well (which undoubtedly you should do in yielding submission) if then (I say) you suffer evil undeserved (by undergoing with patience, the cynical censures of some giddy conceitours) this is thankworthy and acceptable before the Majesty of our eternal God. And therefore, this your primary respect for not submitting yourself: it is (you see) very fond, and preposterous. Exorcists. Yea, but by this my submission, I should give our adversaries great occasion, to insult over the brethren afresh in far better causes then this: as we found by experience, how highly they triumphed over the intended discipline of late, by reason of Hackets, Arthingtons' and Copingers' seductions. Orthodoxus. If your own dealings, in these your preposterous courses, do as deeply discredit the holy ordinance of prayer and fasting, as Hackets seduction disgraced (in the judgement of some) the intended church discipline: I hope than you will never account, much less entitle them adversaries to sincere religion (howsoever opposite to these your practices) that shall seek, by due means to suppress the irregularity of your intemperate humour. Otherwise, if these your disordered attempts have ministered just occasion for any to insult over the brethren (as you say) afresh, in far better causes then this: when you see such fearful effects to follow your fooleries, you may never blame the insulters themselves, but your own indiscretion. Howsoever, I do advise you in all love, to reckon this late-given occasion as the very principal among the rest of your sins: and, make it a perpetual means, to your better humiliation before God and men. As for the inconsiderate and unchristian insultings of any, over good and Christian causes; let not their evil dealings that way, make you to constant in evil. Exorcists. But yet sir, by this so unseasonable a submission of mine, I should scandalise the zealous professors, and offend sundry honourable, and noble personages, both Lords and Ladies, with diverse others of good estimation: who (favouring rightly the reformation) have mightily affected my cause, and bountifully maintained my person and state. Orthodoxus. Your conscionable rejecting of an inveterate error, and your zealous entertaining of a newly revealed truth, can, ever scandalise such sincere professors, as are zealously, and rightly religious. As for offending any honourable personages or others in any account, who (wishing reformation) have hitherto affected your cause and maintained your person: know this, and know it for truth, that if those honourable personages (even in a sincere regard of some holy reformation) have hitherto affected your cause, so far forth at the least, as they supposed the same to be sound and good: then, doubt not at all, but that they will much more affect your holy and hoped conversion, so soon especially, as their enlightened judgements shall once but sound perceive the infallible truth. Yea and which more is, they will then be much more forewards in supporting your person and state, then ever before. Otherwise, those your maintainers, they might be supposed to affect your cause, and to support your person, in an only malcontentednes, rather against the persons of some in authority, then in any true mindedness towards reformation indeed. And which more is, you your own self (by persisting as you do in your error) you may be supposed of all (as you are shrewdly suspected of some) to be rather their humorist in an only respect of their hire: then any their approved martialist to manage these matters, in any right reverend regard of their honours. This therefore (you see) is but a silly respect, to hold you from such an holy submission. Exorcists. Yea, but by such my submission, I should forthwith deprive myself from all Ecclesiastical functions. For, this is held an undoubted truth, among the preciser sort, that a man so grossly fallen, doth make forthwith, a flat nullity of his former ministery. Orthodoxus. Put the case, that some (concerning this point) are much more peevishly precise, then prudently wise: will you therefore (in an only regard of their itching humours) refuse to do good to yourself and many others of more temperate spirits? For, tell me I pray you, Eius est dest●uere: cuius: est construere. who is able to make a flat nullity in any man's ministery: but, he alone who enableth and calleth whomsoever he will to the ministery. Exorcists. Very true as you say, (respecting simply his gifts and graces) there is none able to make a flat nullity in any man's ministery, save only the Lord. Howbeit (respecting the orderly execution and use of those gifts) the Church, she may, and she ought to make a flat nullity in the ministery of such are grossly fallen. Orthodoxus. If there be none other stoppage at all, to this your submission, but only the fear of foregoing your ministery, this fear I hope, it may soon be removed. For, if none but the Lord, be able to disable your gifts, than none without warrant from the Lord, is able to disable the orderly execution and use of your gifts. But no such warrant have any from the Lord in all the Bible. Besides that, if the Lord bestoweth and continueth his gracious gifts in any (being orderly called before to the ministery) for the edification of others: who may without warrant, disannul, and discontinue the orderly execution and use of those gracious gifts, in any (being orderly continued in the ministery) for the edification of others. For, if unfeigned repentance doth set an offender in statu quo prius, in his former estate, with God and man, notwithstanding any his former offences: Gal. 6. 1. 