LUX VERITATIS. OR, CHRISTIAN JUDICIAL Astrology VINDICATED, AND Demonology Confuted: In Answer to NATH. HOMES, D.D. Wherein his allegations of the Learned, Reasons, Divine proofs, and Arguments, are particularly examined and convinced.  
With the legality of the Art maintained and warranted by Scripture.  
Whereunto is annexed, a short Discourse of that Great Eclipse of the SUN, March 29. 1652.  
By WILLIAM ramsey Gent. Student in Astrology and Physic.  
London, Printed by J. B. for Nath. Brooke at the Angel in Cornhill. 1651.   

To all wellwillers and lovers of ART.  
Gentlemen,  
IT is true, I may look for (when I seriously consider my own insufficiency and lack of good utterance and a pleasing oratorious phrase) many censures, and be perplexed with doubts, whether I have or no chosen the better part; since most, or the generality of men are carried away sooner with a pleasing and deluding tongue, than truth, delivered in an homely or mean stile: especially since this most noble study that I undertake here to defend is so vulgarly traduced, and commonly both ill spoken of: which indeed at the first, was some disheartening to my undertake; yet because my Antagonists Coat is such, as that a word against Astrology sheltered under it, will by the vulgar be more heeded, than an Oration from another; and this noble Art in danger hereby to suffer (most falsely) an ill esteem in their opinions; for the well wishes I own both to it, the truth, and all ye the students therein, and lovers of learning whatsoever. I thought good rather to incur the harsh censure of some, then by my silence to give occasion to the ignorant, and enemies thereof to vaunt themselves against it: and truly notwithstanding all this, I had not thus taken him up; since neither he nor any one else can say aught against this science but what hath been formerly most fully answered: 
Look Pirovanu, Goclenius, Bellantius, Maraseallettes and Sir Christoph. Heydon.  but for the Readers satisfaction, who perhaps would have concluded (had not body undertaken to answer him) he had been past answering. I very much fear there are many most gross faults and mistakes in this Treatise, it being penned at that instant of time, I was more perplexed and troubled then in all my life before; my occasions being such, that I had no time to study a better method, or correct what hath escaped; it being the fruits of what my weak Genius did produce in every house and place I came in (in pursuance of my then occasions) where I could happily meet with the least occasion. Yet my hope is, that in what I have been defective (as I doubt not but your piercing judgements will soon discover) you will both support, supply and amend, hoping also ye will accept of the will for the deed: to whom I here Dedicate both myself and weak labours to serve you to my weak power.  
W. ramsey. Die ☿ 4. Decembris, 1650.   

To the unpartial READER.  
Courteous Reader,  
AS there is nothing more ridiculous amongst the learned, then to conclude, before a through understanding be, in the matter in question and controversy; so is there nothing more worthy or commendable in a man, then to be patiented, and hear all, nay and indeed both tales, before judgement be given; for the old saying is, one tale is good till the other be heard; and if this discourse be a thing beyond thy knowledge, I should desire thee first Legere, perlegere, & tunc judicare,: Read, and read it over and over, before thou judge.  
This very same Art of Christian Judicial Astrology which I here defend, being by the vulgar in general (some few years since) and also by some otherwise knowing and discreet, condemned as Illegal, Diabolical, and indeed to be little better than Witchcraft; I also as ignorant therein at that time as themselves, concluded so too; yet upon an cccasion one day, I desired a Gentleman that was extreme hot (in words only) against it, to do me the favour as to acquaint me with his knowledge of the unlawfulness thereof; that so I might have some ground for my then ill conceit thereof, as also to be better able to uphold my opinion; but to be short, I could get nothing of consequence out of him, that could any wise prejudice the validity of the Art; but only he believed so; and how could any man tell him any thing that he knew not himself, without dealing with the Devil, or being a Witch? which (me thoughts) was so ill becoming a man of judgement and understanding, to have no better reasons nor grounds for his high words, that I was even ashamed I was of his opinion, and therefore thought it much more commendable to be silent thereafter in such matters, which I understood not; then to condemn an Art only with words and no sound argument.  
Whereupon being very much desirous to be satisfied in the verity and legality of this most famous Art of ASTROLOGY, 
The Author's first inducement to the study of Astrology.  which so many discreet Gentlemen would sometime ignorantly condemn, I applied myself to the study thereof, which after some expense of time and pains, I found to be so apparently true and lawful, that these flashes of my friends against it, was quickly manifest to me, proceeded merely from ignorance and tradition.  
Wherefore, Reader, that thou mayst not in the least be mistaken herein, as the antagonists and enemies thereof are to condemn the Arts legality for the abuse of the Artist, who will, out of vainglory and pride, often undertake to predict impossible things, I mean which this Art cannot reach unto; and so for their simplicity & abuse thereof, give occasion to condemn that which of all studies is the most delectable, comfortable, true and lawful; not knowing indeed what it is, they would condemn, and so deceive both themselves and reader.  
But that thou mayst not herein be deceived; I say, I will here declare unto thee, the whole power and subject of Astrology; 
The whole power & subject of Astrology.  and that first Negatively, and next Affirmatively.  
Negatively, First that the Rules of Astrology doth not meddle with vain contingents, or such as have an indifferent respect to the opposites as depending upon unknown, or indeterminate causes, which may happen one way or other.  
Secondly, man's will is not subject to the influence of the Stars, neither hath Astrology to do with it, but accidentally, so far as the soul with the faculties thereof, follow the temperature of the body: neither doth Astrology meddle with the providence of God; 
Astrologers most falsely impeached to be searchers of the secrets of God.  or show a cause of miracles, nor with the secrets of God; for they are passed finding out, saith the Scripture, Ergo, Astrologers that are but men that contemplate natural causes are falsely and most scandalously abused, when thus impeached.  
And thirdly, Astrology, or the influence of the Stars, have no fatal necessity, except some contingency be mixed therewith; for this were to deny the providence of God.  
But contrariwise, Astrology dealeth with such things as are performed by Art and nature, with the will of man indirectly and accidentally; and his inclinations, temperature and dispositions, as also with his affections and body, and with natural secondary causes, and general accidents and contingencies; but if men will, contrary to the rules of Art, undertake to go beyond it, and abuse both the Art and themselves, shall any one therefore conclude positively it is unlawful, not efficacious or consistent with either reason or truth? Sure thus to affirm, is as simple in any man, as for me to say Religion is Diabolical, false, frivolous, inconsistent with reason and truth, because there are heresies crept therein, Schisms, and Sects.  
Wherefore I shall desire all to whom this my weak and small Treatise shall come, that they would not so inconsiderately and rashly condemn what they understand not; but first, throughly weigh every particular argument and reason therein, before a censure proceed from their lips; yet I must be plain with thee, I neither fear nor care for thy rash conclusions; for since I know it will be acceptable to all impartial and judicious souls, I shall rest content, since no man living can please all people. I shall be very glad if I have any whit been serviceable to the Students herein, to whom I wish all prosperity, and could wish that all ingenious souls would apply themselves, to the study thereof; which they may lawfully and safely do, for any hurt the antagonists thereof hath done it, for I do with all my heart love all those that apply themselves to knowledge, and my misfortune is so much the more increased that I am acquainted with so few of the students of this noble Art of Astrology; to whom as also to thyself, I wish all happiness, and remain,  
Thy loving friend, W. ramsey. Die ☿ 4. Decembris, 1650.   

The Contents of every Chapter and Section contained in this Treatise.  
CHAP. I. 
IN Answer to his Distinctions, Descriptions, Observations and nature of Astrology, wherein he is taught what Astrology is, and his Distinctions and descriptions proved merely erroneous, and convinced as malicious, ignorant, and inconsistent with reason or honesty: or to say, sus sacerdos. Page 1. 
Section. I. 
Wherein is demonstrated and taught the definition of Astrology. p. 1.  Section II. 
In answer to some cavils of Mr. Homes', wherein he denyeth Astrology to be warranted by Scripture, proved erroneous and false. p. 4.  Section III. 
Proving Astrology to be an Art. p. 13.  Section IU. 
Proving the lawfulness of Astrology, being not impugned by Scripture, nor Counsels; but allowed of by the wisest and greatest of men. p. 15.  Section V. 
Demonstrating the antiquity of Astrology p. 27.  Section VI. 
Showing Astrology to be the profitablest study revealed under the Sun to Mortals. p. 29.    CHAP. II. 
IN Answer to the opinions of the learned touching Astrology, wherein is further shown the legality of Astrology, that the Stars are both signs and causes; and that Mr. Homes his quoting the Fathers and learned, is merely fallacious and envious, and no wise available to his intent and purpose. p. 37. 
Section I. 
Wherein is farther shown, the legality of Astrology, p. 38.  Section II. 
Wherein is shown that the Stars are signs and causes. p. 39  Section III. 
Wherein his Allegation against the ground of the Art is condemned, and his bringing St. Austin and Galen against it, proved fallacious, injurious and malicious; and how fare we ought to attribute to the power of the Stars. p. 46.  Section IU. 
Wherein Astrology is defended against his Allegations, from Mr. Perkins' words. p. 54  Section V 
Wherein his cavilling Mr. Briggs, and others, are convinced. page 56.    CHAP. III. 
WHerein his divine proofs against Astrology, are examined and confuted. p. 59 
Section I. 
Wherein his first Scripture proof, viz. Deut. 18. verse 10. is convinced and cleared no wise condemn Astrology. p. 60.  Section II. 
Wherein his second proof is refelled, viz. Esay 2.6. p. 69.  Section III. 
Wherein his third Text is convinced, viz. Esay 44.25. p. 72.  Section FOUR 
Wherein his fourth proof is refelled, viz. Esay 47.12, 13, 14. p. 77.  Section V. 
Wherein his fifth proof is proved weak, as to his purpose, viz. jer. 10.2.3. p. 85.  Section VI. 
Wherein his sixth poof is refelled, viz. Dan. 2.1, 2, 3, 4, 5. p. 91.    CHAP. IU. 
WHerein his reasons and arguments against Astrology, are particularly examined and condemned, neither to consist with reason or truth. p. 95. 
Section I. 
Wherein his first  reason is convinced. ibid.  Section II. 
Wherein his objection touching the diversity of twins, is refelled, as also some other quirks against Astrology examined and convinced. p. 101.  Section III. 
Wherein his endeavours to prove Astrology of no truth or certainty, as also its rules and principles, are themselves of less truth or ground; nay, and indeed senseless. p. 113  Section FOUR 
Wherein he thinketh the ground of the Art wholly shaken and overthrown, by affirming it merely imaginary, viz. the ninth and tenth sphere, and in them the Zodiac; therein proveth and showeth his own ignorance the more apparently manifest. p. 129.    CHAP. V. 
Wherein the confutation of the objections that are brought for Astrology are examined, and refelled. p. 130.    

LUX VERITATIS. OR, Christian judicial Astrology VINDICATED, In Answer to Doctor Nathaniel Homes.  

CHAP. I. In answer to his Distinctions, Descriptions, Observations, and nature of Astrology. Wherein he is taught what Astrology is, and his Descriptions and Distinctions proved merely erroneous; and convinced as malicious, ignorant, and inconsistent with reason or honesty; Or to say, Sus sacerdos.  

Section. I. The Definition of Astrology.  
THat the Reader may the better judge of the controversy between Doctor Homes and myself, I think best here before I enter upon any part of his discourse, to set down what this Art of Judicial Astrology is, which I undertake to defend. Ptolemy Lib. 1. Cap. 1. Of his Quadripartite, defines it thus, Astrology is that Art (joining it with Astronomy, as making no difference between them, though Mr. Homes and other Adversaries thereunto do) which teacheth by the motions, Configurations and Influences of the Signs, Stars and Celestial Planets, to judge and prognosticate of the natural effects and mutations to come, in the Elements and inferior and Elementary bodies. And who so takes Astrology to be any other thing, is altogether ignorant of the Art, or guilty of inveterate malice in traducing so noble and admirable a science, esteemed and allowed of in all ages, and that in great reverence and honour, as well as the students thereof (as in its due place shall be made to appear) by the chiefest and noblest of the people. Though Doctor Homes would feign persuade the vulgar and ignorant sort of people that it is a Doctrine of Devils, & unlawful, which shall in its due place be made to appear (as also the rest of his weak arguments and cavils,) that they are merely malicious, ignorant, weak, and inconsistent with reason or the thing in question; which that he may not be ignorant of, as also for the better understanding of the Reader, I do here more plainly rehearse by way of Quere, viz.  
First, whether Astrology or foretelling, or Prognosticating by the Stars, be a lawful Art, free from all Diabolical practices and devices.  
Secondly, Whether Astrology may not lawfully be studied and practised, by the best of God's people, without offence in the least, either to the law of God, or man (if they concur with the rules of the Scripture) which is the full matter in controversy, and to be in this following discourse discussed, handled and cleared; and if so, then certainly the malicious ignorant condemners of this Noble and most profitable Art studied by mortals, (as in its due place shall appear) ought to be severely punished, and that with exemplary infliction, that posterity may take warning how they condemn what they are ignorant of; and likewise be encouraged to apply their minds to the contemplation and knowledge of all Arts and Sciences, especially this most heavenly and divine study of Astrology, or the language of the Stars.  
Now you have heard the distinction of Astrology the subject intended, by it you may not only see the causes which concur to the constitution of the nature of the Art, but also the final cause, whereunto all the precepts of the Art are to be referred; seeing then the knowledge of the effects of the Stars in the Elements and their bodies, dependeth of the motions, Configurations, and Influences of the Celestial bodies, 
Astronomy and Astrology both are one Art.  Astronomy or Astrology (for by the learned, there is made no distinction between them as several Arts, but generally conclude them (as indeed they are) one and the same Art) is divided into two parts, the first speculative or theorical, which consisteth in the knowledge of the heavenly motions; the other part is that which consisteth in the effects and properties of the former motions, and without this (viz Astrology) the other is merely vain and of no use, or to none or little purpose; the former viz. Astronomy furnisheth the ginger with matter and stuff wherein to exercise himself; the other viz. Astrology disposeth the matter, and accordingly judgeth as the case doth require, and therefore to be esteemed the more noble part of this Science.   