2. why should not an unfeigned repentance, set a poor minister (being fallen by occasion) in statu quo prius, in his former estate with God and man, for the orderly use of his ministery, notwithstanding any his former offences? Otherwise, why did not the Church in former times disannul and discontinue the orderly execution and use of gifts, in David, in Peter, in Paul, in john Mark, in Demas, and divers other both ordinary, and extraordinary persons. In all whom did break forth no less apparent disorders then this one of yours: & yet (the Lord continuing in them his gracious gifts) the Church still enjoyed the use of those gifts. Discharge you therefore a good conscience, by testifying truly your unfeigned submission: and then, if the Ecclesiastical governors (upon advised deliberation) shall deem it convenient to employ you afresh in the use of your gifts: let those your preciser sort, set upon them (if they please) for such their employment of one so grossly offending. In the mean time let those precise ones beware, lest (in this over nice a conceit) they do fall (before they beware) into the Luciferian heresy: Hieronimus, contra Luciferianos. and be yourself persuaded of this, that (notwithstanding these their owle-like hooing and scriking in corners) you shall find me very ready to join with you in this point against them all: Let them make public trial thereof, whensoever they please. Exorcists. Alas sir, by such my submission, I should utterly deprive myself and my family from all manner of maintenance. For, not only I am made destitute already of my former place: but which more is, I being by this my humble submission discovered, and discredited with the Church of God: what hope of future preferment? Orthodoxus. Howsoever your late practices have justly deprived you from all present supplies for your maintenance: Let neither the fear of such want; nor the needless distrust of any discredit in respect of your humble submission, be any means to withhold you from the dutiful discharge of a Christian conscience. No, no, be you rather assured of this, that your obstinate holding out with a settled pertinacy in this your peevish opinion, it will more discredit you with the true Church of Christ, than your humble submission would do, by a thousand degrees. Neither, let any falsely supposed fear of future wants, withhold you herein: both because true repentance deprives not a man from the favour of God, or his fatherly providence, but bindeth them so much the more firmly unto him: and for that also, this your refusal to yield, in an only fear of some falsely supposed wants, it would but confirm that hard conceit which many have had against you of late. Who do generally give it forth, that (howsoever you cannot but perceive your fault concerning these matters) you will never be brought to acknowledge the same. Because (in standing thus stoutly as you do to your tackling,) you do get better maintenance by your imprisonment, than you could otherways gain by your enlargement. And therefore, if it were for none other cause else, but, to take away occasion from such as seek for occasion to deprave the holy profession, do you forthwith submit yourself to the truth. Exorcists. Sir, although (notwithstanding those the former respects) I should willingly submit myself to authority, yet then this vile inconvenience would follow thereof, namely, by that means, I should be reputed to be in some practice at least with the yoongman at Mahgnitton, with Katherine Wright, with the boy of Burton, and with many other beside. Orthodoxus. Surely, I cannot perceive how your standing out, should possibly free you from that suspicion with men, if once they but read Master Harsnets' book, concerning your authentical convention, and public conviction: and those also exactly performed, in an orderly course, and a judicial proceeding, if the things he reporteth, be reputed for truths. The which also we must be persuaded they are: unless haply we do fond imagine, that the Commissioners themselves; the Register also, being a sworn public Notary: the yoongman at Mahgnitton: the several deponents being orderly deposed, and secretly examined apart: yea, and you your own self, upon your corporal oath, were all (jointly, and by one uniform consent) confederate together, to find yourself guilty concerning the causes and circumstances, so judicially propounded and prosecuted. And therefore, unless you be thoroughly able to discredit that course, as a matter but forged, false, and erroneous: your standing out (as you do) in the premises, it will rather aggravate than lessen your fault: Humanum est errare: Diabolicum perseverare. and apparently demonstrate a bad disposition, both purposely perpetrating, and peevishly persisting in evil. Exorcists. Yourself then it should seem, is fully persuaded, that I, and the boy (by a precompacted confederacy) have purposely deluded and coosened the world. Orthodoxus. How some others esteem of it, I know not: for my own part (I assure you) I am very far from such a suspicion. Yea, and this also I dare say for so many beside, as have been acquainted with your former sincerity and upright carriage: they are every of them, free from such a persuasion. This only is that which we entertain, and very confidently hold for a truth. Namely, that the graceless boy, did gracelesly counterfeit, and knavishly bear the world in hand, he was really possessed of Satan: when there was no such matter at all. But concerning your own self, we do undoubtedly think, that you being fully persuaded of the perpetuity of real possessions, as also, most strongly deluded with an erroneous opinion of your own ability for the powerful dispossessing of devils by prayer and fasting: did thereupon simply undertake that trifling work. This then is our opinion concerning yourself in the action: namely, that the same was simply your error in judgement, but no purposed error in your practise at all. This is that we would have you revoke: and this is that wherein we would have you submit yourself to authority. And why should you not willingly yield to the same? Think you it impossible for yourself to be deluded by the devil: or to be deceived at all by a cogging companion? Was not the reverend father Master Fox, and many others besides, as grossly beguiled by such counterfeit cranks as ever was you with this your faisely possessed patient? And therefore yield your submission for shame. Exorcists. Nay sir, the yoongman (I dare assure you) he did not counterfeit the matter: but, was actually possessed at least. Else, See M. Darels Apolog. pag. 3● you may likewise affirm, that his own sister, Mary Cooper, did but counterfeit. For, she also (even in the self-same manner) was fearfully tormented by fits. Very certain it is, that she did not counterfeit at all: but was undoubtedly possessed by the devil. Orthodoxus. She was undoubtedly, even so possessed as her brother before her was repossessed, which thing also you prognosticated, accordingly as it came to pass: howbeit, neither of both their fits, were true fits indeed, but mere counterfeit fictions. For first, if Marie Cooper was truly possessed: by whose prayer and fasting was she dispossessed I pray you? There was none other means used, to conjure out the devil from her, but the only bare news of your own, and her brother's convention before authority. It should seem she was simply possessed, either with some cowardly devil that could not, or with some courteous devil that would not adventure the trial: and therefore in a peaceable manner, they did voluntarily forego the habitation which they possessed in peace. And as for the repossession which you so constantly foretold and avouched to be in the boy: the same is no less absurd than his sister's possession expressed before. For if there was in him such a repossession in deed: then, where was your rejoinder for the casting of him out by prayer and fasting? Either he was not repossessed at all, and so your prognostication proved false: or else not yourself by prayer and fasting, but judge Anderson rather (by procuring a Process, de vilaica removenda, did drive out that dangerous devil. In the powerful execution of which Process, he so canuassed that cumbersome Spirit, as he was glad to betake himself to the uttermost borders of Egypt: and ever since then, the country hath been free from such dangerous bug-boyes, and therefore you may boldly submit yourself. Exorcists. If I submit to this motion, my credit is cracked in the world. Orthodoxus. Why stand you so much upon your outward reputation before the face of the world: against the plain evidence of your inward conscience in the presence of God? Or, why will you (in this case especially) so fond respect the flying reports of fantastical fellows? August, in sermone. What will it prejudice your person, though blind ignorance should cancel your credit in the transitory tables of worldly men's hearts: when your own conscience doth not raze forth your name from the everlasting Book of the living? Put case, that those good reports which the world doth afford you, be not found to be faithfully registered in the closet of your conscience: then, what other effect can they cause in the same, but an inward tormenting torture? Put case again, that those bad reports wherewith the vile world would besmear your credit among men, be found utterly false in the consistory of your secret conscience: Oh, what an exceeding great joy will be resident there, and keep in the same a continual feast? So then, if your own conscience accuse you not, you must not so greatly regard the causeless contumelies of cynical censurers, as that for the same, you care not to torture your conscience with continual torments. Neither may you be persuaded, that other men's lying reports are esteemed more authentical before the tribunal seat of Christ the righteous judge, than the approved testimony of your own conscience, which stands there to be acquitted in judgement. The premises therefore considered, Seneca de moribus. I would advise you rather to respect conscience, than fame: for fame may oftsoones be forged, but so can conscience never, and therefore submit, yourself. Exorcists. Alas sir, I am (by the very force of your speech) so fearfully distracted, as I wot not which ways to turn me. For, if I stand out (as hitherto I have done) you will repute me to be peevishly obstinate: on the otherside, by submitting myself to your motion, I should but confirm the Bishop; in their bad opinion concerning my cause. Who (suspecting me to be confederate with the boy in some cozening practice) have hitherto handled me too too hardly. Orthodoxus. Your settled pertinancie in so apparent an untruth, hath bred in every of them that bad opinion: and your peevish persisting therein, doth more fully confirm them in such a conceit. Touching their hard proceeding against your person, if you simply respect the cause, they could do no less than they did: although yet (respecting especially your place and calling) it were to be wished, that (as well on their, as on your own behalf) a more considerate regard had been given to the main cause itself, without any such eager pursuit, or preposterous apologies, concerning matters of fact. For then, so soon as it had been made apparently evident, that, there are now no possessions at all: your standing out in the matter would forthwith have been nipped in the head. Whereas they now (suspecting perhaps, that you had some sinister purpose to manage your public fasts, by such a pretended false miracle) have showed the more sharpness: and yourself on the otherside (surmising it may be, that they only maligning the purity of your pretended profession) have continued so much the more obstinate. All which inconsiderate courses, and preposterous practices would have been fitly forestalled, if between you all, the cause itself had been cleared▪ Howbeit, the remedy comes never unseasonably, which may fully effect the cure: and that I assure myself, may yet be accomplished by your dutiful and humble submission. Exorcists. Sir, notwithstanding any your pathetical persuasions: the premises considered, I may in no wise submit. Physiologus. Master Orthodoxus, that which hath been hitherto spoken may fully suffice to persuade any reasonable person, affecting the sincere truth with freedom of conscience. Howbeit, this fellow I perceive, he is wholly overswaied with some spiced singularity, or with a peevish selfewill at the least, in not submitting himself to that truth which he is unable to answer, for any thing hitherto heard. You have (I confess) been toiled too much, respecting especially your present meditations, for the Sabaoth days exercise: and therefore it shall not be amiss to put an end to our conference. In the mean time, let Exorcists repair to his familiar friends, and those of his faction, how many or mighty soever. Let him intimate our whole discourse, to their approved judgements. Let them duly consider, and exactly perpend the several points: and then, let them (in a more mature deliberation) devise with themselves, whether it be better for the man to submit, or still to stand out as he doth. If they advise him to yield a submission; we have our heart's desire, and God the whole glory. If otherwise they will have him standfast to his tackling: Let then signify the manner how with the time, and place, for our meeting, and we will be ready from time to time to confer with them to the full, if they accept of our offer. Lycanthropus. This is (in my simple conceit) a Christian motion. Pneumatomachus. If they dislike, they shall greatly discredit their cause. Physiologus. They are bound to praise God for your Christian care. Orthodoxus. Well then, in the mean time we will pray unto God to enlighten our judgements, to make us wise to sobriety, and to give unto us the spirit of discretion, that we may be able to discern the things that differ, and to approve only of those things which are pleasing to God in jesus Christ: and so I take my leave for the present. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Soli Deo gloria, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. A summary Table of all the principal points, the special matters, the several syllogisms, and the sundry expositions of such places of Scripture, as are any way pertinent to the main purpose itself. The first Dialogue. pag. 1. CHristian conferences, and their commendable use. pag. 2. summers his supposed passions put down. 4 Man's nature is ever desirous of Novelties. 6 Christian exercises must be begun with prayer. 7 Pneumatomachus, what it properly signifieth. 8 That there are essential spirits and devils. 9 Angels are celestial creatures, created of God. ibid. Spirits and devils, supposed to be nothing else but the good, or evil motions in men. ibid. Angels supposed to be none other thing else, but the sensible signs of Gods wonderful power. ibid. It is dangerous to deny the essential being of spirits and devils. 11 Man is endued with a spiritual, and immortal soul. ibid. The original fountains, or grounds of all errors. 12 Physiologus, and what the same signifieth. 13 Philosophy, is not simply forbidden, Col. 2. 8. ibid. The true use of Philosophy expressed. ibid. The mind what it is, and the effects thereof. ibid. The mind how it is corrupted naturally. 14 The mind differeth from the will, and how? ibid. Phantasie, what it is, and how it worketh. ibid. The natural man, unable to comprehend spiritual things. 14, 15 Anthropomorphites error, and whence it sprang. 17 Scriptures expounded hand over head, do procure a thousand absurdities. 18 Reasons, proving Spirits and Devils to be more than the good or evil motions of men. 18, 19 Angels not mentioned in the World's creation. 21 Angels and Spirits, not eternal, or uncreated. 22 Angels, in what day they were created. 23, 24 Reasons to prove the essential being of Angels. ibid. Testimonies of Fathers for the essential being of Angels. 24 Angels created on the second day. 24, 25 Reasons to prove the essential being of Angels. 26 Angels how they are said to be evil. 28 To be created good, and still to retain that self-same goodness, are two distinct things. 29 Boiling affections, the causes of controversies. 30 Physiologus, and what the same signifieth. 31 Possessions doubted in these days of the Gospel. 32 Satan's dominion over men, what it is, and how the same is limited. 33 Possession, and what it importeth. ibid. The word Possession, is not peculiarly appropriated to the Devil, throughout the whole Bible. ibid. If the Lord had ever intended an essential possession of Devils, he wanted not fit words to express it. 34 Possession what it is in the Hebrew tongue. 35 Possession what it signifieth in the Greek tongue. 37 Possession how the same is defined. 40 Real possession of Devils, what it is. 41 Mental possession what it is thought to be. ibid. Real possession, whether in the mind alone, or in the body alone, or in the mind and body together. ibid. Satan needs no mental possession, for the actual accomplishment of sin in any. 42 The manner of Satan his proceeding with men. 43, 44 Reasons against the real mental possession. 45, 46 Our judgement concerning the real mental possession, is mightily deceived, by relying too much on the bare letter. 48 Satan being a Spirit, doth principally affect man's spirit. 49 After what manner the Devil hath a mental possession. 50 Spirits and Devils are substantial creatures. 51 Devils are Spirits by nature, and Angels by office. ibid. devils are spiritual and finite substances. 52, 53 Whether man's mind be a receptacle, or place circumscribing the Devil. 53 Whether man's mind be a common or proper place for the Devil. 54 Whether it be a corporal, or an imaginary place. 55 Things are said to be in a place three manner of ways. 56 Corporal substances are in a place dimensively. ibid. Spiritual substances, are in a place determinately. 