SECT. II. In answer to some cavels of Mr. Homes his, wherein be denyeth Astrology to be warranted by Scripture, proved erroneous and false.  
HAving thus painted forth the matter and form of the thing intended to be insisted on, I come now to show you what Mr. Homes his utmost power and malice against it is: and first his blind zeal gins to show itself, in persuading the Reader it is condemned by the Scripture, and no wise thereby tolerated; his words are, It is not where allowed in the Scripture, under the notion of Astrology, but every where spoken against as we shall see afterward: and all that he can show us and make us see, is but six places of Scripture, which is fare from being worthy of the Title of a general condemnation, when there is none but knows the extent of the Scripture to consist of many half dozen Chapters, nay of books, Ergo not envy where condemned, and those places neither, but imagined by him to condemn Astrology, when indeed they serve no whit at all for his purpose, as in its due place shall be made appear. But he thinks these words to be of force enough, to astonish and discomfort the ignorant, from the study thereof; and therefore as a warning piece, or that his other windy reports may better take, and be more heeded and believed, he prefixeth this slanderous and most false and wicked saying; and truly for his policy he is worthy applause, for mistrusting his words should be little regarded, he colour's them with a preface (as it were) of Religion; 
Astrology allowed of by Scripture.  yet this will not keep him from being ridiculous to the wiser and more learned sort of people. But by the way, is it every where condemned? doth not the King and Prophet David say, The heavens declare the glory of God, Psal. 19.1. and in another place, The language of the Stars, (which is the signification of the word Astrology 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the language of the Stars; and is it not allowed any where in Scripture under the notion of Astrology?) Is heard over all the earth, or the utmost parts thereof, Psal. 19.3. as if he had said, there is no part free from the power of their Influences; for their power hath a general extent over all Nations, Kingdoms, Countries, Provinces, and Languages. I pray, who can restrain the sweet influences of the Pleyades? Job 38.31. And did not the Stars in their courses fight against Sisera? Judg. 5.20. One of these places had been enough to have convinced him of great wickedness, in denying the Scripture doth any where allow of Astrology; for if he never read these places, than he is wicked, and no less than wilfully wicked, to conclude what he understands not; if he hath perused them, then most malicious to speak against truth; I may even as well say diabolically wicked, 
Mr. Homes himself rather to be imputed a teacher of the Devil's Doctrine, than Astrologers.  and that he teacheth rather the Doctrine of Devils, for the Devil's Doctrine is falsehood; and if he preacheth such gross lies as these, he is the Devil's preacher, and not Astrologers, neither is Astrology a Doctrine of Devils (as shall be made clear to him before the closure of my discourse) as he in his 160 page, line 21. is pleased to term it. So then, now I hope the Reader doth clearly see, these his first words of his discourse, to be merely envious, slanderous, and malicious, (or at the best) most ignorant; for it will puzzle all his brains; and Mr. Raunces, nay and all that dare or will take their parts, to make any one of those passages of Scripture (he brings to confute or condemn Astrology) to serve in the least for his turn, as in its due place shall be cleared.  
Then saith Mr. Homes, as other things that are natural, which are brought to countenance Astrology, are not tolerated by the Encyclopedia, and general order and seals of all Arts and Sciences, within their own spheres, to be accounted Astrology. For instance, First, (saith he) Some urge that we know the tides of the Sea, by the state of ☽ and tempests by other Stars, which I am confident Mr. Homes cannot deny, but he will render himself more ridiculous than already, which he endeavours to do thus; these and of the like nature, are properly handled in that part of natural Philosophy, which we call meteorology; and so likewise are all fiery Meteors, Comets, etc. and so by consequence are made an integral part of Physics, for if you will say, because of their external efficient cause, viz. the Stars; they are to be handled as a part of Astrology, by the same reason there will be left no such Science as natural Philosophy, because all inferior bodies below the Moon (as sayeth the great Philosopher Aristotle) depend upon the superior Celestial bodies of the heavens. In all which he doth but show his great mistake in the ground of Astrology, and his envy thereto; for how can Mr. Homes prove this is a mere urging, or an opinion of some, that the ☽ is the cause of the ebbing and flowing of the Sea; or that it is rather to be attributed to that part of natural Philosophy, which is called meteorology, and so consequently to be a part of Physics, when all the world knows that hath any experience or understanding in Astrology, that he is as far from hitting the mark, as if he had missed the Butt.  
Wherefore for his better instruction, (for I see he is not so well versed in Astrology as he pretendeth, or as one that is to condemn it should be) I will make it appear to him, that the ☽ is the absolute cause of the ebbing and flowing of the Sea; and this is the opinion of all or most knowing and learned writers, both in this Art and other Sciences; and not only so, but it is so clear to all the learned, that his great friend Picus Mirandula, which was a stronger Champion (or at least more knowing in the Art then he) against Astrology, doth confess the ☽ to be the positive and sole cause thereof.  
And thus, 
The ☽ the cause of the ebbing and flowing of the Sea.  if he have any understanding in the Art (as by his writing, I must confess (as I but now said) I see none) let him take the true time of the Seas flowing first, and then observe in what part of heaven the ☽ is accidentally, placed by her violent diurne motion, and he shall find it to flow till she come to an absolute □ aspect of the place she was in at its first beginning to flow; and then will continue ebbing till she come to the direct ☍ or opposite place in the heavens, etc. Still let him observe exactly when she comes to the □ or ☍ of the place of her first beginning, and he shall never err in this point; this is sufficiently well known to the learned Practitioners, and the sons of Art; yet note that ☉ and other Stars may hasten, hinder and alter the ☽ influence, as he may see at ☌ and ☍ of ☉ or the change and full, in spring tides, and neap tides, at quarters and half quarters. I would he had not been ignorant of this, and then perhaps, (this being the beginning of his discourse) he had not undertaken to lay pen to Paper against this most heavenly, most admirable, and most contemplative, delectable study and science of the Stars and Celestial bodies. So by this time he clearly sees how inconsiderate and rash this his sophistical and false argument is.  
Secondly, saith Mr. Homes, others say that by Astrology we know Eclipses and Changes of the Moon; but we say Astronomy doth challenge this as belonging to it, etc. My answer is, that I say, (what ever he telleth me others may or do say) he cannot but know that those that say so are not versed therein, and are as ignorant to apply or attribute this part of the practic, viz. Astrology to the Theorical part, viz. Astronomy; as he is to make a distinction between the one and the other, as two distinct Arts, when Ptolemy whom the most learned follow, in his book, chap. 1. of his Quadripartite (as above said) defining Astrology, maketh no distinction between the one and the other, but that the one is Theorical, the other Practical. And thirdly, 
How doth he define (by all his rabble) the Art of Astrology?  saith he, If any one urge that Astrology bandles of the qualities and effects of the stars, we Reply, that so doth Astronomy, of their qualities namely, of their light and colour, and natural Philosophy of their effects, in watery, airy, and fiery meteors: as much as to say, Astrology is no Science at all, but will give its property to another study; if this be not slanderous and malicious, let the weakest in the world judge: he might as well then all this while have called it, Natural Philosophy, as Astrology; and then he tells us, if we admit of the Title Alsted gives to Astrology, viz. Astrologia planetaria, or Planetary Astrology, and of Doctor willet's titles, viz. Astromaney & Genethliaca; then saith he for conclusion by all observe, that there is no place left for Astrology; by which he clearly renders himself the most malicious of all wretches, to deny that Art which above 298. 
The learned and famous Sir Christopher Heydon recordeth them, which you have verbatim by and by.  of the most wise men of all ages have studied and practised (their names you shall have hereafter in its place;) both before and since Christ's time, whose antiquity may be derived from our first father Adam: maintained by Princes and Kings, reverenced by that greatest of worthies, Alexander the Great; and not condemned by any of the Fathers, or the practice thereof prohibited by the Church, farther than that they should not hereby be drawn from the study of Divinity, as you shall see by and by; Mr. Homes me thinks being a wise man, should not write against, (and that in such a zealous manner) a thing which is not in rerum natura, or in posse, as in his first Section of his tenth Chapter, he studies to make Astrology appear, to what purpose then are all his arguments against Astrology, when he will not admit of any such thing in the world: what doth he write against then? and why doth he so much condemn the students thereof? because he knows not the validity thereof; because he knows not the rules and fundamentals thereof; because indeed he is altogether ignorant of the same; and let him not be angry I plainly tell him so, (plain dealing is best among friends) for if he did, he would have been so far from writing or speaking against it, that he would have been more furious and hot with any one should have condemned it, than I am with him; for he that will speak against what he knoweth not, and bring false, scandalous and sophistical arguments to maintain his opinion; he I say, would certainly term that man no better than a fool, or at the best a knave to write against what he knows, and can also prove to be true; but I will not be so hot with him.  
But now that he may see his error in offering to undertake to put men out of conceit with this heavenly study, I will show him here (before I begin to answer his second Section, in that which I have to say to it, though this will sufficiently refel it.)  
First, that Astrology is an Art.  
Secondly, the lawfulness of it, being not impugned by Scripture nor counsels, but allowed of by the wisest and greatest men.  
Thirdly, the antiquity of it.  
Fourthly, that it is the profitablest study under the Sun.   

SECT. III. Proving Astrology to be an Art.  
ARistotle, lib. 2. chap. 2. 
Astrology is proved an Art.  Phys. affirmeth that Astrology is Scientia media, a Science between the Mathematics and natural Philosophy, for the principles are merely Mathematical, and in practice are applied to sensible matter as the Physical subject thereof; moreover he ranks it also amongst the liberal sciences; and annexeth it to Philosophy in such a sort, that he seemeth indifferent to use the name of a Philosopher and an ginger for the same. So likewise Averro in his Commentary on the 12. of the Metaphysics, text 44. speaking concerning the power of the heavenly bodies, in the procreation and conservation of all worldly things, and in their mutual consent and and assisting one another in their mutual operations, he resembleth them to good governor's in a Commonwealth, that jointly concur in one unanimous consent for ordering the same: His words are dispositio in juramento corporum coelestium ad invicem in creando entia, quae sunt hic, & conservando ea, est sicut dispositio regentium bonorum, qui juvant se ad invicem in regendo bonam civitatem. And in his Commentary on the second book of Physics, his second Chapter, showeth that natural Philosophy and Astrology have one and the same subject, and yet are distinguished by a divers consideration; and in the third of the Metaph. Comment, 7. he affirmeth the knowledge of the Stars to be a Mathematical Art; and so it hath ever in all ages by the most learned Philosophers been esteemed. I believe Mr. Homes nor no man else that knoweth any thing, will deny that it is one of the liberal sciences, and if he will condemn it as none, he must be content to lose one of them, which were to render himself the eighth wise man; what science I pray will he place in the room of it, since he thus endeavours to excommunicate it, for he tells us it is as mere a fancy as Palmistry, and yet Galen (one of his learned, that he brings to condemn Astrology with the word Sophisticum, that it is Sophistical, page. 115. l. 11.) as Physicians themselves report, teacheth to know the temperature of the body by the palm of the hand; and his reason is, because the mind commonly followeth the constitution of the body; thus you may see how he carpeth and catcheth at any thing that he thinks will make in the least for his turn; as also of Alsted, and Doctor willet's Titles of Astrology, when the question is, whether either of them knew the common rules of the Art. So then, this being made clear to him that it is an Art, and not only so, but a Science, and hat one of the liberal Sciences; I come now to the second lesson I promised him. viz.   

SECT. iv Proving the lawfulness of Astrology, being not impugned by Scripture, nor Counsels; but allowed of by the wisest and greatest men.  
WHat hath already above been said, is clear to any judicious impartial eye, 
The lawfulness of Astrology.  that this Art is lawful, where I say, The heavens declare the glory of God, etc. But to clear it more plainly, the Psalmist in his very next words sayeth, The Firmament showeth the works of his hands, Psal. 19.1. which is clear to me is meant thereby that he effecteth by them, (and no other thing) (though I must confess there are divers interpretations thereof) my reason is, that otherwise, every thing which is created doth declare the handy work of God; I believe Mr. Homes will find Aquinas and Hierome of my opinion: He hath heard also, that there is no speech nor language, where the voice of the Stars are not heard; Psal. 19.3. which may serve here again very well for the purpose in hand; 
God prohibiteth not the study of Astrology.  and to speak more plainly, that God doth not prohibit mortals from the study of them; you may see how the Holy Ghost by Stephen, in the 7. of the Acts, verse 22. speaking in the commendation of Moses, giveth him (over and above the commendation that was aforesaid) that he was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and was mighty in words and deeds, which is clear to any rational man, that if it had been any wise sinful, diabolical, or odious in the sight of God, Moses would not have applied his study thereunto; or at least, it would never have been recorded in his praise. I might instance here Daniel, Solomon, and others, but this is so clear, that to insist longer hereon, were but vain, since there is no one place in the Scripture that can be shown to speak positively against Astrology, 
Astrology no wise condemned by the word of God.  or the study thereof, more than to remember us not to give the glory of the Creator to the Creature, etc. as in the answer to his divine proofs shall appear. Wherefore then since it is warrantable and lawful out of Scripture to study this Art, nay and as we see by experience, warranted by God, in the showing of blazing Stars to Astrologers only (not to the vulgar & proficient in other Arts) to forewarn his people of the danger and punishment to come; 
Look my reply to Raunce his Declaration against Astrology  and if it were not so, he might as well show signs on earth to the illiterate, by common vulgar things; as in heaven to the learned ginger, who only can judge of their effects. Wherefore then I say, of necessity the Art must be allowed of by Counsels, being the wiser sort of people, especially by the godlier sort of Counsels, whose acts and determinations will be grounded on piety and the word of God, 
Nota.  and if otherwise, I value not what their censure is; for they are but men, and (guided by their own reasons and opinions, 
How fare the Counsels in former ages hath or may lawfully condemn Astrology. ) are but frail, subject to infirmity and error, humanum est errare, he cannot but know also that even the palpablest truths have been condemned by Counsels, either for some self interest, or for abuse of the thing condemned; as for instance, the Bacaran Counsels (as well as the Roman Senate) hath condemned Astrologers, but how? not because they were students in that heavenly science, but for trusting in Astrology (and who is so superstitious, may not lawfully be termed an ginger, for Astrologers are in no sort hereof guilty) the words of the Council is in the Cap. 9 of Bacaran Counsels, Si quis animas, & corpora humana fatalibus stellis credit astringi, sicut pagani & priscillianus dixerunt, anathema sit. Who so trusteth in the fatal necessity of the Stars, as the heathens and Priscillianists do or say, let him be accursed; to all which, there is no ginger, but will willingly condescend; for by this, is not Astrology nor Astrologers in the least condemned, but the abuse of the Art, to give that to it, which properly belongs to God the creator of these heavenly bodies; the decree is against those that trust in them, or believe a fatal necessity, not that study the knowledge of them, and make a true use of them. So likewise the Council or Parliament in England, made a Law against those that multiplied Gold and Silver, why? not because they condemned that heavenly revelation, or practise of the most blessed Stone of the Philosophers, 
This is the Anima mundi, Adrop. ☿ Philosophorum, lo veridus, the life of the world, which that learned Agrippa saith, is actual and animal, created by nature, found every where, known by few, expressed by none under its proper name, but in figures and riddles.  but they forbade the multiplication of Gold and Silver, in that they thought it too great a treasure for any private subject, and to prevent rebellion, commotions and insurrections in the Commonwealth, like wise Pilots sitting at the stern, did study to prevent the storm which was likely otherwise to shipwreck the safety thereof. So that I say then, there is no Council, (if they have any spark of Religion, learning or policy) that will show themselves so ridiculous, as to decree-any thing in the least, against either Astrologers or Astrology, taking it as it is in itself, and not abused; which is not the fault in the Art, but the Artist in going beyond the Art; for if under the colour of Astrology, I study Necromancy, is Astrology therefore to be condemned as unlawful, because together with it I study unlawful Arts? No, sure since this is a thing so far different; therefore it is good to put the Saddle on the right Horse.  
And this my argument is thus confirmed, for that in former ages, both the greatest and wisest sort of people were Practitioners and Students in Astrology; 
The great estimation Astrology was in in former ages.  as first we may see by the Egyptians, amongst whom it was not lawful for any man to take the function of priesthood on him, except he were an ginger; nor could any be chosen King, except he were of the College, of Priests. And Rodiginus reporteth that for the prevention of Treason, there was none borne within that Kingdom, whose Nativity was not brought to the King to be judged on. And Dion recordeth the same to be practised by Tiberius, and we see in Daniel, that the Monarches of Babylon attempted nothing of importance, without first ask Counsel of the Chaldeans. And the Kings of Lacedaemonia had none in their Counsels, neither were any suffered to sit, but who were Astrologers: and also among the Persians, none was admitted to the Crown, but who were excellently skilled in Astrology; nay even at this day there is no King but hath his Mathematitian about him. So then, it is cleared, that there is no Council but what is ignorant of Art and Religion, that will condemn or decree any thing against Astrology, and how it hath been esteemed amongst the wisest and greatest of the people. And that ye may be the better confirmed in what hath been already said; I will give the names of most of the chiefest Patriarches, Fathers, Kings, Emperors and Philosophers, (according as that worthy and Noble Sir Christopher Heydon sets them down at the latter end of his Book, in defiance of judicial Astrology) that have been students in this noble Art.  

Astronomers and Astrologers from the Creation, or our first Father ADAM. Before CHRIST.  1 ADam. 
Anno 3032  2 Seth. 
Anno 2930  3 Enoch. 
Anno 2923  4 Kenan. 
Anno 2625  5 Mahalaleel. 
Anno 2617  6 Jared. 
Anno 2520  7 Henoch. 
Anno 2074  8 Zoroaster. 
Anno 2142  9 Methuselah. 
Anno 2366  10 Lamech. 
Anno 2311  11 Noah. 
Anno 2155  12 Sem. 
Anno 1803  13 Arphaxad. 
Anno 1875  14 Sale. 
Anno 1835  15 Heber. 
Anno 1875  16 Peleg. Pheleg. 
Anno 1966  17 Regu. 
Anno 1935  18 Sarug. 
Anno 1922  19 Nachor. 
Anno 1965  20 Therach. 
Anno 1878  21 A raham. 
Anno 1839  22 Isaac. 
Anno 1731  23 Jacob. 
Anno 1706  24 Albion Anglus. 
Anno 1704  25 Joseph. 
Anno 165●  26 Ninus rex assyriorum 
Anno 1679  27 Prometheus. 
Anno 1802  28 Orion. 
Anno 1802  29 Atlas. 
Anno 1792  30 Mercurius Trismegistus. 
Anno 1532  31 Hyas Atlantis filius. 
Anno 1500  32 Aesculapius. 
Anno 1462  Annubis rex Aegypti. 
Anno 1457  34 Petoseris. 
Anno 1420  35 Necepsus. 
Anno 1400  36 Melampus. 
Anno 1357  37 Orpheus. 
Anno 1300  38 Linus. 
Anno 1252  39 Aristeus. 
Anno 1250  40 Musaeus Eleusinus discipulus Orphei. 
Anno 1250  41 Endymion Latmius. 
Anno 1240  42 Phineus Phaenicus. 
Anno 1220  43 Chirion. 
Anno 1202  44 Hercules. 
Anno 1185  45 Homerus Chius. 
Anno 1072  46 Phidon Arginus. 
Anno 812  47 Homerus. 
Anno 742  48 Hesiodus. 
Anno 642  49 Epimenides. 
Anno 592  50 Thales milesiu. 
Anno 582  51 Solon. 
Anno 580  52 Anaximander milesiu. 
Anno 572  53 Aristeus. 
Anno 552  54 Theognis Megarensis. 
Anno 544  55 Xenophon. 
Anno 542  56 Pythagoras. 
Anno 520  57 Anaximenes milesiu. 
Anno 521  58 Democritus. 
Anno 506  59 Heraclitus Ephesius. 
Anno 503  60 Zamolxis Seytha, Pythagorae discipulus. 
Anno 490  61 Lucippus. 
Anno 482  62 Anaxagoras. 
Anno 480  63 Empedocles. 
Anno 458  64 Democritus Abderita. 
Anno 456  65 Empedocles Agregentinus. 
Anno 452  66 Aristarchus. 
Anno 452  67 Archelaus. 
Anno 450  68 Melissus. 
Anno 442  69 Meton Atheniensis. 
Anno 432  70 Criton. 
Anno 432  71 Protagoras. 
Anno 430  72 Helicon Cizicenus. 
Anno 420  73 Euclides Megarensis. 
Anno 420  74 Theetaetus Atheniensis. 
Anno 412  75 Antisthenes Atheniensis. 
Anno 412  76 Eudoxus. 
Anno 398  77 Polymarchus. 
Anno 398  78 Parmenides Eleates. 
Anno 382  79 Dicaearchus. 
Anno 342  80 Heraclides. 
Anno 340  81 Zenocrates. 
Anno 330  82 Conon Samius. 
Anno 330  83 Calippus Cydonius. 
Anno 330  84 Calisthenes. 
Anno 329  85 Theophrastus. 
Anno 320  86 Polemon. 
Anno 318  87 Timocharis. 
Anno 292  88 Euclides. 
Anno 292  89 Aristillus. 
Anno 290  90 Aratus. 
Anno 284  91 Cleostratus. 
Anno 282  92 Ptolomeus Philadelphus. 
Anno 280  93 Callimachus. 
Anno 480  94 Theocritus. 
Anno 280  95 Bion. 
Anno 280  96 Pletades vel septempoetae. 
Anno 270  97 Aristarchus ut alii volunt hoc tempore floruit. 
Anno 267  98 Dionysius. 
Anno 261  99 Eratosthenes. 
Anno 213  100 Archimedes. 
Anno 210  101 Sulpitius gallus Consul Romanus. 
Anno 160  102 Aristotherus. 
Anno 160  103 Colophonius. 
Anno 140  104 Nicander. 
Anno 140  105 Hipparchus Rhodius. 
Anno 126  106 Publius Nigidus. 
Anno 58  107 Theodosius. 
Anno 56  108 Theagenes. 
Anno 50  109 Vitruvius. 
Anno 50  100 Lucius Tarucius. 
Anno 50  111 Achoreus. 
Anno 49  112 C. Julius Caesar. 
Anno 47  113 Sosigenes. 
Anno 47  114 Silvius. 
Anno 47  115 M. Flavius. 
Anno 47  116 M. Manilius. 
Anno 30  117 Maternus Firmicus. 
Anno 5   

Astronomers and Astrologers since the Incarnation of our Saviour Christ, according as Sir Christopher Heydon doth record them.  1 C. Julius Higinus. 
Anno 5  2 Artemedorus. 
Anno 6  3 Germanius Augusti filius. 
Anno 10  4 Thrasillus. 
Anno 17  5 Gamaliel Christi discipulus Astrologus inclitus. 
Anno 34  6 Columella. 
Anno 50  7 Marinus Tyrius. 
Anno 60  8 Andromachus Cretensis. 
Anno 67  9 Agrippa Agris in Bythinia. 
Anno 90  10 Menelaus Romanus. 
Anno 90  11 Ascletarion. 
Anno 90  12 Proclus Licius. 
Anno 90  13 Mileus. 
Anno 96  14 Apollonius Tyraneus. 
Anno 98  15 Hermippus Beritius. 
Anno 120  16 Theon Alexandrinus. 
Anno 130  17 Claudius Ptolomeus. 
Anno 139  18 Ammonius. 
Anno 135  19 Antigonus. 
Anno 135  20 Cornelius fronto, 
Anno 150  21 Abidas. 
Anno 170  22 Apollinaris. 
Anno 170  23 Plotinus. 
Anno 160  24 Amelius Apanteus, 
Anno 270  25 Porphyrius. 
Anno 280  26 Jamblicus. 
Anno 290  27 Sopater Apameus. 
Anno 290  28 Dorotheus. 
Anno 290  29 Julius firmicus. 
Anno 320  30 Syrianus Alexandrinus. 
Anno 320  31 Eusebius Caesariensis. 
Anno 320  32 Theon Alexandrinus. 
Anno 360  33 Theon e Museo Aegyp. 
Anno 380  34 Apollonius Pergeus. 
Anno 380  35 Pappus. 
Anno 380  36 Procus Lycius. 
Anno 390  37 Isodorus. 
Anno 391  38 Ammonias. 
Anno 400  39 Heliodorus. 
Anno 400  40 Rufus festus Anienus. 
Anno 410  41 Cleomenes. 
Anno 427  42 Cyrillus. 
Anno 427  43 Possidonius Apher. 
Anno 470  44 Victorinus Aquitanus. 
Anno 470  45 Phyloponus. 
Anno 490  46 Dionysius Abbas Romanus. 
Anno 532  47 Proclus Byzantius. 
Anno 500  48 Hero Mathematicus. 
Anno 500  49 Olimpiodorus. 
Anno 500  50 Boetius. 
Anno 520  51 Marimes Neopolitanus. 
Anno 525  52 Victor Campanes 
Anno 540  53 Artuillus Scotus. 
Anno 710  54 Adelmus Balduinus Anglus. 
Anno 710  55 Beda. 
Anno 730  56 Albumaser. 
Anno 844  57 Albategnius. 
Anno 879  58 Arzahel Hispanus. 
Anno 879  59 Abbo floriacensis caenobii Abbas. 
Anno 1004  60 Campanus. 
Anno 1030  61 Hermanus Contractus. 
Anno 1040  62 Almeo Arabs. 
Anno 1048  63 Azophi Arabs. 
Anno 1061  64 Robertus Lotharingus Anglus. 
Anno 1091  65 Rodulphus Brughensis. 
Anno 1140  66 Abram Auenezre. 
Anno 1145  67 Aboali. 
Anno 1145  68 Jo. Hispalensis. 
Anno 1146  69 Thebit. 
Anno 1195  70 Hali Abanragel. 
Anno 1202  71 Alkindus. 
Anno 1235  72 Jo. de Sacrobusto Anglus. 
Anno 1240  73 Alphonsus rex Castiliae 
Anno 1252  74 Vitellia. 
Anno 1274  75 Rogerus Bacon Anglus. 
Anno 1280  76 Guido Bonatus. 
Anno 1284  77 Guilielmus de S. Godialdo. 
Anno 1293  78 Michael Scotus Anglus. 
Anno 1293  79 Jo. de Dacia. 
Anno 1300  80 Jo. Dank de Saxo jam. 
Anno 1300  81 Jo. de Ligneriis. 
Anno 1300  82 Rich. Walingforth S. Albani abbess, Anglus. 
Anno 1326  83 Jo. Estuidi. Anglicus. 
Anno 1340  84 Leupoldus de Austria. 
Anno 1340  85 Jo. Eligerus de Gondostenen. 
Anno 1350  86 Rober. de Lecestria Anglicus. 
Anno 1350  87 Jo de ginunden. 
Anno 1400  88 Petrus de Aliaco. 
Anno 1400  89 Henricus de Haffia. 
Anno 1400  90 Jo Blanchinus. 
Anno 1440  91 Georgius Purbachius. 
Anno 1462  92 Nicholaus de Cusa. 
Anno 1462  93 Io jovinianus Pontanus. 
Anno 1462  94 Jo. de Monte regio. 
Anno 1467  95 Eherhardus Schlusinger Tygurinus. 
Anno 1470  96 Abraham Zacuti. 
Anno 1470  97 Georgius Trapezuntius. 
Anno 1480  98 Marsilius Ficinus. 
Anno 1490  99 Bernardus Warterus. 
Anno 1490  100 Dominicus Maria Bononiensis. 
Anno 1490  101 Jo. Lucilius San tritten. 
Anno 1500  102 Jo. Ganivetus. 
Anno 1500  103 Omer Astronomus. 
Anno 1503  104 Jo. Muniz. 
Anno 1503  105 Lucius Bellantius Senensis. 
Anno 1503  106 Jo. Schreterus. 
Anno 1504  107 Jo. Warnerus. 
Anno 1512  108 Jo. Angelus. 
Anno 1512  109 Jo. Esizer. 
Anno 1514  110 Jo Stopherus. 
Anno 1530  111 Jo. Carion. 
Anno 1530  112 Lucas Gauricus. 
Anno 1530  113 Joachimus Ringelber gensis. 
Anno 1530  114 Achille P. Gassarus. 
Anno 1530  115 Aegidius Tischudus. 
Anno 1530  116 Orontius Fineus. 
Anno 1530  117 Andreas Stiborius. 
Anno 1534  118 Jo. Stabius. 
Anno 1534  119 P. Appianus. 
Anno 1534  120 Vitus Minshemius. 
Anno 1536  121 Albertus Pighius. 
Anno 1536  122 Hieronymus Fracastorius. 
Anno 1540  123 Jo. Virdungus Halfurtus. 
Anno 1540  124 Subastiames' Mansterus. 
Anno 1540  125 Jo. Dryander. 
Anno 1540  126 Franciscus Maurolicus. 
Anno 1540  127 Jo. Schonerus. 
Anno 1540  128 Georgius Joach Rheticus. 
Anno 1540  129 Gualterus Riffe. 
Anno 1540  130 Nicholaus Copernicus. 
Anno 1540  131 Michael Angelus Blondus. 
Anno 1544  132 Nicholaus Sophianus. 
Anno 1458  133 Angerius Ferrerius. 
Anno 1548  134 Casparus Penserus. 
Anno 1551  135 Erasmus Rheinholdus. 
Anno 1551  136 Jo. Roias'. 
Anno 1551  137 Cyprianus Leovicius. 
Anno 1551  138 Jacobus Millichius. 
Anno 1551  139 Michael Nostradamus'. 
Anno 1553  140 Nicholaus Simus. 
Anno 1553  141 Hier. Cardanus. 
Anno 1553  142 Genema Frisius. 
Anno 1556  143 Christoph. Stathmio. 
Anno 1556  144 Chonradus Dasypodius. 
Anno 1556  145 Jo. Stadius. 
Anno 1560  146 Petrus Nonnius. 
Anno 1560  147 Thomas Boderius. 
Anno 1560  148 Samuel Syderocrates. 
Anno 1560  149 Jo. Vrsus. 
Anno 1570  150 Joffrancus Officius. 
Anno 1570  151 Valentinus Nabod. 
Anno 1573  152 Jo. Garcus. 
Anno 1573  153 Gerardus Mercator. 
Anno 1573  154 Erasmus Scieckenfussius. 
Anno 1573  155 Nichodem. Frischrinus. 
Anno 1580  156 Cornelius Gemma. 
Anno 1580  157 Henricus Ranzovius. 
Anno 1582  158 Chistoph. Clevius. 
Anno 1582  159 Hier. Wolfius. 
Anno 1582  160 Bartholom. Scultetus. 
Anno 1582  161 Blundevil. 
Anno 1582  162 Jacob. Christmannus. 
Anno 1582  163 Jo. Henricus Rothmannus. 
Anno 1582  164 Sextus ab Heminga. 
Anno 1482  165 Franciscus junctinus. 
Anno 1590.  166 Gerardus Mercator. 
Anno 1590.  167 Peucerus. 
Anno 1590.  168 Bartholomeus Petiscus. 
Anno 1600  169 Henricus Buntingus. 
Anno 1600  170 Adrianus Romanus. 
Anno 1600  171 Origanus. 
Anno 1600  172 Thomas Finxius. 
Anno 1602  173 Enerartus. 
Anno 1602  174 Tycho Brache. 
Anno 1602  175 Aslacius. 
Anno 1602  176 Jo. Maginus. 
Anno 1602  177 Wright. 
Anno 1602  178 Mestlin. 
Anno 1602   
These are it seems, as many as this good man could hear of, before his time that were remarkable; yet let us not forget learned Cornelius Agrippa, and himself. Blagrave author of the Mathematical Jewel, Hartgil, reverend (both for learning and industry) Argol of Rome, and many innumerable others there are, which if I should undertake to express, this whole volume would not be able to contain half of them, besides those that have privately studied it in all ages, which never made their names vulgarly known.  
And let us not forget those of our times, here in our own Nation, (though we know not those that are in others.) viz. Mr Lily who hath put our Astrological rules (for the better instruction of our Nation) into English. Doctor Phiske, Mr. Booker, Capt. George Wharton, and Mr. Vin. Wing, and many others which for brevity sake I omit, and hasten to show you the antiquity of the Art, since you have already seen the lawfulness thereof, being allowed of by the Scripture, and the wisest and religiousest of men.   

SECT. V Demonstrating the antiquity of Astrology  
WE have seen already how Astrology hath been proved lawful by the Scripture and reason, not condemned by Counsels, but admired and honoured in all ages, by the wisest of the ancients; we come now to show its Antiquity, and from whence it had its first original; concerning this point, there hath been much controversy amongst Writers, but most hold, that it was first revealed to man in the infancy of the world by God; Aristotle deriveth it from the Egyptians, Tully from the Assyrians, other from the Sydonians, Chaldeans, Persians, Indians, Arabians and Greeks; but how ever it is most certain, if we will believe the ancientest Historiographers, that the Priests and Kings amongst the Egyptians, the Chaldeans among the Babylonians, the Magicians among the Persians, the Gymnosophists among the Indians, the chief Philosophers of Greece and Italy, and the Druids of France were all Astrologers, and esteemed by those Nations for the wisest men. 
The antiquity of Astrology.  But Josephus in his Antiquities, Lib. 1. Cap. 2. deriveth it from Adam and Seth: and that they taught it to their posterity, and that Seth was so well skilled therein, that foreseeing thereby the destruction of the world, first by Water, then by Fire, lest the knowledge should perish by the Flood, engraved it in two Pillars, the one of Stone, the other of Brick; and he farther witnesseth that of Stone to remain in Syria in his own time; and in the third Chapter of the same book, he affirmeth, that man lived so long before the Flood (by the permission of God) to learn Arts and Sciences, especially naming Astrology and Geometry, the which (saith he) Ediscere non potuissent, nisi sexcentis viverent annis, could not be learned under six hundred year's time, for these are studies that require much experience, and particular observation, which could not be done on an instant. Again in his eight Chapter of the same first book of his antiquities, he further affirmeth, that Abraham having learned this knowledge in Chaldea being the place of his birth, when he came into Egypt, he first taught the Egyptians the knowledge of Astrology and Arithmetic, 
How the Egyptians learned Astrology.  and since the Egyptians have been most exquisite therein, so that some Historians have believed Atlas' King of Egypt to be the first inventor thereof, others have thought Henoch and Atlas to be both one, but most Historiographers hold Atlas to be after the Flood. It is vain longer here to remain, since generally Astrology by most (especially the most judicious) Historiographers hold it to be derived from God to Adam, and that it is the most ancient of all Arts and Sciences, except Arithmetic; wherefore lest this discourse swell to a bigger bulk than I would willingly have it, I hasten to the fourth and last lesson I promised to show Mr. Homes, and that is to show him.   

SECT. VI That Astrology is the most profitablest study revealed under the sun to mortals.  
WHich I shall endeavour to make clear thus; first, That it is most profitable for the knowledge of moral Philosophy, viz. of ourselves and others. Secondly, For natural Philosophy. Thirdly, For Physic. Fourthly, For Health. Fifthly, For Husbanddry. Sixthly, For giving a reason for Climacterical years (which other Arts cannot) and other things. Seventhly, and lastly, For Miletary Discipline.  
First, 
Astrology profitable for moral Philosophy.  that it is most profitable for the knowledge of moral Philosophy, Mr. Homes will not deny (if he know any thing in the Art,) that the constitution of the body, and the disposition of the mind is by Astrology known; so that hereby we receive a double benefit, viz. First, admonition to refrain what may prove obnoxious and hurtful to our health. Secondly, encouragement to apply ourselves to that whereunto we are born apt by nature, besides we may also be warned hereby, of what may cause the mind by ill government to offend others. And for felicity the chief end of moral Philosophy; no Art or Science can compare with Astrology, for it teacheth a man what pertains to the goods of the body and mind, and so also to moderate the unruly affections, whose violence carrieth away the mind from that golden mean wherein virtue dwells and keeps her place; so likewise in the external goods, it resolveth a man what hopes or likelihood by his own industry, or otherways he hath to attain to the riches of this world; and also teacheth him how to increase the same, by what means, at what time, and in what place it will be best for him, or most profitable to this intent or purpose. So that then ye see Astrology to comprehend more in one part, than all the Arts in the world put together, in any or all parts.  

For natural Philosophy.  Secondly, For natural Philosophy, it bringeth no less help hereunto, then to the former, for hereby the Philosopher cometh to know God the upholder and  Creator of all things, by the constant inchangeable motion of the heavens; and the corruption and generation of all things, by the motion of ☉, ☽ and other Planets in the Zodiac; and that there is a certain prefixed time of every one's life that is born, allotted by the Stars, and that this is divers according to the nature of every constellation, and the measure of every proper revolution; as also the reason of the ebbing and flowing of the Sea, by the motion of ☽. He comes also by Astrology to know the rise of Meteors, the motion of Comets, and innumerable other things, much conducing to the furtherance of his knowledge, experience and skill. But this is so clear, I hasten to what is further to be said in the praise and utility of Astrology, lest I spend too much time in confuting such weak stuff, as is this discourse of Mr. Homes, against so apparent a Noble and excellent Art.  
Thirdy, For Physic, for all that knows any thing in Astrology, can acquaint Mr. Homes, 
Astrology profitable for Physic.  as also his great friend Galen (as most falsely he accuses him (in his 115. page) to condemn Astrology as Sophistical, when indeed he himself appears no other at the best, to wrong so worthy a man.) That he that shall administer Physic when the Sun comes to the equinoctial points, or in the Canicular or Dog-days and the like, knows very little either in the one or other, viz. Physic or Astrology; and is rather to be accounted a fool then a Physician; and further, Galen admonisheth men not to trust themselves with that Physician that is not versed in Astrology; and Hypocrates also sayeth, that that Physician which is ignorant in Astrology, is not fully, nor can he be perfectly known in his Art; for without Astrology, he shall never be able to give Physic safely, viz. when to purge by evacuation or vomit, or Phlebotomy, or for what humours, or in what quantity, neither can he know or come to the understanding of the chief Pillar of his Art, viz. The true cause of the Malady without it, neither with it, (if well learned therein) can he err, besides Galen further affirmeth, that Physic given at unseasonable times, doth not only little avail or help, but often times prove very hurtful, even to the endangering of the life of the Patient; and that these times are only to be known and judged by the Stars. Fernelius (a learned Physician) doth hereunto also condescend, as also Ficinus; for there is nothing more certain, than that Astrology doth plainly deliver rules for all the parts of Physic abovesaid, (which Mr. Homes I am confident (if any whit read therein) dare not but confess) and not only so, but teacheth also the critial days, without which they cannot be known with any certainty; wherefore it is, that those Physicians ignorant in Astrology, conclude the seventh and fourteenth days to be dangerous, when most times they are deceived, and so consequently apply contrary remedies to their Patients, much to their prejudice, 
The reason of Critical days.  if not absolute destruction: The reason is, the ☽ by her various motion cometh sometimes sooner, and sometimes latter, to her □ and ☍ or quadrat and opposite part of the place she was in at the beginning of the disease, viz. Sometimes she comes to her □ in seven days, sometimes not till the eight or ninth day, other times at the sixth days; and to her ☍ sometimes at the fourteenth day, sometimes at the thirteen day, other times not till the sixteenth day. I would feign now Mr. Homes, you would show what Art in the whole earth, is more beneficial to Physic, than Astrology, etc. but I hasten to the remaining proofs.  
Fourthly, For health, 
Astrology profitable for health.  which none but the most ignorant and malicious will deny, since the constitution of the body the only ground, wise Physicians go upon and look first too; that, that foundation being laid, they may then fall to the rebuilding of the Patient, otherwise (as you have heard) destruction (like a house founded on the sand) is to be expected. Then consequently the most envious cannot but confess and acknowledge it to be the most profitable thing for our health under the Sun. Wherefore then let us see whether the husbandman will acknowledge it to be beneficial to him in his way of living, viz. Husbandry.  