57 God is in a place indefinitively, and repletively. ibid. Angels and Devils, howsoever they propound divers ends, their manner of working, is ever the same. 58 Devils how, and by what means they torment men. 60 God is the only encliner of man's mind. 61 Man's mind is inclined either by an interior efficient, or by an exterior agent. 62 The third Dialogue, pag. 64. Corporal possession, what it is supposed to be of some. 65 Real corporal possession what it is ordinarily thought to be, ibid. Entering in and dwelling there, do imply no essentially inherency, but an effectual operation in the bodies of men. 66 The Metaphor of entering in, rightly expounded and fitly explicated by the example of Saul and David. 67 The word Tsalak very truly expounded, by conference with other places of scripture. 68 A good rule for the right understanding of such scriptures, as do any way concern the extraordinary operation of Spirits. 69 Sundry reasons against the real corporal possession. 70 Man's mind is an incorporal substance being simply considered. 70, 71 The proper operations of the mind, are either organical or animal. ibid. The organical operations of the mind, what they are? 72 The animal operations of the mind, what they are? ibid. Whether man's mind or the Devil be answerable for the actions done by the body, during the time of Satan's possession. 73, 74 God (in the first creation of bodies) never purposed any such real corporal possessions of Devils. 74 Gods image was not lost in Adam, as touching the essence. 76 A human body is only capable of an human soul. 77 Satan so possesseth, as Christ invadeth. ibid. There is no one necessary use or end of such a possession. ibid. If the Devil be in the possessed man's body essentially, then is he so, either hypostatically or formally. 78 How the real corporal possession may be perceived. 78, 79 Whether Devils have their proper, or their assumed bodies: or whether no bodies at all? 80 Celestial bodies have only their celestial motions: and elementary bodies, their elementary motions. 80, 81 Gross absurdities ensuing the opinion of corporal Devils. ibid. It is absurd to hold that Devils have airy bodies. 82 Augustine is not sound concerning the supposed airy bodies of Spirits and Devils. 83 Though it were granted that Devils might add unto, yet may they not diminish or alter their substantial being. 84 Four several sorts of Spirits found in the word. ibid. Angels have eftsoons their assumed bodies, and why? 85 The testimony of fathers, pretending corporal Devils. 86 Reasons directly concluding the incorporietie of Devils. 94 Testimony of father's concerning that point. 95 The Grand juries verdict against corporal Devils. 96 The Lateran Council concluding the same. 97 The fourth Dialogue. pag. 99 whether Devils can essentially assume true natural bodies. 9 Whether that body which the Devils are supposed to assume: be a true natural or but a fantastical body. 100 The Devil had never power to assume essentially any living man's body. pag. 101 The Devil had never power to assume essentially any dead man's body. ibi. It is absurd to hold the Devil his assuming of dead men's bodies. 101, 102 Whether the Devil can assume to himself an uncreated body. 102 The Lord alone is the only creator of bodies. ibid. It is absurd to imagine that God should create bodies for Satan. 103 Satan hath no power at all to create a body. 104 Arguments pretending the Devil his essential assuming of bodies. 105 It is no good argument to hold, that because good Angels have, therefore evil Angels may also assume to themselves true natural bodies. 105, 106 That place in the Psalm 78. 49. is very truly expounded. 107 The Devil did not essentially assume to himself the serpent's body. 108 Whether it was the Devil alone or the serpent alone, or the Devil and serpent together that tempted Eva. 109 It is ordinary in the scriptures to use the names of other creatures: in setting forth unto us the intellectual creatures. 111 Reasons declaring why it was not the serpent, but the Devil himself set forth by the name of a serpent that tempted Eva. ibid. A very good Canon for the faithful expounding of scriptures. 112 It is no absurdity or impiety at all to hold, that Moses under the person of a poisoning serpent: did metaphorically set out the Devil who poisoned our grandmother Eva. 114 The judgement of Tremellius and others concerning this point. 115 The common received opinion herein consented unto, and why? ibid. The true interpretation of the word Nachash. 116 The Devil did not essentially enter into the serpent's body. ibid. Whether the Angel essentially spoke in baalam's Ass: and how that scripture is to be understood. 117 Whether the Angel opened the Ass' mouth efficiently, or but ministerially. 118 Whether the Angel for such a ministerial opening of the Ass' mouth, did essentially enter into the Ass' body? 119 Whether samuel's true natural body was essentially assumed by Satan. 120 Whether the Devil appeared to Saul in samuel's likeness. 123 Sundry impossibilities and absurdities concerning such a supposed likeness. pag. ibid. The opinion of sundry writers touching this point. ibid. The Witch, a cunning ventriloquist, coosened Saul. 126 The distinction of essentialitér and effectiué, is no new, but a renewed distinction and ordinary with Schoolmen and Fathers. 127 The testimony of writers touching that point. 128 It is absurd to understand literally the things that are spoken of Satan. 129 The fifth Dialogue. pag. 131. whether Devils can essentially transform themselves into any true natural body? 131 This essential transformation of Devils, is opposite to true philosophy. 132 Devils are not essentially transformed into Angels of light. 134 The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, what it importeth. ibid. The place of 2. Cor. 11. 14. is truly expounded. 134. 