Astrology profitable for Husbandry.  Fifthly, Husbandry, and first let me ask him, whether he lops his Trees from the time the Sun declines from our Horizon, till he again reenters the equinoctial point? or if he knows not (if he should) that it will not grow again? or whether he use to sow Pease in the increase of ☽? or if so, whether they will then ever leave blooming or blossoming? or whether therefore he doth not observe and remember to set them in the wain, or decrease of ☽. Nay, it is reported of the women in the North, both of England and Scotland, that they diligently observe a time of the Moon to set their Eggs, that they may all come to good; and furthermore, let me ask the Husbandman, whether he observeth not a time to graft, and prune his Trees? but this is so common, that to spend more time hereunto, were to no purpose.  
Sixthly, 
For rendrin a reason for Climacterical years  For rendering a reason for Climacterical years, it happening by the profection of the Planets and Horoscope, ascendant or first House (as ye may call it) to the ☍ or □ aspects or their places in Nativities, or by the motion of ♄ if he have any power in the Nativity, for Ptolemy and the wisest in this Art, give ♄ as much power in the decree several of years, as the Sun hath in months, or the ☽ in days; and if his course be observed, it will be found finished much about the same number of years, as the Moons is in days; and further, that ♄ in every seven years comes either to □ or ☍ of his place in the Radix of Nativities. And further know, that if there be no danger (as we find by experience) of some men's lives, at these years, they have either some of the beneficial Planets in their eight House, or the direction of the ascendant, 
Look Ranzovius on this subject.  or Aphetical places are free from all impediment and affliction, of the interficient and malignant constellations.  
Seventhly, and lastly, 
Astrology profitable for military affairs.  for military Discipline, History is full of examples herein, and for brevity's sake (because I will hasten to conclude this first Chapter, that I may proceed to Mr. Homes his second Section) I will hear content myself with this one, which the Indian Histories show forth unto us; which is, that Columbus having the Art of Astrology, and being in a strait for want of Victual, together with the whole Army of the King of Spain Ferdinand; and foreseeing an Eclipse of the ☽ within few days to happen; threatened the Indians he would send infinite plagues amongst them, if they speedily relieved them not; in token whereof, they should at such a time see the ☽ light taken from them, which they at first slighted, but when they saw according to the former words, that the Moon began to be darkened, and grew so more and more, and being ignorant of the cause thereof, did not only send them the victual they formerly retained from them, but also threw themselves at Columbus feet, ask forgiveness: So than you have had (as brief as may be) shown unto you, what Astrology is, that it is an Art, and a lawful Art, allowed of by Scripture; the antiquity of it, and the utility of it; there is it may be some Arts, that may be beneficial or helpful to another; but you see both positively and conclusively, that Astrology is generally helpful to all Arts and Sciences, nay what other study in the whole world in this point is like it or able to compare with it? and seeing it is so, very indiscreetly and unfitly, doth Mr. Homes join it or compare it with Augury, Auruspicie, Auspicie, Pullarie, Necromancy, Sortelegie, Onieromantie or Palmistry, which are no Arts, as he clearly seethe this is; and that by the judgement of the wisest men and greatest Philosophers; wherefore if he will be wiser than all these he hath been shown, by my consent, he shall be elected the 8th wise man; wherefore seeing truth and authority of these, as well as Scripture, standeth with it, and distinguisheth it from these sortelegies, haphazards and chances; it mattereth not what either he doth or can say, or do, against it.    

CHAP. II. In Answer to the opinions of the learned touching Astrology; wherein is further shown, the legality of Astrology; that the Stars are both signs and causes; and that Mr Homes his quoting the Fathers and learned, is merely fallacious, and envious, and no wise available to his intent and purpose.  
I Am come now to Mr Homes his second Section, wherein we shall see how he vents his malice most invectively all along against Astrology; thinking he bringeth the learned to condemn it, but what are the learned Schoolmen, or great Philosophers to me, or their say in this matter, 
Truth and reason, the touchstone whereby all controversies are decided.  further than they have truth and reason on their side? If they follow their own opinions and conceits without sound reason and warrant, I see no warrant or reason why I should regard either them, their words or their quoters.  

SECT. I. Wherein is further shown, the legality of Astrology.  
HIs first learned man (then) he gins with, is Tostatus, who he saith in his Commentary on Levit, 19 Quest. 28, 29, etc. hath these words, the which Doctor Willet gives him, viz. Of things which are (as to us) accidental, as the success of business, or their causes internal, as men's will and free choice, as to undertake a journey, or to build, or not build, predictions are not only uncertain, but superstitious: and the same is to be said of casting of Nativities by the conjunction of the Planets; but if he had considered what reason or ground Tostatus hath for these words, he had never thus laid them open; and I much wonder he being a Divine, he had not first himself considered and weighed the text, which that he may now do (Nunquam sera est ad bonos mores via) I will here set it down: Regard not them that have familiar spirits, neither seek after Wizards, to be defiled by them; I am the Lord your God, Levit. 19.31. where we clearly see there is no part of the text, once in the least mentioneth or meaneth Astrology; it is against the seeking after those that have familiar Spirits, and Wizards; 
Look what Astrology is, pag. 2.  now that Astrology doth not in the least savour hereof, is clear in what hath been already said, and the definition thereof, see Ptolemy's own words at the beginning of my discourse in the second page: So that except the rest of his learned men (as he calleth them) can bring better proof or reason then this first, he had better have been silent, then thus to be overshot.   

SECT. II. Wherein is shown that the Stars are signs and Causes.  
HE than brings Doctor Willet (to cast his squib also at this strong Tower, viz. Astrology) in these words, all manner of conjecturing (which saith he is meant by Astrology) is not unlawful, whereof any Natural or Divine cause can be yielded, as first there be Natural signs in the heavens and air, as of the alteration of weather, of winds, of rain, etc. This doth no whit hurt it, and is only a flash that at the most doth but whiz about it, and at the last after a great crack, vanisheth in smoke: mark but the words, all manner of conjecturing is not unlawful, etc. and saith Mr Homes, see he calleth it (meaning Astrology) but conjecturing only; but doth Mr Homes conjecture it to be no other? if he do, it is his ignorance; I hope the reader sees by this time what Astrology is and gins to be as much in love with it again, as ever before by him discouraged, as also out of love with his cavils; but this is not all, when you see him stripped of his Scripture proofs, you will tell me something then; when you see him as naked left, as my nail, of all his sophistications, you will tell me then you are worse in love with him, (I'm confident) when his ugly malice is discovered against this most apparent truth: But let me not forget myself, and spend too much time about him, but return to the discourse in hand; which is, that since there hath been already shown, that the Stars have the applause of power on the natural things of this world, as also the great Ptolemy (whose word in this case I believe will be taken before Doctor willet's, or Mr. Homes his) gives his word for it; 
Astrology no way unlawful.  besides experience also, as above shown, (and you know experientia docet) there is no more to be said, but that Astrology is not (as Doctor Willet sayeth) unlawful; neither doth he in any wise condemn it, for in his following words he tells us, There are natural signs in the heavens and air which cause rain, wind, etc. The cause of which, is no other than the influence of the Stars, which if he deny, all Writers on this Art are contradicted, as also the Scripture to boot, if then this be not a strong Argument, let himself judge.  
But to clear this point more fully, what sayeth Mr. Homes, 
Nota. As anon shall appear.  is the cause of Rain, alteration of Air, and the like? if his Master Doctor Willet did not in these words show it, me thinks he should not have left the Reader unsatisfied; and not only so, but have proved the Stars to have no Influence thereon, nor to be causes of these alterations, and then his argument had been good; but certainly he that will carp at such trivial words as these, would not have omitted that, could he but sufficiently have proved it, which since he could not, or did not; he must give me leave to prove they are. 
The Stars signs and causes.  And first let me give you Moses judgement herein, who plainly tells us, The Stars are for signs and seasons, Gen. 1.14. which Mr. Homes will say is fulfiled in the words following, viz. And God made two great lights, the one to rule, the Day, and the other to rule the Night Gen. 1.16. To which then I answer, by way of Quere, to what end then are these invincible,  and innumerable hosts of Heaven? were they made for no other use then to gaze on? the ☉ and ☽ will sufficiently serve our turn for matter of light, if we look no further into their uses; but the Scripture further putteth this matter quite out of doubt if we will believe Gods own word, Joh 28.31. For he speaking of his Omnipotent power, asketh his servant Job, whether he, or any one else Can restrain the influence of the Pleyades, or lose the bands of Orion: 
Saint Austin on Job.  On which words St. Austin referreth all men to the study of Astrology, for the understanding of that place; and not only so, but shows us that under these two constellations, the Lord doth comprehend the influence of all the Celestial host, figuratively expressing pars pro toto; and to show you by experience the verity hereof, if you will neither believe Augustine, Moses, nor God himself, except you see and feel; (not to insist long on this point, which is cleared by such strong and invincible witnesses; one whereof is able to be sufficient testimony against all Mr. Homes his learned Judges and condemners of Astrology) For confirming and clearing hereof, than I might here again instance that palpable experience we have of the ebbing and flowing of the Sea, by the influence of the ☽ (as abovesaid) but to manifest it yet further, let him call to mind the increase and decrease of shellfish, the mutation and variation of times, and innumerable other effects of the Stars, which (if time and conveniency would permit) might be recorded, and let him then study the cause hereof, and he will then without doubt be of an other tenant; let him observe also when ♄ and ☉ is in □ or ☍, or when ♂ and ♀ is in □ or ☍ or ♃ and ☿ are so posited, and let him tell me then, what alterations they produce in the air both by Rain, Snow, Wind, Tempests, Thundering and Lightning, and the like according to their several positions, the nature of signs and houses and mansions they are in; (which if he be not altogether ignorant of the Art, he may daily see) these and the like effects, are most vulgarly known by experience, so that therefore he might even as well have confessed those signs he speaketh of, to be the Stars, and causes their influence, since he doth not, nor cannot show me any other thing they are, without wronging and slandering the Art; and contradicting the most learned therein, as also the Fathers, St. Austin, Moses, nay and GOD himself; and if this appears not then to all the judicious, an apparent Doctrine of Devils; 
Mr. Homes proved rather to be a teacher of the Doctrine of Devils, than Astrologers.  let the meanest of capacities judge, but who could indeed look for better stuff in so vile a mean warehouse; or that beast not to be a monster, or at least to be shunned as very obnoxious, that hath HELL written in its forehead? for the title of his Bell and Dragon, (which he hopeth shall devour Astrology, with other frivolous and indeed unlawful Arts, like an unconscionable judge, condemneth the good with the bad) is DEMONOLOGY, OR THE DOCTRINE OR LANGUAGE OF DEVILS; I say, is not this most wickedly, or else most ignorantly done of Mr. Homes, to deny these effects and operations of the Stars abovesayed, to proceed from the Stars? and seeing it is so, of necessity than must Mr. Homes' Clerks in this point fail, who have so palpably the word of God against them; he might as well then have left out that other addition of Doctor willet's; where he saith, that the Stars have not the same influence in summer, and in Winter, Spring and Autumn, and so consequently will conclude them. First, not to be signs (contradicting Moses, and the word of God, Gen. 1.14. as abovesaid.) Secondly, Nor causes, quia ex unitate causae sequeretur similitudo effectus, of the same cause there should follow the same effect; but there followeth not the same effect from the same signs, appears by experience. As much to say, the Stars are neither causes nor signs, because they produce not fruits in Winter, as well as in Summer, or because they cause not Snow in Summer, or Buds and Blossoms in Winter. O rare cavil! but since he is already, by what is abovesaid, confuted; I shall here add nothing but this, that since the question is, whether they are causes and signs, because that passage in the first of Gen. manifests they are signs, I will (if he will be convinced by the word of God) here give him to know they are also causes, I will hear the heavens, and the heavens shall hear the earth, and the earth the corn and the wine, etc. Hos. 2.2. And in another place, the increase of the earth is referred to the Influence of the Sun and the Moon, Deut. 33.14. By all which we may clearly see (unless blinded with malice and wilfulness) that they are both signs and causes, of all our earthly enjoyments and happinesses; Et si scriptura, & ipse deus nobiscum, quis contra nos.   

SECT. III. Wherein his allegations against the ground of the Art is condemned; and his bringing St. Augustine and Galen against it, proved fallacious, injurious and malicious; and how far we ought to attribute to the power of the Stars.  
SEeing then it is most clearly so, that the Stars are signs and causes as above said, what need these envious carpers or malicious gainsayers of the truth be heeded or regarded; but let their perverse rags of paper perish with themselves, not worthy the least remembrance; and indeed had it not been rightly to inform the vulgar, and to make them see, that high language serveth not to condemn truth, I had buried both them and their filthy rags in perpetual oblivion, but I hope since they must be remembered, it will be but for their disgrace, not Chronicled for their worthiness, but perpetual infamy.  
But this is not all, he comes next to condemn Astrology by Keckerman, and that with as weak arguments as he did the rest, Keckerman (saith he) a most learned Philosopher, and Christian, although he favours some things which men now a days call part of Astrology, did not in all his two great Volumes in fol. of Arts and Sciences, set forth any Astrology; a wise story indeed, because Keckerman writeth not of Astrology, therefore there is no such thing, but if Keckerman hath not, yet as wise and as learned and greater Philosophers have, 
Look the second Chapter of this Treatise, Sect. 2.  as if the being of Astrology depended on his writing hereof, or a whit farther from being an heavenly Science and a lawful Art, because he omitteth it, fine Logic and rare reason, if rightly understood, and the depth thereof throughly searched! because Aristotle knew not the reason of the ebbing and flowing of the Sea, therefore no body else doth, neither is there such a thing in Nature; and because Moses writeth not of the creation of Angels, Ergo, there is none, O profound and invincible reason? but it savoureth so little of reason, that it is rather rime-Dogril, Brains and Stairs, or hot and block, I had almost said head, that I might make (at least) sense thereof, if neither rhyme nor reason. But to proceed, (he saith) he is sure he hath these words against it, Manent tamen, etc. the Stars abide, as of other sublunary effects, so of effects in man, the common and remote cause which many ways may be hindered, not only by the first cause, God, but also by particular causes, partly in the Heavens, partly in the Air and other Elements; so that the Predictions of Astrologers are with ifs and and's, etc. which is as much to the purpose as comes just to nothing; for first, that God can alter the course of the Stars there is no ginger but will confess (but whether he will or no, or ordinarily uses so to do, is the question) so that Mr Homes gets little by this querk since he affirmeth nothing that any ginger will deny: But if Mr Keckerman maketh it not appear what particular causes hinder the effects of the Stars, me thinks for the strength of his argument Mr Homes should have done it; for it standeth not with any reason, that subordinate causes as are the Air and other Elements, should predominate or rule over the first moving causes, viz. the Stars; this the weakest capacity that understands the Art will affirm, and you have but now heard that the effects of the Stars cause alteration and mutation of the Air, as we also daily see by experience; and therefore his assertion, that the principles of Astrology are not confirmed on true principles, is here also condemned as erroneous, false and malicious; 
Carelessness in Astrologers cause error.  for we see Astrologers seldom fail in their judgements, except when they swerve from the rules of Art, wherefore Alsteds' assertion also is here no less simple than the rest, who saith, Astrologers are also often deceived, and what then, because a man that never was at London, misseth his way, once or twice, shall he conclude there is no such place; sure it should rather teach him to observe diligently his road, and not turn on the right hand nor the left, and if the Astrologers would as warily observe their rules, this objection of the ignorant had never been thought on. But Mr Homes, is Divinity false and no wise to be heeded; because there is so many errors and schisms crept into the Church? or because every one attaineth not to a full perfection of the Spirit? or because humanum est errare, man is frail and subject to failings? no sure, experience, reason and truth teacheth us to the contrary: Wherefore he might very well have omitted these slender reasons, as also that place of Galen, where he saith, sophisticum est, it is sophistical, but how? not as having no verity therein, but in the superstitious abuse thereof, for you see clearly in the first Chapter of his Treatise, Galen holdeth that man a fool, rather than a Physician, that is not an ginger: and in all his works hath Astrology in great esteem and applause, and moreover testifieth his own practice hereof, especially, lib. 3. de diebus decret. chap 2, 3, 4, 5, & 6. and the like: So he brings St. Austin to condemn it, thus in these words in his Treatise De Doctrina Christiana, lib. 2. chap. 21, 22. est magnus error, & magna dementia, superstitio: Astrology is a great error madness, and superstition, it is clear that St. Austin here speaketh of the superstitious use thereof, as in attributing fatal necessity thereto, and in too much trusting and confiding therein, as may appear by what you have already heard St. Austin saith of it; but to clear it more fully, St. Austin confesseth that before his conversion, he followed the heresies of the Manichees, who maintained the Stars to be adored and prayed unto, 
Lib. 5. chap. 4. & lib. 20. ch. 6. contra Faustum Manichaeum.  and therefore to reclaim the multitude, which went thus a whoring after the ways of the Heathen, this good man useth these words to recall them, and unite them to the belief of God: But I hope Mr Homes will not say that Astrologers are thus superstitious and wicked; he that saith Astrology (as I said before) is any other thing then what is delivered by Ptolemy, in the second page of this Treatise, knoweth not what Astrology is; Neither will he affirm I hope, that St. Austin condemns Astrology, but the superstitious abuse thereof, which is clear, for he delivereth five opinions concerning destiny.  
First, that by destiny is understood the providence, 
Lib. 5. chap. 1. De civitate Dei.  will and power of God, and therefore he warneth the Astrologers, that they continue their opinions, but correct their tongues, for through custom of speech the vulgar commonly understood nothing by the word fate or destiny, but the inevitable power of the Stars.  
The second is quite contrary to the former, ascribing all to the absolute power of the Stars, without the will of God: But this opinion derogating from the omnipotent power of God, and his providence in all our actions, he saith aught to be rejected, not only by those that profess the true Religion, but which serve or worship any gods at all, though never so false.  
The third, so attributeth to the decrees of the Stars, that yet they believe them to have this power in such sort derived unto them from God, that thereby they can, and do determine of us and our actions, as they will themselves: which opinion he thinketh is very wrongfully held of heaven, to maintain such wickedness to be, as it were enacted in that most shining Senate, that were the like acted in any Court or State on earth, were worthy to be subverted.  
The fourth opinion is, that the Stars have neither power nor will to operate on us at their own pleasures, but as they do necessarily execute that which God imposeth upon them; which St. Austin accounteth more intolerable than the other, for that it teacheth us to conceive that of God, which they hold unworthy to impute unto the Stars, 
Lib. 2. de Gen. cap. 17.  against such he sufficiently declareth.  
These opinions, St. Augustine renounceth, as they rather utterly deny the power and providence of God, or, as they impute absolute rule and dominion of the Stars immediately over the will of man, necessarily enforcing us in all our actions; or as they throw all our sins upon God, whilst they make him by the Stars inevitably to enforce us to evil: wherefore had Mr Homes (as it had besit a learned man) first examined his Authors with good observation and deliberation, and not so readily taken hold on every thing he finds delivered by others, that he imagineth will serve for his turn; I'm confident, he had not thus inconsiderately alleged St Augustine against Astrologers, for (as I defined before in the second page, what Astrology is) so the same Ptolemy confesseth the Stars not to have any fatality as working by or with a fatal necessity on the will or soul of man, as much as St. Austin himself; giving them no farther operation in these matters than the most orthodox and learned Divines do.  
The fifth opinion is, which neither esteemeth the Stars of their own wills, 
How fare we ought to attribute to the power of the Stars.  (as if they were living souls) to decree future events, nor necessarily to usurp power over our minds, but only to signify the inclinations of the elements, and of all things compounded of them.  
Now that St. Austin meant not such Astrologers as deny necessity (as Mr Homes would feign persuade the vulgar to believe;) but only ascribe power unto the Stars to work upon sublunary bodies; is evident by his words, Non usque quaque absurde dici possit, 
Lib. 5. cap. 6. De civitate Dei.  ad solas corporum differentias, afflatus quosdam valere sidereos, sicut in solaribùs accessibus, & recessibus, videmus etiam ipsius anni temporae variari & lunaribus incrementis, & decrementis angeri & minui quaedam genera rerum; sicut Echinos, & conchas, & mirabiles aestus oceani, non autem, & animi voluntates positionibus syderum subdi: where we see nothing exempted from subjection to the Stars that is bodily, but only our spiritual part: 
St. Austin concurreth with Astrologers. lib. 2. cap. 5. De Gen.  And he ascribeth not this power to the Stars in general, as that their specifical virtues are not possible to be known to man, for he concurreth with Astrologers, that the quality of ♄ is cold, etc. as you may farther see at the beginning of this Chapter. So that you may see how falsely and injuriously he brings in St. Augustine against Astrology; by which (I will only add this) the Reader may clearly see the envy and malice of Mr. Homes, how he studieth (by the learned and Fathers) to persuade his reader against this most apparent truth, viz. ASTROLOGY.   