135 The conference of that one, with other places of scripture, 136 The family of love is fitly confuted. ibid. Transubstantiation very shrewdly cut in the neck. 137 Antiquity is no privilege for errors whatsoever. ibid. Whether the Sorcerers rods were essentially transformed into true natural serpents? 138 Whether the Sorcerers rods were true Serpents in deed, or serpents only in an outward appearance. ibid. The Serpent's rods were no true natural rods, in any orderly course of nature. 139. Neither Sorcerer nor Devil, could ever work a true miracle. 140 Devils never had any supernatural power or skill. 141 Why the Sorcerers rods were called Serpents: not being in deed true natural Serpents? 142 Satan may procure an outward appearance of things, three manner of ways. 143 Spirits and Devils, they have a deeper insight into mere natural causes, than men have by much. 144 The Devil in transforming the Sorcerers rods, was undoubtedly assisted with a twofold power. 145 What is meant by the power of nature? ibid. What is to be understood by the power of obedience? 146 The Sorcerers rods they were trasformed into Serpents, not existingly, but appearingly. 147 Whether Nabuchadnez-zer was essentially transformed into a natural ox? 148 There was in Nebuchadnezzer no transmutation of substance: but only an alteration of qualities. 149 Fury disordering men's nature, doth make them beastly affected. 152 Men by tradition have received (hand over head) an error concerning the essential transformation of Devils. 153 God hath naturally engrafted in man such a peculiar propriety touching his natural being: as can at no hand be essentially transformed into any other form. 153, 154 Man's members may not possibly be transformed into the proportion or lineaments of a beast. 155 If there are essential transformations of Devils: then Christ's argument (joh. 20. 27.) cannot be currant. ibid. That there are no essential transformations in any sensible appearance. 156 Lycanthropus, and what the same importeth. 159 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a mere natural disease, and how. ibid. Lycanthropy, and melancholy proceed from one and the same cause. 160 The signs and effects of a true Lycanthropy. 161 The An●yran Council against the opinion of essential transformations. ibid. Counsels, Fathers, and the pope's own Canons condemning the same. page 162 The sixth Dialogue. pag. 165 Actual possession what it is, and the causes thereof. 166 The actual possession of Devils is twofold. ibid. The actual possession of Devils was only in Christ and the Apostles days. 168 The perpetuity of actual possession was never purposed by God. ibid. Whether the commission given by Christ to his Apostles for the dispossessing of Devils, be a perpetual commission? 169 Reasons against the perpetuity of actual possessions. ibid. The extraordinary power for the expelling of Devils, was only peculiar to Christ and his own Apostles, and why? 170 The opinion of ancient fathers for the supposed perpetuity of actual possessions, considerately examined. 171 Extraordinary gifts and graces, did determine with the officers themselves on whom they were peculiarly bestowed. 172 The continuance of actual possession avouched in some. 173 Whether the actual possession of Devils be an ordinary disease? 174 The terms of ordinary, and continually working what they import. 176 The instance from the Sun with the Antipodes, very fitly retorted. 177 The actual possession of Devils is an extraordinary and supernatural matter: surmounting the orderly course of nature. 178 The perpetuity of actual possession long since determined by Christ. 179 The two main ends of actual possession are ceased long since. ibid. That main end which tended to the manifestation of Christ his Deity, is fully determined, joh. 12, 31. 179 Christ his power matter to work upon still, though the actual possession be ceased long since. 180 The text in joh. 12. 31. is cleared by conferring the same with other places of Scripture. 181 Scriptures unfolding that extraordinary power of Christ for the dispossessing of Devils, before his suffering in the flesh. 182 The difference between Christ and the Levitical priesthood, very plainly expressed. 183 Scriptures respecting this special power of Christ after his suffering. 184 though words Tsamath, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 very plainly expounded. 185 The text of john 12. 31. paraphrasticallie analyzed. 187 The Father's opinion concerning the ceasing of actual possession. 189 The Devil was subdued in the Fathers before the coming of Christ 190 Though actual possession be ceased: the faithful are not freed quite from the Devil his sundry temptations. ibid. The reason why Satan's destruction, is so confidently applied to the actual determination of his essential possessions. 195 This our exposition of john 12. 31. overthrows not, but confirms the ordinary received exposition. ibid. Something besides the weakening of Satan's dominion, was actually accomplished, by the very act of Christ his death. 196 Christ restrains the actual determination of actual possession, to the very act of his death. ibid. The dispossessions after Christ's death, were to confirm the Gospel. 197 The seventh Dialogue. pag. 199. whether common experience may concludently prove the supposed continuance of actual possession? 199 The actions in the young man at Nottingham were (in experience) no admirable matters, if we consider the actions well. 200 Many natural experiments as admirable as those, in all appearance. 202 Many marvels in nature, overshadowed as yet, with nature's majesty. ibid. Very strange and admirable wonders apparent in nature. 203 More strange and admirable matters, are reported by Augustine. 205 As admirable matters may and do proceed from natural diseases. 206 The actions at Nottingham, they were no admirable matters at all, if we but respect Satan the supposed actor thereof. 