SECT IU. Wherein Astrology is defended against his allegations, from Mr. Perkins his words.  
MAster Homes comes then to tell us Mr Perkins a learned man and famous, writ a Treatise against it, so did Melancthon, a greater scholar than he, and as knowing a Divine, writ as much and more for it, than he ever did against it; what if I should tell him of some that have writ against the Scripture, is the Word of God therefore false and to be rejected? he saith Mr Perkins calls it profaneness, and idolatry; but let the Reader seriously and diligently but observe what hath been here already said, and he cannot but understand Mr Perkins spoke only against the abuse of the Art, not as it is in its self; against the superstitious confidence and trust in the Stars, not the searching and studying of the influences and effects of the Stars on elementary bodies; and as much as this comes to, all that study the Art will confess, Ergo, Mr Homes is mistaken to think by these words of Mr Perkins to condemn Astrology, since he saith no more than all Astrologers themselves will say; wherefore to dwell longer here, were but vain and superfluous; and to as little purpose as to bring a man a bag-pudding when he hath filled his belly with pie. We come therefore now to his eighth learned man which condemns Astrology, which he tells us is Mr Geree, who hath (saith he) written a Treatise against Astrology, I could if need were, cite as many, and more that have written against the Divine word of God, than he can make appear hath written against Astrology; shall any man be therefore so impudently wicked to conclude the word of God is not true, or not to be credited, no sure, this were altogether as impudently wicked as Mr Homes his sequel or conclusion is ridiculous, sophistical and envious. Mr Chamber also writ a book against Astrology, which I wonder he remembered not also, but that learned Sir Christopher Heydon returned him such a repulse, as that none of the Antagonists or ill willers to the Art, ever durst undertake to give a reply thereunto; for he doth not only refute Mr Chamber, but also Picus mirandula, Melton, Perkins, and Geree to boot; wherefore I refer all those that would be further resolved herein, and desire to discern between truth and falsehood, to the perusal of the discourse itself, it being a piece of that exquisite wit and learning, that none can be able to surpass it, if (in the whole world) be worthy to compare with it; it was never as yet undertaken to be answered, neither I believe will it ever be attempted by any of these cavilling punies, that gainsay indeed what they know not, but by tradition or Theorically, and if practically, it is so slenderly known by them, that they imagine the Art to be no better then mere Conjuration, and the Artists Conjurers.   

SECT. V Wherein his cavilling Mr. Briggs, and others, are convinced.  
WE now come (not to be too tedious) to hear what he can tell us of learned Mr. Briggs, against Astrology, which is briefly thus much, That after an earnest desire to attain the perfection thereof, he seriously applied himself unto the study, but in conclusion, when he thought to have had joy of his wearied labours, he was satisfied with nothing but uncertainty, and meeting an other ginger, told him how he had been deceived in the rules of the Art, (who for his comfort) concluded also as he did, that there was no certainty therein, upon which he left off further studying thereof. Now I would very feign know of any man (which shall be all the answer I shall give to this sophistical cavil) whether by these words Astrology, be convinced as uncertain, because Mr. Briggs and another, or (suppose half a dozen more) could find no certainty therein; when Ptolemy, Galen, Hypocrates, St. Austin, and thousands more, found not only certainty therein, but concluded and agreed that it was the most beneficial and pleasant Art under the Sun; and whereas he citys Phavorinus against Astrology in these words, Aut adversa eventura dicunt, etc. which is, They foretell either things of prosperity or adversity; if of prosperity, and they fail, than thou shalt be prosperous or happy in hoping for that good, if of adversity, and hit not right, than thou wert miserable in fearing in vain, etc. which agrees with what he sayeth Mr. Briggs would undertake to do, viz To prove the rules of Astrology contradictory, viz. It shall be so, and it shall not be so, which is the merest cavil of all the rest, to say, Ergo Astrology is uncertain. I will undertake then a greater matter than Mr. Briggs, for let there be what Art or Science that Mr. Homes can devise nominated (though never so true) I will undertake to speak as much, nay and with more proof against it, than all these his learned men hath done in this his Character of the present times (he forgot to put in those that deny the truth; nay, and not only so, but sophistically and maliciously maintain it to their utmost endeavours, thinking the citing of St. Austin to be proof enough to terrify the Reader from undertaking this study, or continuing therein, not observing the words of his Author, 
Look the first Chapter of his treatise.  and together with the Fathers to include the Counsels, but tells us not how and upon what grounds and reasons they disallowed of the Art, lest then his malice be discovered. Wherefore let me then for a conclusion, as well to this Chapter, as his cavils, ask him these two questions; whether a man may not (if enviously disposed) speak against the most manifest truths, nay against the very word of God, and wrest the Scripture to their own inclinations and intentions? And secondly, if he be proved hereof guilty, in the next Chapter, to wrest the Scripture sense to confute Astrology; whether he be not more fit to be brought under the lash of the Law, than Astrologers? so have you his learned men against Astrology confuted; we come now to the main point of all, viz. whether Astrology be condemned by the word of God?    

CHAP. III. Wherein his divine proofs against Astrology, are examined and confuted.  
BUt before I begin, I shall desire the Reader to have a special care to remember what Astrology is, which is now in controversy, and either to be confuted and condemned, or defended and cleared; the definition whereof you have at the beginning of the first Chapter, for otherwise our pains and arguments are but frivolous on either side; wherefore I commend Mr. Homes in that he did not first set down the state of his question, before he began to confute it; but thinking pleno ore, to condemn Astrology, will be enough to scare the Reader from the study thereof, leaveing him to consider what it is he condemns, although he be altogether ignorant of the same; that so his words may have the more force, and take the deeper impression in the Readers heart to believe what he would feign, and as much as in him lies, studies to maintain.  

SECT. I. Wherein his first Scripture proof, viz. Deut. 18 verse. 10. is convinced and cleared, no wise to condemn Astrology.  
COncerning his first proof, Deut. 18.10. I have formerly in my reply to Raunces' Declaration against Astrology said something, and referred the Reader, to that never to be enough honoured and remembered, the learned Sir Christopher Heydon, to be further satisfied in the rest of his divine proofs, who in his answer to Mr. Chamber, hath so excellently and learnedly handled, that the wit of man is not able to perform better, and that so learned a piece may not be kept from the knowledge of the vulgar, under the cloud of silence, I will here along in the confutation of Mr. Homes his divine proofs, use his very arguments and words (as near as I can) against the same places alleged by Mr. Chamber.  

His first proof of Scripture refelled.  His First proof than is Deut. 18.10. There shall not be found among you any one that useth Divination, or an observer of times; which words saith he, by the common consent of the learned of all sorts, Signify Astrology and Astrologers; and for the which sins, 
Look the seventh page of my reply to Raunce his Declaration against Astrology.  the Nations were driven out before the Children of Israel: Now that you shall see how fare Mr. Homes is mistaken to think hereby to persuade the world against Astrology (as I said before) I will give you that (learned, and never enough remembered) Gentlemen words, against Mr. Chamber hereon, viz. Sir. Christopher Heydon Knight, 
Chap. 2. page 41. and forward of his piece in defence of Astrology against Mr. Chamber.  where he saith, Picus urgeth that Achinas' understandeth the word in the Original, to signify such, as observe lucky and unlucky hours, which our English translate, a regarder of times, and Tremelius, Planetarius, and from hence they think they have pregnant evidence to condemn Astrology by this Law.  
I may reckon up here also Mr. Homes his Mercer, R. Kimchy, and Schindler, who, saith he, take the words in the worst sense (which I may very well say indeed, and shall appear by and by) viz. The curious and Diabolical Arts, ●s Magis of the Egyptians, 
In the second page of this treatise, you have it defined.  Ergo saith Mr. Homes, Astrology is not lawful, but what affinity astrology hath with Diabolical practices; I desire the Reader to remember what Astrology is. But to proceed with Sir Christopher Heydons discourse hereon, saith he, But notwithstanding all this, I will make it appear, that these Translations are of small force; and being admitted, little or nothing impeach this Art.  
And first, I encounter them with the authority of the Church, even from the time of Moses until they wrote, being wholly against them. For to begin with the Septuagint, They have Translated the word Gnonen, in this place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth Augurare, or to divine by the voice and flying of Birds; St. Hierome and the vulgar expounded it, of such as divine by observation by Dreams. Pagnine in his Translation interpreteth it Hariolus, by a general name, or such a one, as divineth at the Altar by sacrifices. Arias Montanus, useth the word Praestigiator, that is 〈◊〉 Juggler or Cosiner, 
All these interpretations Mr. Homes himself confesses is given to the word.  that wi●● Legerdemain deceiveth the eyesight. (See that that 〈◊〉 also confessed by Mr. Hom●● himself) So that besides a●● antiquity, and consent of the whole Church against him, we see that divers men have diversely interpreted the word; and therefore I leave it to the judgement of the Reader, whether we are to give credit to the new Expositors, rather than to the ancient and learned Hebrews themselves, who best understood their own Language, or to the common understanding of the Fathers and the Church, even from the first, until these men (which hath been long since) expounded it otherwise then all that had gone before them. And now to come to the English Translation, as we have it expressed in our Bibles; see with what reason and sound arguments Mr. Homes is silenced, who is not only thus mistaken in the signification of the word, but most slanderously intrudeth Astrologers with, or at least makes them the same with Wizards, and those that have familiar spirits, for saith he, So that indeed (as 'tis in Levit. 20.6.) to follow such kind of Arts, (speaking before of Divination, by observation of times, and juggling which he all along concludes to be Astrology, as his interpreters there have it) Is to go a Whoring (spiritually) from Christ, and God will (saith he) set his face against such, and cut off such from among his people, weighty reasons against Astrology (saith he) when the words of the Text are merely wrested by him, not having in the least any mention of this Art, or Artists; but of those that have familiar spirits, and Wizards, and how he will prove Astrologers to be any of these, I know not. Yet I can tell him when he will do it, though I never see him, and that is when he can make the 18. of Deut. to condemn the legality of Astrology; but to come to our english Translation, the same Sir Christopher Heydon sayeth, Concerning our english Translators, I find they rather leave us in doubts, then resolved; for whereas here they take the word Gnonen for a regarder of times, in other places they interpret it otherways, as in 2. Chron. Chap. 33. vers. 6. for Witchcraft, and in the 5. of Micah For Soothsayers. So that in this inconstancy to themselves, they must either give a better reason (than any thing I know they are able) why in this place of Deut. it should not be interpreted as well a Witch, or a Soothsayer, as a regarder of times, or else they must understand such a regarder of times, as makes his election by Witchcraft and Sooth-saying, and not by Astrology. Again, suppose the word be admitted as the English Translate it; yet neither is all regarding of time prohibited, neither doth it prove that regarding of time by Astrology is unlawful. For Solomon (the wisest of men) sayeth, That the heart of the wise man knows time, and that to every purpose there is a time, as to Plant, to pluck up, to slay, to heal, to break down, to build, to weep, to laugh, etc. which none but the fool neglecteth. As in Ecclesiastes farther in the third Chap. and more at large: and he that observeth not time, but shall laugh when he should weep, and sow when he should reap, is unseasonable and maketh himself ridiculous, according to that of the Poet Virgil.  
" Multi ante occasum maia caepere, sed istos  
" Expectata seges, vanis elusit aristis.  
Wherefore if this be the true interpretation or signification of the word, he must speak against that superstitious observation of times, which the Heathen used, and that superstitious people at this present do use; the very same I may say to Mr Homes, if he know any practitioner of the Art that maketh any superstitious use thereof, let him be brought forth and condemned, I'll assure him, he shall see me as ready to assist him therein, and be as forward as himself: But that it can be applied against observing of such times as depend upon evident causes and reasons in nature, which only Astrology prescribeth (as abovesaid) none but that man that hath no judgement can imagine: 
Look the 2 chapter of this Treatise where Astrology is helpful o husbandry.  And you have heard before Ptolemy himself as well as St. Augustine, and all the best learned Astrologers do absolutely neglect the superstitious and sortilegious elections of the Heathen: wherefore the Reader seethe that this text (were the interpretation admitted) impugneth them nothing at all.  
But in answer to Mr. Homes his expositors, take the interpretation of the word Gnonan, as the same Sir Christopher Heydon delivers it by Mr Edward Lively, professor of the Hebrew in Cambridge to Queen Elizabeth; being a man (for his singular knowledge in all kind of good learning, but especially in Divinity, and the tongues) of great estimation and authority in that University; who was solicited by Sir Christopher Heydon to deliver his opinion and judgement of the Hebrew word, because it was objected by Mr Chamber, that Tremelius did interpret it planetarius, wherefore for the Readers better satisfaction, I have hear delivered it verbatim as that worthy Knight hath it.  
I have looked in all the Hebrew Scripture, wherein that word is used, examining as well the judgements of the Hebrew Scoliastes in their Commentaries, as also many of the best translations, Caldee, Greek, and Latin, among whom for the signification of that word, I find this general agreement, that it signifieth an unlawful and forbidden Art of Soothsaying, or Juggling, or Sorcery, or Witchcraft; but touching the certain and special kind thereof, there is such dissension and disagreement among them, as thereby it may sufficiently appear, the very proper and clear signification thereof in specie, to be utterly unknown: for Aben Ezra in his Commentary upon the 19 Chapter of Levit. ver. 26. deriving it from the word Gnonan, which signifieth a cloud; understood those thereby who by the forms and move of the clouds, foretold things to come: Avenarius from the same root understood Jugglers which cast a cloudy mist before their eyes, to cover and hid their deceitful slights. R. Solomon on the same place referreth it to a word Gnonah, which noteth time, supposing such to be meant, as took upon them to define times of good or bad luck for the doing of things; others fetching it from the word Gnanath, which signifieth to answer, understood Soothsayers, which being asked of secret matters, answered according to their skill; as by like reason barioli were so called, quasi farioli, a fando, as some of the ancient learned have observed: some from gnajin, signifying an eye, thought Jugglers to be noted, which do perstringere oculos, that their legerdemain may not easily be espied: here is great diversity of opinions, but none cometh to Tremelius his mind, for a planetary, (or of Mr Homes his Arabrick versions, which it seems he is loath or at least ashamed to nominate, yet he might as well have wronged them as Moses, who, he saith, bringeth five strong arguments against the Astrological Art, when all the world cannot show that in all those verses, viz. 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, & 16. of the 18. of Deut. nor indeed in the whole chap. that Astrology is so much as mentioned) yet some for a Juggler have agreed with him, which signification of this word, even Tremelius himself retaineth in the 19 Chap. of Levit. ver. 26. and in the 2. of Esay, ver. 6. and divers other places, thereby showing the vanity of his own planetarius: for if it properly and truly signifieth Prestigiatorem in any place, I dare boldly say, that it signifieth Planetarium in no place; I may here omit anotable place in the 57 chap. of Esay, ver. 3. where this word is taken for Witchcraft, beni gnonenah Witch's children: So it is interprepreted in our Geneva translation; so likewise expounded by the Hebrew Doctors on that place, Jarchi and Chimchi; so translated by Mr Calvine (a man for understanding of the Scripture, endued with an admirable gift of judgement) filii veneficae, which by Kimchy is proved to be true by this reason, 
Yet Mr Homes affirmeth Kimchy maketh mention of attributing good to one time and bad to another.  that the word Gnonenah there used is for the feminine gender, pertaining to a Woman; because women (saith he) for the most part are given to the practising of this devilish Art, it were madness to think women should have given themselves to the study of Astrology, or Planetary aspects (a thing never used in any Commonwealth that ever I heard of) but for Witchery, every where to be found in them rife and common. Here therefore I end, for this matter confidently affirming, that neither Tremelius if he were alive, nor Junius, nor any for them can prove that Planetarius is the clear and sure signification of Gnonen, in any place of Scripture. Thus far Mr. Lively. And I may conclude this point with Sir Christopher Heydons words next ensuing, viz. Wherefore I do conclude, that if that which is before spoken be indifferently considered, there is no man able demonstratively to argue to the condemnation of Astrology out of this text.   