208 Satan can effect nothing impossible in nature, or incredible in divinity. ibid. If Devils be the creators of substances: then are they also the quickeners thereof. ibid. The nature of beginnings, affecteth singularity. ibid. devils may work strange wonders: but not effect any miraculous actions. 209 Satan restrained from working miracles: by the bounds of nature, and the will of God. ibid. What is necessarily required in the orderly accomplishment of every action. 210 Satan his supposed actions in summers, are opposite to Divinity, Philosophy, Physic, Nature, Law, and to Conscience. 211 It is impossible for Devils, to effect impossible matters. 213 The truth of summers his supposed actions: is tried forth by the nature of the things: and by the rule of right judgement. 214 summers his supposed actions, were either natural, or not natural. ibid. Things natural, what they properly are. ibid. Things not natural and their kinds. 215 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, what they are. ibid. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, what they import? 216 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, how they are to be understood. ibid. The rule of right judgement, with the several kinds. 217 The natural cause of truth, and the kinds thereof. ibid. Natural principles, and the several kinds. ibid. Theorical principles, for the judging of things. ibid. Practical principles for the effecting of things. ibid. Universal experience, another natural rule of judgement. 218 The words Cheker, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 expounded. ibid. Experience, what it is: with the sundry degrees. 219 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, what it signifieth? ibid. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, what it importeth? ibid. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, what it respecteth? ibid. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, what the same betokeneth. ibid. A supposed spiritual experience pretended, to prove the supposed natural experience. 221 The holy Ghost hath given neither Canon, nor Council, concerning the perpetuity of actual possession. 223 Arguments against the perpetuity thereof. 225 Obsession, what it is, with the kinds thereof. 226 Outward assaulting and vexing, how? 227 Inward suggesting; and tempting how? ibid. The means how Satan effecteth his power of obsession laid forth at large. ibid. The determination of actual possession, giveth no liberty to Atheism: but rather the contrary. 230 The eight Dialogue. pag. 232 Satins power of actual possession, could not be subdued but by some supernatural power. 232 Etsbang Elohim, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, what power they import. pag. 234 The immediate power for expelling Devils. ibid. The mediate power, with the kinds thereof. ibid. Christ expelleth efficiently: others ministerially ibid. The Apostles mediate power, what it was? 235 The Ecclesiastical mediate power: with the kinds. ibid. The Ecclesiastical mediate power, respecting the Churches primitive, what it is. ibid. The same power respecting the Churches successive. 236 Exorcizing what it is, with the kinds. ibid. Counterfeit Exorcizing, ever in the Church. ibid. Satanical Exorcizing, what it is. 237 ethnical faculty for Exorcizing, what? ibid. judaical faculty for Exorcizing, what? 238 Papistical power for Exorcizing Spirits, what? 239 What kind of Exorcizing, master Darels was? ibid. Whether a Devil indeed was driven out of summers? 240 The pretended signs of dispossession, cannot concludently prove a possession. ibid. Whether the precedent, or subsequent signs, do conclude the pretended dispossession? 241 The reasons from the supposed signs of dispossession, very fitly retorted. pag. 242 Dispossession, whether effected by means, or by miracle? ibid. Whether devils are driven out, by mere natural means. 243 Whether by a created, or uncreated means. 244 No created means may efficiently extend itself to the supernatural expelling of Devils. ibid. Pretended instances of created means, from josephus. 245 Wierus his censure upon josephus: concerning the expelling of Devils by created means. 246 Whether the perfume made with the fishes liver expelled the Devil from Tobiah his wife. 247 Whether David's harp expelled the Devil from Saul. 248 Torments inflicted by Satan two ways abated: yet not totally removed, pag. 250 Whether there may be an active operation of Satan, without a passive disposition in the Demoniake. 251 Whether Elisha recovered the gift of prophesy by the melodious sound of an harp? 255 Whether prayer alone, or fasting alone, or both together, are means for the expelling of Devils? 257 Whether fasting and prayer was any other than a created, or a mere natural matter? 259 Whether the efficacy of such pretended prayer, consisteth in sound, in voice, or in words. ibid. Whether the denial of dispossessions by fasting and prayer: be any disgrace to fasting and prayer? 260 The ninth Dialogue. pag. 263. whether prayer and fasting be an ordinance perpetually established by Christ: for the powerful expelling of Devils? 264 Whether the words of Math. 17. 20. do directly prove such an ordinance? ibid. Whether an ordinance for all: or some special persons. 267 What warrant master Darell had to undertake the execution of such a supposed ordinance? 268 Whether he effected the work as a common Christian: or as a minister of Christ? 269 Whether he did it as an ordinary, or an extraordinary minister. ibid. Why other Ministers could not as well do it as he. 271 Whether prayer and fasting be effectual but by times and by turns? 272 If Exorcists had that power above others: the same must needs be a vocal, or personal power. 274 How virtue proceeded from Christ's body, for the curing of men. 275 Whether dispossessions effected by Christ were works of his Divinity, or humanity, or of both. 276 Chrsts humanity alone, unable to effect any miraculous actions. 