SECT. II. Wherein his second proof is refelled, viz. Esay 2.6.  
ANd if so, or rather, seeing it is so, than I may with more confidence affirm his second passage of Scripture to be less material in all respects, for the blindest of people may clearly see, it doth no whit (by his own words, nay and argument) so much as either hint or mean Astrology, Esay 2.6. Therefore thou hast forsaken thy people, the house of Jacob, because they are replenished from the East, and are Soothsayers like the Philistims; where is Astrology in all this? the text tells us God had forsaken his people because they were Soothsayers, but as for their being Astrologers, I see nothing mentioned: is not this a pretty scarecrow? thinking any passage of the Scripture enough to condemn Astrology, whether it speaketh of it or no? what does he think Astrology to be Soothsaying? then he should prove it so, and I will assure him I shall endeavour then to speak as much against it as he can; but if it be not first proved so, this wrist of Scripture and sophistical cavil is already refelled; but he gins to make up the matter with the interpretations of some men, but all will not do, they are at least a mile short of the mark, yet if I should see any of them within an inch thereof, I should conclude him to be as fas from hitting it, as he that is a yard wide; but let us see but how he tugs to bring this far fetched argument or proof to serve his turn; he shows us first that the word clearly signifieth Soothsayers, which is enough alone to refel all his Interpreters therein, let them say what they will to the contrary, Vatablus in his notes (saith he) rendereth it Diviners; and Junius, Praestigiators, that is (saith he) that make show of that they cannot do: you have heard Junius opinion but now, but what of this? Votablus saith the word imports Diviners, must this consequently and infallibly be Astrologers, why not Necromancers, Auguries, Enchanters, Sorcerers, Auruspicers? do not all these Divine? but I need not insist longer hereon, for, he answers this point in his following words himself, the Septuagint (saith he) rendereth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is (saith Budeus) saith he, a kind of foretelling: as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (saith they) signifieth Divination, and generally the Caldee, Syriac, Arabic, Arias montanus, etc. renders it Augurers or Auguries, Ergo, not Astrologers, but saith he, farther because antiquities tell us that that the Augurers did Divine as well by the aspects of the heavens as by flying Birds; Authors of late times commonly use that word to express Divination in general: O brave reason! because for brevity sake in Oration, or the like, Authors (as he calleth them) perhaps use this word, therefore he will use it (being as he confesseth himself general) to condemn particularly Astrology? and because the text speaketh against Augurers, and they know the aspects of the Planets; therefore, it also condemneth Astrology? all that believe shall be saved (saith the Scripture) it is clear the Devils believe and tremble; Ergo, I shall conclude them not damned? rare logic indeed! which is as affirmative, I'm confident, as his argument in every particular; so that you see than I hope by this time, the infatigable pains Mr Homes taketh to swim against the stream, and when reason and truth will no wise support him, he lays hold just as he is sinking, on the rushes and weak props and supporters of logic, which neither is sufficient to save him, but together with him they sink down with perpetual shame and silence, into the pit of forgetfulness: Alas poor Doctor Homes; I must confess this would make any one Pity the poor Pastor. 
A pretty jest, of a zealous Priest.    

SECT. III. Wherein his third text is convinced, viz. Esay 44.25.  
THirdly, he produceth the 44. Chapter of Esay, verse 25, etc. I am the Lord thy redeemer, which do frustrate the signs of Wizards, making the Soothsayers mad, foiling their wise men, and making their skill foolish: This is to as little purpose brought to condemn Astrology, as it is weakness in him to allege it or affirm it: but before I begin to meddle with the words, I think meet here first to remove his injurious wrong he doth impose upon Astrologers, to reckon them Soothsayers and Wizards, Diviners, or Augurers, etc. But I desire here the reader to observe that Mr Homes in his book, studieth to condemn those that profess Astrology here in England, and this City of London, and yet he will needs intrude Astrology, or rather persuade the vulgar, that Astrology is the same with these above named; from all which Astrology is as far, as black from white, or Mary-stainings from Bred-street, or as different as a 
a A very Religious story (if rightly understood) of a Divine and one that should with such zeal set forth the sins of the times.  sick body is from one that's well: which because he can bring some proof against them, will therefore term Astrologers, by the same to be understood; when all Astrologers will not deny to condemn (in as much as in them lies) these aforesaid studies as well as he. But to the purpose, how can Mr Homes, or any one living, prove Astrology to be signified by any of these names, when it is clear (as abovesaid) it dependeth merely on the natural influences and effects of the Stars? which is not to foretell by the flying or voice of Birds, observation of the entrails of Beasts, and the like; nor indeed is it properly to be termed Divination, for to divine is not, or doth not naturally signify the foretelling of future events by natural causes, but by some divine instinct. Wherefore Mr. Homes might have discharged his duty much better both to God and his Country, if he had employed his pen to vent all the Gall both in his Inckhorn, heart and brain, against those enemies of the truth, that maintain their own opinions, before the word of God, and make no Conscience of perjury, professing the form of Godliness, but (in effect) denying the power thereof. And not against Astrologers (nor the Art) who attribute all their knowledge, and the power of the Stars to the Omnipotent Creator of them; and in all points of Religion, show themselves conformable both to the discipline of the Church, and obedient to the Laws of the Land.  
But to come to the words in the Text, which he would needs enforce against Astrology; the same Sir Christopher Heydon, further sayeth upon these words. That they are purposely uttered to advance the omnipotency of God, 
Page 32. Chap. 2. of his defence of Astrology.  so greatly diminished by Idolatry, but to imagine that God would set forth the greatness of his power, by opposing the same against that, which in its self is fruitless, infirm, and of no force at all, were not only against sense, but in truth to frustrate the words and meaning of God himself; wherefore it doth necessarily follow, that so long as it pleaseth him to suffer the course of nature to proceed without interruption, Astrological signs must be confessed effectual, and not to be frustrated but by miracle, and by his omnipotent power, to which that the Stars are subject, all our Astrologers do confess, and none but an Atheist will deny. For as God is the Creator of all things, so is he the first cause of all causes, to whom all causes are but his instruments; and therefore as the instrument worketh not of itself, but when it is employed by the Artificer, so the heavens being Gods instruments, do not exercise their force upon these inferior things, but as God doth use their ministry in the Government of the world. And this he sayeth is taught us by the Prophet Hosea (as abovesaid) Chap. 2.21.22. where (saith he) he sayeth, not simply, the heavens shall hear the earth, but first, I will hear the heavens, to show them the power the heavens have over the earth, and that it dependeth on God. In which sense, the Scripture sayeth also, God worketh all in all things, and that we live, move, and have our being in him. And therefore whether we respect the natural course of things, or those accidents which happen besides the order of nature, we are to acknowledge it to be the supereminent power of God, as the first cause of every thing, which nevertheless can be no impeachment to Astrology, because God doth govern ordinately, and therefore seldom perverteth or disturbeth that order, whereby in his eternal providence, he doth govern his workmanship.  
Wherefore seeing he can not properly make the words abovesaid to signify Astrology, and seeing the Text doth not in the least express Astrologers, but only soothsayers, and Wizards; I may confidently affirm and conclude this Text no whit at all to impeach Astrology; and then consequently his argument to be merely sophistical, rash, and inconsiderate, malicious, weak, and inconsistent with either reason, sense or honesty. This may sufficiently serve to refel this his wrist of Scripture, but if the Reader desireth further the discussion hereof, and how it is in every point cleared and handled, let him peruse the 2 Chapter of Sir Christopher Heydons defence of Astrology against Mr. Chamber, to whom (for brevity's sake) I refer him, where you shall not only find these his own reasons and words, but likewise the opinions and judgements of as well the Ancient as latter Divines; all which could never pick any thing in the least, justly to be objected against Astrology. Ye see clearly therefore Mr. Homes his palpable mistake, or at least wilful wrist of the Text; to serve his own turn, to condemn Astrology, but all will not do, which is a most pitiful case, and doth almost persuade me also, to Pity the poor Pastor.   

SECT. iv Wherein his fourth proof is refelled, viz. Esay 47.12.13.14.  
FOurthly, he brings the 47. of Esay, 12.13.14. Stand now with thine Enchantments, and with the multitude of thy Sorceries, Let now the Astrologers, the Stargazers, the monthly Prognosticators, stand up and save thee, etc. Behold they shall be as stubble, the fire shall burn them, they shall not deliver themselves, etc. This very place (as I would have the Reader observe) is enough to confute his former injury to Astrologers, in reckoning them no other than soothsayers, Wizards, Sorcerers and the like, when he sees clearly the Lord here makes a particular distinction between the one and the other; for you see, Astrologers, Monthly Prognosticators, Sorceries, and Enchanters, particularly named, here I may also put the Reader in mind, 
Mr. Homes his craft in wresting the Scripture.  that he take him as he is, viz. a Sophister, in wresting the Scripture to his own purpose, and interpreting it to maintain these his arguments, which he cannot otherwise in the least support with either reason or truth.  
But to come now to the claring of the Text, which he thinks doth absolutely strike the fatal blow to Astrology; inferring from thence, that Astrology is opposite to confidence in God, and that Astrologers are much of the same abomination, with Enchanters and soothsayers, (which you may see is false, and as for soothsayers they are not in the least mentioned in the Text, where you see he again hath his own interpretation) and that they are to be derided, and no wise to be trusted in, etc. But as I said before, the wit of man is not able to answer these his vain wrists and interpretations of the Scriptures, better than by that Honourable Gentleman, Sir Christopher Heydon, I hear give you, as he hath it in his 2. Chapter, in answer to Mr. Chamber, bringing the same place of Scripture, and indeed with the same conclusions as doth Mr. Homes. I will not deny that, because God and his Prophets were not believed by the Chaldeans, (who reposed in their Magicians, soothsayers, and Mathematicians) the Prophet here in a scorning Sarcasmus, biddeth them save their Empire from ruin, therein contemning their Power, and not their Predictions, and expressly noting that it shall not be in them to save themselves from the judgements to come. This I do plainly acknowledge, although were I disposed to stand upon all advantages with Mr. Chamber, sigh both Vatablus, and Mr. Calvin, in their Commentaries, confess that word Chabar, doth indifferently signify such observers of heaven as were Enchanters thereof; I could easily avoid him as not disputing ad idem, sigh not Astrologers simply, but such as withal joined Magic, seems here to be mentioned. And it is manifest by the example of Moses, and the Egyptians, and of Balaam and Balacke, that though they were Astrologers, yet they reposed their safety against God and his people, only in their Magical power, by which (as their Poets and others report) they profess themselves able to pull the Moon and the Stars out of Heaven, and so doth Diodorus Siculus testify, Lib. 2. Cap. 8. that though they were cunning in Astrology, yet they did only prevent the evils which they did foresee, by Enchantments and Charms. For in truth, Astrology professeth only to foresee natural mutations and accidents, and not power to prevent and save. 
Nota bene.  But to return to that which he most expects, I will admit as much as Mr. Chamber himself can desire, that the Prophet here derideth the trust which was put in the skill of Astrologers, 
The true meaning of the Prophet in this fore going Text.  (which is indeed Mr. Homes his chief drift also) now let him frame his argument, and he shall never be able to bring the proposition of this Chap. (which is, That Christianity and Astrology cannot stand together) (which indeed is Mr. Homes his argument also concluding Astrology, to be opposite to confidence in God) within his conclusion. For it followeth not, that because upon some circumstance a thing my be derided, that it is unlawful. If this were any consequence, then because confidences in Princes, Psal. 1.16. in Riches, Psal. 52. in Horses and Chariots, Esay 31. in Cities, Jer. 5. in Physicians, 2 Chron. 16. in Negotiation or trade of Merchandise. In the last verse of this same Chapter of Esay, (where the very same words and phrase are used against Merchants, that before were used against observers of heaven, or Astrologers, as Arias Montanus and Tremelius Translate it) is prohibited, derided, and punished; we must hold the permission of Princes, Riches, Horses, Chariots, Cities, Physicians and Merchants, to be against Christianity, and unlawful. He ought therefore first to have distinguished of the trust that is here derided, and not thus to deceive by any elench, à dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter, as if all trust were taken away, because some trust is derided. For in these places, and the like, only such a trust as excludeth confidence in God is understood, and no other. As in our case, where notwithstanding God by his Prophets had threatened the destruction of the Babylonish Monarchy, it was not believed; but these heathen presuming rather upon their own power and skill, in contempt of God broke forth, as appeareth verse 10. into these blasphemous speeches, None seethe me. Quasi dieat (sayeth Tremelius) ne deus quidem novit rationes meas, nay God himself knoweth not my ways, and again, I am and none else, and verse 7. I shall not sit as a Widow, nor shall not know the loss of Children: Thus denying both God and his power, while they presume upon their own. But is this heathenish presumption and confidence to be imputed as a fault to Astrology? or is it not truly to be reputed the impiety of the professors, and others, with whom the Prophet dealeth? who denying that to God which is due, and ascribing more than they ought to the Stars, and their own knowledge and power, do that which Astrology never taught them, and therefore is not guilty of their ungodliness. 
This had been well done of Mr. Homes also.  He ought then to make a difference between the heathen, with whom the Prophet hath to do, and Christians against whom he writeth; for though it be true that Christian Astrologers do monthly prognosticate, as is mentioned in the Text, by the consideration of the Stars; yet is he not able to tax any of them with that derogation from God, or impiety, 
The difference between Astrologers and those that are condemned in the Text.  which is here derided. For to place confidence in Stars, as in divine causes and powers, is one thing, and to esteem them but as subordinate and second causes in nature, is another; the one maketh them Gods, the other but God's instruments, which (as our Astrologers do acknowledge with one consent) it is in his power to alter, 
Nota bene.  as best pleaseth his divine will; and therefore they are very far from that heathenish presumption and confidence here taxed, whereby ye may see, that the trust may be reproved, yet the Art unchecked. For I omit here to show, that monthly prognostications grounded upon observation, deduced from causes in nature, 
Nota.  have ever been permitted and suffered, in all well ordered and Christian Commonwealths, so far as I know; and that not only the Fathers, and those latter Divines by me before remembered, but even Mr. Calvin himself, in his admonition, with others (that attribute as little as they may to this Art) do allow thereof, so far forth as they extend to the state of the Wether, of Health, Plagues, Plenty, Dearth, and to the direction of the Physician, when to Purge by Pill, when by Potion, when by letting of blood; this being as far as our prognostications proceed; 
Nota.  which nevertheless would not have been suffered, if God by his holy Prophet had showed any detestation thereof, or reproved the same as unlawful, and unchristian. Wherefore when these adversaries condemn the Art for the abuses of Artists, it is clear that they do but play the sophisters, deceiving by a plain fallacy, ab accident. And lastly, if it be considered what St. Hierom, Hugo, Aquinas, Lyra, Haymo, and other ancient Expositors, 
More you may read in the second Chapter of his book.  have written upon this Text, it is most certain, that not one of them is so sharp sighted as to espy out any thing in this place that may prejudicated Astrology, but they all defend the same as fully as myself. Wherefore if in this proof of Scripture Mr Homes be not as far mistaken as in all the rest of his foregoing cavils, and maketh not himself appear to the eyes of the world to be a mere sophister, let the impartial, judge: for I dare confidently affirm, that by the conclusion of this his cavil concerning this text, he is as ignorant in the Art of Astrology, as from the true sense and meaning of the Prophet; or from the art of administering Physic to sick women, 
He is known to be a spiritual Doctor.  nay I am most confident he is herein farther a great deal out of the way, than it is from Mary-stainings to Bred-street, wherefore I cannot choose but Pity the poor Paster, both for his mistake, and absolute miss of his plot and purpose, both of the one, and the other: I proceed therefore to his next Scripture proof.   

SECT. V Wherein his fifth proof is proved weak, as to his purpose, viz. Jer. 10.2, 3.  
FIfthly, he strives to condemn Astrology by the 10. of Jer. v. 2, 3. but to as little purpose as in all the rest, but with no less craft and deceit, Juglar-like, he endeavours to cast the mist of error and mistake before the eyes of his reader, that so he may carry on his design with more dexterity and agility: the words are, Learn not the way of the Heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven, for the Heathen are dismayed at them, etc. whereupon he inferreth, Astrology not to be lawful, (because as he thinks God here by the Prophet prohibiteth the Jews to give credit to the Stargazers) but as I said before, 
Astrologers hold no fatal necessity in the Stars.  Astrologers do not make the Stars gods, but God's instruments; not in the least attributing fatal necessity to be in their power: wherefore then consequently he argueth not against, nor contradicteth, nor condemneth Astrologers by these his cavils, since they are as far from being guilty thereof as himself, nay and I believe more; for certainly he that will wrest the Scripture to condemn what he understandeth not, merely to show himself a , (as it is known sufficiently Mr Homes is) is a hypocrite, and much to be feared whether he is not altogether as ignorant of God, as of this Art: But for the farther clearing of the text, and the manifesting of Mr Homes his mistake, if not wilful malice, let us hear what the same Sir Christopher Heydon saith in answer to the same place of Scripture alleged by Mr Chamber also to condemn Astrology: Whereupon Mr Chamber inferreth, that the Prophet willeth the Jews to give no credit to the Stargazers, (and Mr Homes, trust or confidence, page 134, opposite to the confidence and comfort in God:) But sure he that maketh this collection out of these words of the text, never (I think) either gazed or looked upon them with half an eye: for the Prophet prohibiteth fear, Mr Chamber, credit, (Mr Homes trust or confidence;) again the Prophet speaketh of the Stars themselves, Mr Chamber of the persons that observe them, (so Mr Homes also) wherefore what difference there is between the one and the other, so far ought we to be from giving Mr Chambers assertion any credit (and how shall Mr Homes his then take?)  
For if he will truly inform the reader, he knoweth there is nothing prohibited in these words, but that the Jews should not learn the way of the Heathen; 
The meaning of the text.  which when he wresteth against Astrology, he doth both show himself to be out of the way, and to seek to seduce others, for to the creature, as in these words, fear, not the signs of heaven; where the word fear, is not simply understood, but for Religious reverence, and Divine worship: for that it is often taken in this sense, is no novelty to those that are acquainted with the speech and phrase of the holy Ghost: As for example, Esay chap. 29. verse 13. And their fear towards me, was taught by the precept of men: where fear is (by Christ himself, alleging this place of the Prophet, Mat. 15. v. 9) expounded for worship, saying, in vain they worship me, teaching for doctrines, men's traditions: As likewise the very same word is used in other places, for the Idolatrous worship exhibited to false gods: as 2 Kings chap. 17. verse 7. when the children of Israel sinned, etc. it is said, they feared other gods. I could confirm this by infinite like testimonies, were it not superfluous in so clear a case: But to prove that the Prophet even here, under this word, likewise revoketh the Jews from worshipping the heavenly bodies, is yet more evident by the words following: for after he hath in the two next verses, expressed the vain customs of the Heathen, in erecting and adoring those Images which they worshipped; he likewise restraineth them from this second Idolatry, ver. 5. in the very same phrase, that he did at the first: fear them not, for they stand up as the Palm tree, but they speak not, etc. whereby there is no colour of wrangling left to him, that disposeth not himself to be obstinately perverse: but of force it must be confessed, that the Jews are here only forbidden to imitate the Heathen in both these kinds of Idolatry.  
This may clearly satisfy any judicious impartial eye, for the clearing of this proof of Scripture, and that notwithstanding it, Astrology doth stand in its full force no whit more eclipsed, (if so much) then the Sun, by being overcast with a cloud: wherefore let all Astrologers proceed in their study in this heavenly and most lawful Art, except there could be more palpable witness against it, then hath been hitherto produced. But to confirm what hath been already said concerning this text, let us hear what this worthy man further saith. To confirm this more fully, by the consideration of other places: the Scripture giveth us plentiful testimony, that the Jews did follow the Heathen in their Idolatry to the Stars, but are never reprehended for learning Astrology of them: Wherefore the Prophet Amos, chap. 5. prophesied to them long before, even this captivity wherein the Israelites were held in Jeremy's time, because they had born (that is worshipped) the Images of Siccuth and Chiun. Abenezra and and with him Montanus, understanding the Planet Saturn by Chiun: and St. Hierome expounding this word Coeab, thinketh it to be Venus whom even the Saracens in his time did worship: But St. Luke, Acts 7. ver. 42. & 43. following the Greek doth explain Amos, and saith, than God turned himself away, and gave them up to serve the host of heaven, as it is written in the book of the Prophets: and you took up the tabernacle of Moloch, and the Star of your God Remphaim, figures which you made to worship them, therefore I will carry you away beyond Babylon: and therefore not unaptly have some expositors conceived the Images by which the Prophet doth here exprobrate the Heathen, to have been the Images of the Signs, and that not without reason; because that after the Prophet hath restrained them from this Heathenish fear of the Sgnes, immediately he giveth this reason, for the customs of the people are vain: and declaring wherein, he addeth, for one cutteth down a tree in the Forest, etc. which should want sense, if this verse depended not on the former: thus also 2 Kings chap. 17. verses 15, 16. the history saith, they followed the Heathen that were round about them, concerning whom the Lord had charged them, that they should not do like them: But now if Mr Chamber would know, wherein the Imitation of the Heathen offended God, the spirit of God himself resolveth him, that this was not in the study of Astrology, but in that they left the Commandments of the Lord their God, and made them molten Images, even two Calves, and made a grove, and worshipped all the host of heaven, and served Baal: Wherefore in the 23. chap. 4, 5, 11. of the same book of the Kings, the Jews are again particularly reproved for offering incense to the ☉, ☽ and Planets, and for dedicating horses and chariots to the Sun: and to return to our own Prophet; doth he not chap. 7. verse 18. expressly testify, that their children gather wood, their fathers kindle the fire, their women knead the dough, to make cakes for the Queen of heaven, and to pour out drink-offeings to their gods? and is it not for this defection, not for Astrology, that he doth likewise threaten, chap. 8. verse 2. that the bones of their Kings, Princes, Prophets, Priests, and Inhabitants, shall be spread before the Sun and the Moon, and all the host of heaven; whom they have followed, and whom they have served, and whom they have followed, and whom they have sought, and whom they have worshipped? to be short, the Prophet remembreth their like Idolatry to the host of heaven, ch. 19 ver. 13. & ch. 44.15. all which considered, it is plain enough why the Prophet in this 10. chap. seeketh to withdraw the Jews from fearing the Signs of heaven, sigh in every place their Idolatry to heavenly bodies, is reprehended; But their imitation of the heathen in the study of Astrology no where. But for tediousness I might here give you the expositions of the chiefest and best Expositors as he also sets them down, who from all ages have interpreted the text in this sense, but these my labours would then swell to a greater bulk, than I would willingly they should; besides it would be in some sense superfluous, sigh what hath been already said may satisfy any one who doth not willingly blind his eyes, and absolutely deny satisfaction; wherefore I refer the curious reader to his most learned book, chap. 2. and hasten to Mr Homes his remaining sophistications.   

SECT. VI Wherein his sixth proof is refelled, viz. Dan. 2.1, 2, 3, 4, 5.  
HIs sixth wrest of Scripture is Dan. 2.1, 2, 3, 4, 5, etc. where we read Nabuchadnezzar dreamt a dream, and for to understand the interpretation and meaning of the dream, he commanded to call all the Magicians, Astrologers, Sorcerers, etc. before him, to tell him the signification of his dream; which if they could not do, they should be cut in pieces, etc. upon which Mr Homes infers, that because they could not show the King his dream, with the interpretation thereof, Astrology is false, which I may say is a very false assertion; for if he had known what Astrology is, he had never thus made himself ridiculous to condemn Astrology by this assertion or place of Scripture, the reader may remember what Astrology is, 
Page 2. it is defined.  and how far all Astrologers hold it effectual; as ye have also before. Now that this place of Scripture doth no wise condemn Astrology, I shall desire him to observe, that God in his secret wisdom and counsel, Dan. 2.18. had decreed what should happen in the latter days, and had revealed it to the King by a dream, viz. the subversion of his Monarchy, and together with his, all others whatsoever, and the coming of Christ which is the stone cut out without hands, which afterwards grew to a mountain which filled the whole earth, both with his power and glory, by the clear Sunshine of the Gospel; by which I am confident Mr Homes cannot prove then, Astrology to be condemned or to be false, when it is not in its power to reveal the secrets of God, but only extendeth to the knowledge of natural accidents and mutations, and their causes; which was not (you clearly see) the King's dream, but a revelation of God's secret will and intent by dream: wherefore since his argument will not hold, his conclusion must needs fail him. Moreover you see, as the dream was really a revelation, so was also the interpretation thereof, for you see in that same second chap. that Daniel prayed to God to reveal it unto him, which you see accordingly was in a vision by night, 
Daniel an ginger and Magician.  and thought he was as great an ginger and Magician as any of the wise men; yet he knowing it was a secret beyond nature, Dan. 2.13, 14. applied himself to God for the revelation thereof, not to the search thereof in any book of natural causes, as of Astrology or Magic: wherefore you see how far Mr Homes runs himself into an error, for want of knowing what Astrology is, and the extent thereof. And then lastly, he as rashly concludes with his divine proofs, as in all his progress before; intruding and falsely impeaching Astrologers to be some of those that brought and burnt their books upon repentance of their wicked practices, 
Acts 19.19.  which I must confess (were they as he also most rashly and inconsiderately terms them to be, and as he saith set forth in the 21. Revel. 8. to have their parts in the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone) they had at that time done very well in burning their books, had they been worth a thousand times as much again as they are there reputed or valued at; but sigh their Art and study depends upon only the knowledge of the nature and influences and motions of the Stars; I know not what reason he hath to include them to be thus penitent for studying Nature only, Ergo, not condemned under the word Sorcery in the Revelation, 21.8. wherefore seeing this is so apparently false, I should counsel him (and that speedily to) to burn his books that thus hath lead him into an error, and to contradict the Scriptures; for I find in that very 21. of Revelation 8. Liars expressly nominated, and when he goeth to the fire with his books, let him remember to go by Bred-street, that so he may sorrow for all together: that so the Lord may have mercy and Pity of the poor Pastor.    

CHAP. IU. Wherein his reasons and arguments against Astrology, is particularly examined and condemned, neither to consist with reason or truth.  

SECT. I. Wherein his first  reason is convinced.  
HIs first reason than is, (to prove Astrology is false) that Astrologers themselves confess, that either the prudence of a moral wise man, or the piety of a Godly man, or the tutelarity of Angels, or the providence of God, overruling all things, may prevent their predictions. Whereupon be concludes that Astrology is false; for saith he, what humane providence cannot do, grace can; if not, Angels may; and wehre all fail, providence doth order according to the mind of God, etc. To answer this his most weak cavil, I shall begin with what he sets down last, viz. The providence of God overruling all things, which he sayeth himself (as well as the other three clauses) is the concession of Astrologers themselves, and if so, I would demand then what advantage he hath hereby, against Astrology; when he can say no more against it, than what the Practitioners in the Art do confess themselves? there is certainly none but wretched Atheists, that will deny, that God hath not an overruling, and a restraining power over all things, as well celestial, as terrestrial; but whether his will and pleasure be to alter their natural courses, is a question, but he hath heard that Ptolemy himself, nay and all Astrologers in general, do attribute nothing (farther than natural things, which are in sublunary elementary bodies) to the power and influence of the Stars; 
The Stars have power but on natural things.  he might then as well have said, the eye hath no power to see, or distinguish from black and white, (because by the power of sense, it may be closed) as weakly to infer the Stars not to have power, because God can alter, or is able to alter their motions, influences and effects, or the piety of a Godly man, which neither is in the verge of nature, all Astrologers will condescend and agree, that the Stars (as also Ptolemy himself) hath no power of what is beyond nature; and if piety be not as far beyond nature, as heaven is from earth, let the weakest capacity judge. He might then as well have said, a fish is no living creature, nor hath any life, because it will not live on the Land; for it is altogether as far out of the element (as I may say) of the Stars, or their power to extend their influence to divine matters, as for a fish to fly, or a stone to swim, or the like ridiculous things, (if affirmed) which is contrary to nature. Wherefore his third clause also, is to as little effect, as the two former, when all that knows any thing in divinity, will acknowledge the tutelarity or guard of Angels, to be administered only to the elect; and if this be not as far out of the bounds and confines of nature as the other, I would desire Mr. Homes to make clear to the contrary; and for his fourth clause, it is as witty an one, as if one should say, Mr. Homes is no Divine,, because he is not as yet a Bishop, 
k Inquire of Mr. Homes.  or that a man is not married, because he lives from his wife. The prudence of a moral wise man, may alter or prevent the effects of the Stars. This is not only confessed by all the learned in Astrology, but also sapiens dominabitur astris, a wise man may rule the Stars; but they do not conclude therefore they have no effects at all, as the ignorant in the Art do with Mr. Homes; but they farther say, astra regunt homines, sed regit astra deus. The Stars rule men, but God ruleth the Stars; this is the doctrine of Astrologers (I mean those that are Astrologers indeed, and know the fundamentals and true ground of the Art, not such ignorant Practitioners as Mr. Homes and Raunce) neither do they mean, 
Astrologers hold no fatal necessity.  when they say, astra regunt homines, any fatal necessity to be attributed to those heavenly bodies, nor to have power over men, further than such men are guided only by sense as bruit beasts, and not by reason; for they further affirm, that they nisi agunt, non cogunt, they act, or incline, but no wise compel; but where grace or reason supports a man, there, or on such a man, the Stars have no power; wherefore then (by the way) I may ask Mr. Homes or Raunce, if they with all their pretended zeal, can find fault with this Doctrine, or teach better themselves; or whether any Divine whatsoever, or all put together, can in the least carp at this; or whether Astrology then be Diabolical, Idolatrous, the Doctrine or Language of the Devils, or wicked, as these two seeming zealous blades, most falsely, maliciously, inconsiderately, and ignorantly traduce it? and than I demand, since as the Philosopher sayeth, ignorance is the enemy of all good learning, 
Ignorance the mother of vice.  whether they deserve not exemplary punishment, to condemn so noble, so profitable to the Commonwealth, so excellent, so divine, and so pleasing a study, as Astrology is, teaching and traducing their vile ignorance to the world; and truly as one of them most wisely said, if he should make appear what he knoweth of some Astrologers, the Parliament would make a Law against it, as sometimes was done in the Senate of Rome; but would he be content all Divines should be silenced, because some are Knaves, and prate nonsense, and so consequently conclude no verity or truth in Divinity? Truly might I be worthy to advise that High Court; in the stead of condemning and prohibiting this most worthy study, they would do well to prohibit all such Pamphleteers, which without either fear or wit, undertake to condemn what they are ignorant of; and that none should be suffered to condemn, or falsely undertake to traduce any Art or Science whatsoever, without first before the publishing of their writings, to make appear to the world, that they are throughly versed and read in the Art they undertake to condemn. And this would not only be a discouragement to the ignorant traducers of Arts, but also an encouragement to all ingenious spirits, to apply themselves to knowledge, 
Knowledge, the only distinction between a man and a beast.  which is the only thing that distinguisheth men from bruit beasts. For I dare confidently affirm, that if either of these two zealous time-servers, knew the depth and ground of Astrology, they had never thus enviously carped at it; The verity whereof, as also it's legality, I dare undertake to defend, not only against what they can say against it; but also all the Divines in England (put together to help them) can imagine or contrive to say. But to return to our business in hand, Mr. Homes on his  argument, brings this conclusion, that God worketh not by the stars as secundary causes, but Ephe. 1.11. he ruleth all things after the counsel of his divine wil O rare Divine! which understands not the meaning of the Holy Ghost better in this place, then because God ruleth all things after the counsel of his own will; he worketh not by causes: then, to what purpose I pray you are Armies, and the success sometime this way, sometime that, till in conclusion the victory is fully obtained on one side or other? will he say, (notwithstanding the various success of the business in time of the war) that it was not concluded in the counsel of Gods own will, that the victory should be given on that side? sure he will not be so impious: yet you see he worketh it by instruments. (Many of the like instances might be here produced, but for brevity's sake) but he might understand this place of Scripture to speak of the Omnipotency, and Omnisciency of the wisdom and power of God, in the Government of the world, (as to any one that peruseth the Chapter will appear) will he therefore deny that God worketh by causes or means? Sure this were obstinate wilfulness, or absolute madness; but that he worketh by the Stars, what he preordained, 
Chap. 2. Sect. 2. of this discourse.  is clear from what hath been already said, wherefore here again to rehearse, would but increase this same volume to a larger size than my first intentions; wherefore I leave you to look back to what hath been hereon abovesaid, and hasten to his second frivolous reason or argument.   