277 The working of miracles must be considered, partly principally: and partly ministerially. 278 How Christ his humanity alone, and all other the servants of God may be said to be instruments. 279 God alone the efficient cause of miracles. ibid. The instrument is that whereby God effecteth miracles: and, the same is an instrument, either conjoined, or separated. ibid. How those instruments have in them a certain different virtue. ibid. Augustine's opinion concerning Gods working of miraculous actions. 280 Gregory his judgement confuted: concerning mans-working of miracles, principally, and instrumentally. 282 The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 very truly interpreted. ibid. Whether Peter had a principal power in the effecting: of miracles? 284 In all miracles, we are to respect the active virtue effecting: and the action effected. 286 Respecting the active virtue effecting all miracles are alike, and why? ibid. Respecting the actions effected, there is some difference, whether we consider the matter of the thing effected▪ or the manner of effecting the same. ibid. Whether Exorcists drove out the Devil, by means of some supernatural power from God: or whether the Lord himself drove him out by the Exorcists hands. 287 By what means Exorcists apprehended that supernatural power of God? pag. 288 Whether by some power of prayer and fasting. ibid. How Devils are distinguished by the words (this kind) 291 What faith apprehendeth that power of God. 292 Whether Math. 17. 20. be to be understood of the justifying faith, as able alone to expel Devils. 294 Whether Marc. 16. 25. 17. be to be properly understood of the justifying faith. 296 Master Beza his judgement concerning the casting out of Devils by a justifying faith. 297 The personal prerogatives spoken of Marc. 16. 17. were but temporary seals to establish the Gospel. 299 Testimonies of writers concerning that point. 300 Either no Devil at all driven forth, or driven forth by the miraculous faith. 302 The tenth Dialogue. pag. 340 WHether the miraculous faith be yet still continued in these days of the Gospel? 304 What a miracle is: and whence it is derived. 305 The words Niphlath, and Miphleoth interpreted. ibid. The causes and kinds of miracles. 306 The true miracles what they are. ibid. The false miracles what they are. ibid. False miracles effected 3. manner of ways. 307 A thing effected by means, whether a miracle. 309 Means either natural: or artificial. 310 The distinction of mirandum and miraculum, dashed. 312 Sundry places expounded concerning the true sense of Oath, and Mopeth. pag. 314 The words (Oath and Mopeth) expounded. 313 The words (Semeion and Teras) interpreted. 317 Tautologies in scripture no idle repetitions. 319 Many things effected by means: are (notwithstanding) miraculous actions. 321 How Sorcerers, Satan, or Antichrists effect wonders. 323 Nothing a true miracle, that is not truly effected: or effected to a true end. ibid. False miracles are commonly called Terata. ibid. True miracles are properly called Semeia. ibid. Exorcistesis driven into dangerous Dilemmaes. 324 Expelling of Devils (whether by means, or without means) as admirable now, as ever. ibid. Whether the working of miracles be ceased. 325 The ends of miracles are ceased now. ibid. That end which concerns the declaration of Christ's Deity: is determined Math. 12. 39 40. ibid. That other end which respects the confirmation of the Gospel: is determined by Marc. 16. 20. and Heb. 23. ibid. Miracles needless, for the confutation of Atheists. 326 Miracles, frivolous for the silencing of papists. 327 Prayer and fasting, are not graced by miracles now. ibid. Dispossessions by prayer and fasting: not generally held of all Divines, as is pretended. 329 The miraculous faith is now determined. 330 The faith of hearing for ever established. ibid. Reasons for the determination of miracles. ibid. Testimonies of writers for that purpose. 333 The faith of miracles, but rash, and uncertain. 337 Hypocrates opinion of miraclemongers. ibid. The eleventh Dialogue. pag. 339. A Summary recapitulation of all the premises. 339 The necessity of such a recapitulation. ibid. A summary abridgement of the 1. Dialogue. 340 A summary abridgement of the 2. Dialogue. ibid. A summary abridgement of the 3. Dialogue. 341 A summary abridgement of the 4. Dialogue. 342 A summary abridgement of the 5. Dialogue. ibid. A summary abridgement of the 6. Dialogue. 343 A summary abridgement of the 7. Dialogue. ibid. A summary abridgement of the 8. Dialogue. 344 A summary abridgement of the 9 Dialogue. ibid. A summary abridgement of the 10. Dialogue. 345 Certain respects, restraining Exorcists from submitting to the truth of this Doctrine. 346 The note of inconstancy and cowardliness. 347 The hardening of the adversaries against better causes. 348 The scandalising of zealous professors & offending of great personages. ibi. Fear of being deprived from all ministery. 349 The depriving of him and his from all maintenance. 351 The suspicion of practising with the counterfeits. 352 How the charitable sort esteem the action? ibid. If W. summers, than also M. Cooper counterfeited. 353 How M. Cooper was cured. ibid. The fixed respect, uz. loss of credit for ever. 354 Exorcists is fearfully distracted. 355 pertinacy in his opinion put over to some other conference at his own choice. 356 FINIS. Gentle Reader so many faults in the Printing as came to our remembrance, we pray thee correct as followeth: the rest (if any arise) we refer to thy godly wisdom. Pag. 6. lin. 28. put down Orthodoxus for the speaker. pag. 21. l. 3. for executiours, read executioners. pag. 106. lin. 4. for visible, r. visibly. pag. 205. lin. 31. for actual, r. effectual. pag. 307. l. 34. for and of heat, r. an active heat. Item, l. 36. for an active, r. and of an active.