SECT. II. Wherein his objection touching the diversity of Twins, is refelled. As also some other quirks against Astrology examined and convinced.  
HIs second Argument or reason against Astrology is, (saith he) from clear experience in Twins conceived at the same instant, and borne in the same hour or less. Now Mr. Homes had done well to have made this his clear experience, as clear to his Reader, by demonstration or example, and not to content himself with his bare word, this is but one Doctor's opinion; but will he say that all Twins are conceived at the very same instant of time? sure he will not; but admit some are, yet will he not affirm, they are therefore borne in the same instant of time; I will appeal to any one of discretion and understanding in such matters, if it hold with reason, that two Children should be borne both together; and to make it more clear, that all Twins are not conceived at one and the same instant of time, 
Aristotle, Pliny, Cardanus, Dodoneus, Laurentius Gordonius and Paraeus.  I refer him to the perusal of those he finds in the Margin; but let me ask him what he thinketh of the story of Proconesia, who as the story goes, lying with her Master, and his man her fellow servant both in one day; conceived by both, and brought forth one Child like the Master, and the other like the man. Wherefore the first part of his argument is not available; neither (upon good consideration) will his following words; for he confesses himself that the nearest time of their birth is, in the same hour or less, when all that knows any thing in Astrology, knows that four minutes of time in the birth, gives near upon a years time in directions; wherefore certainly when he made such clear experience in the birth of Twins, they were not born at the same instant, but at least four and four and four minute's difference, for the nearest time he confesses, may be somewhat less than an hour; which certainly must breed very much difference indeed; wherefore except he could have proved that they were born both at an instant, or give us an example of any such that he hath made clear experience of, 
His argument concerning Twins, Merely sophistical.  his argument and reason is a mere sophistical cavil. And whereas he allegeth for this strength of his cavil, that Pharez and Zara did put forth themselves interchangeably in one hour; but how he can prove it was in one hour, is I believe too hard a task for him to do, he having no Warrant therefore, from the word of God. But all this is nothing to the point, for though Zarah put forth his hand first, and for distinction had a red thread tied about it, yet be plucked it back again, and Pharez was born before him, Gen. 38. ver. 29. Therefore I am confident he cannot affirm, that Zarah was a whit the nearer his birth by putting forth his hand, for we see to the contrary; wherefore then how this assertion maketh against Astrology, let the weakest capacity judge. And this is not so weak, but he can bring the example of Jacob and Esau to condemn Astrology, 
The example of Jacob and Esau no wise equivalent.  which is far weaker (if possible) and serves as little for his purpose (when he rightly considers it) he will say himself. For all that is acquainted with that story in the Scripture, knows that Esau was borne first, and after him came his brother Jacob; and that this is clear, the Scripture further sayeth, the younger shall serve the elder, Ergo, they were not born at one instant of time, and therefore I may very well conclude, that this cavil serveth no whit to the condemnation of Astrology; since for aught he can prove to the contrary, (or any one can tell) they were born many hours distant, and so consequently they must needs have several significators at their birth, which will cause very much diversity of manners, fortunes, form and shape, etc. but if he will tell me there was so small difference in the time, as that Jacob had hold on his brother's heel; I say that yet notwithstanding, doth this prove them to be borne at one and the same time; but that there was so much time betwixt their births, as may cause much difference in most matters of their lives: but admit this objection, any understanding man knows it could not wise stand either with the safety of the Mother or Child, that he should be thus born with one hand before all the body. 
His reason against Astrology, in the matter of Twins, proved frivolous and inconsistent with either time or reason.  And again, since it is no wise possible in nature, that Twins should be born both at the same instant of time; this his frivolous cavil is of no use, unfitly brought for the matter in question; and altogether inconsistent with reason.  
But this by the way; we come to his example of Jacob and Esau, which he saith, by reason of their differences, confuteth Astrology: 
But who so would be farther satisfied in the matter of twins, let him look Ranzovius in his book De certitudine Astrologiae scientiae.  But wherein the difference appears, I believe he knows not; however, if he could prove all the difference that possibly could be imagined, yet is not this a sufficient ground for him to condemn Astrology, sigh it hath nothing to do with Divine providence, or matters beyond the common course of nature; which may evidently appear, that this birth of Jacob and Esau is, by the story of their conception, which you may see was absolutely a thing beyond the power of nature; for their mother Rebecka (the Scripture telleth us) was barren: Wherefore this being so, this I say alone, is enough to silence all that he can say against Astrology, by this example of Jacob and Esau. But sure, notwithstanding, if one should particularly examine their lives, one should hardly find such great difference between them as could justly be alleged to condemn Astrology; for if we look to their qualities, they were both Princes, if to the number of their Wives and Children, 
Philo his antiquities of the Jews.  look into the Antiquities of the Jews, and you will find their children were alike in number within one, and we know that Jacob had Leah, 
Gen. 36.  Rachel, Billa and Zilpah, to his Wives, 4. and Esau, Bashemah, Mahalah Adah & Aholibamach, 4. also; if we again look to their Riches or wealth, they were both so abundantly wealthy, as that one Country was not able to contain them both: but if any one say, they differed in the matter of their birthright, I answer, that this simple objection is of no validity, 
Astrology meddleth not with Divine matters nor with the secret will of God.  for, Astrology is not to decide or premonstrate, or foreknow the cause of Divine matters, neither the secret will of God, which that this was Gods secret will, there is none but knows; for, as he was chosen to be the root or foundation of God's people; so by the obtaining of the birthright of his brother, did clearly premonstrate, both this his election and the power of his seed, to exceed the power of the others seed, being the elder: And here I may also add, they were both roots and foudations of two great Nations; but as this maketh neither for, nor against Astrology, being a supernatural birth; yet it may and doth serve very fitly to show, that if Mr Homes be minded to cavil, here is matter enough for him: Wherefore you see clearly, this reason (or non-reason) and example of twins, against Astrology to be of all reasons and examples the most weak, and inconsistent with the matter in question.  
So that rather I may justly ask him here, where is the strength of his reasons and arguments against Astrology? where is his victory over the Astrologians? where is Astrology proved incertain? where hath he proved the incertainty thereof? then for him to ask (upon these his bald reasons) where then is the verity or certainty of Star predictions? where is the verity of Astrology? as if he had obtained an absolute conquest, over Astrology and Astrologers: And therefore concluding these his reasons to be most invincible, and not able to be answered by Astrologers, he answereth them himself his own way, in the behalf of Astrologers. It may be (saith he) they will read us a lecture of difference from magnitudes and motions, which answer I must confess suits just well enough with the question, neither of them both being fully to any purpose; but to be farther satisfied herein, let him look Ptolemy, lib. 3. 
Look Ptolemy, Lib. 3. cap. 7. of his Quadripartite, to know the reasons of the differences in Twins.  chap. 7. of his Quadripartite, where he shall be clearly taught the reasons of differences in Twins, and convinced of his erroneous cavil, that they are born at the same instant of time; it is not from magnitudes or motions, though somewhat might be said thereon, and that so much, as that I believe would trouble him to answer; but let that pass, and hear how he questions and answers for and against Astrolologers, if so (saith he) if the ☽ be less than the earth according to Keckerman at least twenty times, and the rest of the Planets below the ☉, as ♀ twenty seven times less than the Earth, and ☿ twenty two times, how then shall these at any posture, at one and the same time effect or signify any thing to all the world? it is the opinion indeed (and with very much reason) of all the Mathematicians and Astrologers that ever writ, that these three Planets under the Sun are less than the earth, 
See Ptolemy, Albotegnius, Alfraganus, & Tycho.  but amongst the most learned of them there is much dispute of the certain magnitude thereof; but how equivalent this querke is against Astrology, is wonderful! A candle is not able to give light to a bowl, or any thing as big as a peck, because it is so much bigger than the candle; when we know and commonly see that it will give light to a great spacious room, a thousand times bigger than itself; (a strong reason indeed) we know and see, that the influence of a Planet extends itself ten thousand times beyond its visible light to our sight; but to come closer to the matter, hath not the ☽, ☿ and ♀, their ⚹, □, △ dexter and sinister, and ☍, to all and every part or utmost parts of the heavens (that are millions of times bigger than both them and the earth) according to their several motions? and hath not these aspects as much power and influence, as a perpendicular ☌? and whereas he asketh, what is the difference of natures in Twins? when the superior Planets are proportionably bigger than the Earth, but sure he never read that part of Ptolemy, which I before cited, concerning the several significators in Twins, which is the only cause and reason that can be given for his frivolous quirk: but as he questions to bring his bald arguments about; so he answers his own questions in hopes to confirm them; If (saith he) this is because of the swift external violent motion of the Stars, why then I again demand, how the Stars can have time to make any distinct impression by any particular influence on one borne, especially on one who perhaps may lie in the mouth of the womb partly borne, partly unborn; for a quarter or half an hour, or many hours; when the motion of the Zodiac is 60 times 60 miles in an hour, which is 60 miles complete in one minute.  
But to answer to this weak cavil, I shall say no more, but that though the Heavens be so swift, yet in comparison of us it is not so much as an inch is to 10000 miles; for we see by daily experience, that the ☉ (who is also by the same violence (contrary to his own natural course) carried in like manner) doth not as to us move at all in two or three hours; for mark how small a thing in a Dial gives this 60. miles in a minute, so that this doth no whit at all hinder the influence of the Stars, if they should be hurried ten times swifter; for this great course is in relation to the circumference of the heavens, not of the earth: besides we know that those signs that are of longer ascensions, as are, ♋, ♌, ♍, ♎, ♏, ♐, are sometimes an hour and a half, nay perhaps two hours ascending, or in the first House, and so consequently may be in any House.  
And for his long continuance of the Infant in the mouth of the womb, this may somewhat refel, but there is no ginger that will take that part of a birth, or the beginning of the mother's travel, to be the ground or Radix of the infant's Nativity; 
When the Radix of a nativity is properly to be taken.  but that instant in which He or She is perfectly separated from the womb, and entered this elementary world, since no man can properly call that a birth, which is but half a expelled, or but half perfected, when also sometimes the Infant may draw back again.  
So that these frivolous kind of cavillings, is neither available nor indeed any thing in the least to the controversy in dispute; yet Mr. Homes is willing to help Astrologers to answer these his feeble questions, with far weaker expressions; and to say the truth, ignorance itself, for saith he, If Astrologers will plead and thing to help themselves herein, from the slowness of other motions of the Stars, that are natural to them, viz. that the fixed stars, move with so slow a motion from North to South back again, as that their courses are not finished in less than 7000. years; Now I would very feign know of any rational man, how this answer of his in the behalf of Astrologers, is able to avail them a rush, or himself in his purpose, since they are also hurried with the like violence as aforesaid, every 24. hours once about the earth? but as all these his quirks are brought into his advantage (as he thinks,) so the advantage he strives to gain hereby, he may brag of, as much as of the former; for all this his gain is but the opportunity of this question, viz. How then can any age since the beginning of the world have experence, what the conjunction of the Stars may produce? This is a great Conquest indeed, but how slender an Artist he herein renders himself, let the judicious judge, since it is most certain that these stars we call fixed, move not at all; Ergo, are nominated fixed, for they move unanimously together in their sphere, which is about 7000. years finishing its course, not the Stars; but suppose they do move, yet they move not by several motions, as the one being flower or swifter than another, for they are all alike distant each from other continually, and if these come not to aspect nor ☌ of the Planets; yet the Planets come to configuration with them, as ♄ cometh in configuration of them once in 29. years some odd months and days; ♃ in 12 years, ♂ in three years, ☉ in one year or twelve months; ♀ and ☿ in the like time or there abouts, the ☽ in 28 days and some odd hours. I hope then this experience may be learned in a far shorter time than 7 or 8000 years, and if the motions of the Planets are not exactly for ever calculated by Astronomers in former ages, and that of late to our hands, I would feign Mr. Homes would do them better; and since these is so apparently and vulgarly known, it is sufficient ground for any one to take the exact position of the heavens, either in Twins births or any others, without the error that these motions he speaketh of can cause, which indeed is none at all. Wherefore if these assertions of his, be not weaker than all his former cavils, as also most apparently inconsistent with what he would feign prove, I leave to the learned and judicious herein to judge, and hasten to his remaining cavils.   

SECT. III. Wherein his endeavours to prove Astrology of no truth or certainty, as also its rules and principles, are themselves of less truth, or ground, nay and indeed senseless.  
HIs third Argument against Astrology is, to prove the Maxims, Theorems, Axioms and Canons of the Art, inconsistent with truth or foundation; but first he denyeth absolutely any such (viz. ground or principles) at all to be in the rules of Astrology, but with what apparent falsehood, malice, and invective wickedness, this is done, shall appear to the world by these examples following, being some few questions and resolutions, which by my own experience I can against all malicious adversaries affirm to be most punctually true; wherefore I have thought good here to divulge them to the world, that such envious carpers at this most true Art, may be for ever silenced, or at least that their perverseness may be apparently and vulgarly known in their colours; but see how inveterately they traduce it, notwithstanding million of the like examples, which they know not otherwise what to say for themselves, unanimously (this surpassing the natural capacities of their profound judgements, when they so clearly see themselves by experience convinced) they presently say, it is impossible this should be true! sure this is very strange? nay I am confident this could not be done by Art! this is a plain dealing with the Devil! it is witchcraft! and the like simple and malicious censures, or rather scandals hereon, but to the business intended.  
Die ♃ 10. jan. 1649 10. h. 0. m. P. M. ☽. a. △. ♀. ad. ⚹. ♃. Shall I receive my money? and when?  
A Gentleman a very good friend of mine (having expected some money from an Uncle of his, a Father's brother, and being disappointed two several returns of the Post; being therefore doubtful of the receipt thereof) propounded unto me this question. Whereupon I erected this Sceame, it being the punctual time of his question.  
I find here but two degrees ascending, and that of the sign ♎, which according unto the rules of some Astrologians, and indeed all that ever I met with) ought not to be judged on; yet I agree not always with them in this point, nor in many more besides this. The reason than I take this question to be sufficiently radical, is, because it so exactly describeth the Querents body, together with his marks; besides, the question concerned not the ascendant, but the second House, and there is 24. degrees ascending, etc.  
But to be short, I find ♃ here significator of the Querents Uncle (from whom this money in question is expected) as being lord of the third from the fourth, yet the sixth in the figure, he is located in the Querents second, intimating therefore his intention and willingness to perform the Querents desire; which judgement was the more confirmed by being in ⚹ with ♀, Lady of the Querents second; as also ♂ lord of the seventh, which is the Uncle's second in a △ to the Querents second House; and ☽ separating from a △ of ♀ and immediately applying to a ⚹ of ♃ in the second, both being friendly aspects and principle significators, (though she separated not from ♃ and applied to ♀, yet they being both fortunes, and her application was to ♃ in the querents, 2d) I judged as abovesaid, that his Uncle had a great willingness to perform his desire, and that he should receive the money he expected, of the which I was the more confirmed, by reason I found ♁ disposed of by ♀ and that within a fortnight after the time of the question; the reason I nominated just that time, was, for that ♃ and ♀ lacked just two degrees of the perfect ⚹ aspect; ♀ indeed as she is in a movable sign, might denote but days; yet by reason ♃ is in a fixed sign, which might signify months, or years (but as the ancients teach, a te et a scientia) I took the medium therefore of these extremes, which was weeks; which accordingly happened, and not till then: for on the 25th. day of the same month he received it, notwithstanding by a Letter presently after the question, a sooner time was nominated, and after that, not above four days before the day I nominated, came a messenger from his Uncle, about other business to him, and yet brought it not, which did seem very strange to the Querent. This Gentleman▪ viz. the Querent, till his acquaintance with me, had but a weak belief of Astrologies legality or verity; I believe he is at this present in this Town, and can justify this for a truth.  
But because some ignorant traducers of this Art, do affirm that Astrologers will never undertake (nay and that they cannot) to resolve the querents doubts, without he comes to them with a great belief of their skill, and of the power of the Art; I will here give you my judgement on two figures, propounded not only by unbelievers, but enemies of Astrology; which were propounded by way of discourse, and in their arguing with me of the verity of Astrology.  
The occasion of this Question was thus; upon some conference, of the verity of this Art of Astrology we here undertake in this small Treatise to Vindicate: a Gentlewoman of very long acquaintance with me, being then in company was very invective against it, insomuch she would no wise believe any one could resolve her any thing she should demand, and wondered I would maintain (in the least) the verity thereof; whereupon I desired her to propound any question to me; whereupon she told me that she was confident if there were any verity therein, yet I could not resolve her question; her reason was, because no ginger (she told me) would undertake to resolve an unbelieving querent: so that I desired then the willinger to be demanded some Question, the rather, for that I was desirous to convince her, of this weak opinion; but to be short, she at length after much entreaty, propounded this Question, as followeth.  
☿. 19 Decem 1649. 4. h. 30. m. P. M. ☽ a. ⚹. ☉. ad ⚹. ♂.  
Shall I receive the money due from the Parliament?  
I find here the ☽ significatrix of the querent in ♏ disposed of by ♂ and he lord of the 11; whereupon I told her, she depended much upon a friend (or so in pretence) which might happily be a soldier, which I was the more confident of, by reason I saw ☽ going strait to the ⚹ of ♂, but because she separated last from the ⚹ of ☉ lord of the second; and so transferring the light of ☉ to ♂, I told her I feared her friend was not very faithful unto her, but did underhand seek to defraud her of what she expected of the Parliament, or of as much as in him lay he could do: I found also ♃ significator of the Parliament disposed of by ♂, as also ☉ lord of her second, separated from a ⚹ of ♃, I acquainted her they had lately promised her fair, but still (I told her) I did believe her martial friend did obstruct their good willingness unto her, and because I saw ♂ so very near the □ aspect of ♃, and that he was disposed of by ♂, I told her I was confident (notwithstanding all the fair promises (of which she confessed she did plenteously abound) the Parliament had lately made unto her) he or some man or men signified by ♂ would be her hindrance, so that she should no wise receive the money she expected of them, which was the more certainly confirmed by his being in ☍ to the cusp of the second.  
She thereupon confessed that the friend signified by ♂ (whom I described) was indeed very forward (to outward appearance) to do for her, but she had indeed (of late) found him very perfidious, but yet she said she could not be persuaded but the intentions of the Parliament were real: but not long after (viz. within three months, as ♂ wanted three days of the □ of ♃) came forth the Engagement, which her husband refusing to take, was forced to lose his debt: and who was the authors of the Engagement? which when she also found so marvellously to happen, she was so converted from being an antagonist or enemy to Astrology, that she became a great lover and admirer thereof; often times since blaming her former rashness in condemning what she was ignorant of.  
But another example that the querents unbelief, is no whit material to the perverting of the Artists judgement, I will also here give you; for if the question be indeed radical, the Artist having any skill, and not deviating from his rules, he shall seldom fail.  
And this is of an incredulous Gentlewoman also; her Question was, of her husband being absent.  
♂. 17. Oct. 1648. 9 h. o. m. A. M. ☽. a △. ☉. in △. ☿. ad △. ♀.  
Where is my husband? And when will he return?  
This Question was propounded by a Lady very unbelieving in the Art of Astrology, insomuch that if possible, she exceeded the former.  
I find here ♀ significatrix of the absent husband, and located in the twelfth house of the figure; whereupon I told her, her husband was in Prison (but before (because ♏ ascended) I described his shape, as also the marks of his body) who when she heard this, with much admiration began to tell me, he was indeed in Prison, and was such a manner of man exactly as I had described him; but she could never have believed this could have been told her, which was the reason she would say nothing to me of his condition; whereupon she was very desirous then to know farther, viz. when she should see him; but first I finding ☽ separated from ☉ (by a △ aspect) lord of the ninth, yet the third, from the seventh his ascendant; & in △ of ☿ lord of the tenth in the figure, and then immediately transferring the light of both by a △ to ♀, the absents significatrix, I acquainted her that a brother or kinsman of his, should make means to some officer in great authority, or the General (for it could not then be the King) which should be the means of his enlargement, 
He was then himself a Prisoner.  and for that these aspects were so near the time, that the question was demanded, I told the querent I was confident her husband was already or should suddenly be enlarged, and be relieved also with money; which I saw also by ☿ his being in combustion of ☉ he was in want of; as for the time when she should see him, I find ♀ very near the ascendant, and the same time she comes to the cusp thereof, the ☽ cometh to the same degree (or very near it) of ♊ the proper ascendant of London, I told her I was confident when ♀ and ☽ came to these places, he would be with her, which was the 25. day of the same month, being Wednesday, which accordingly happened; and when I came to the speech of him, he confessed all that I had related concerning him was to the letter true; viz. That he was in Prison ten weeks, and was by the means of his brother's power with the General (which was then Sir Thomas Fairfax) he had his liberty, and that his brother did (for his necessary occasions) furnish him with 20. l. I could here insert many the like examples, but since they are so frequently divulged in other Treatises, I hold it here no wise necessary longer to insist; but Mr Homes I pray, if one had asked whether a man had lived with his wife or no? or whether he loved another man's wife? might not these questions have been resolved as well as any of these above mentioned?  
But let us see how he can prove the rules or principles of the Art groundless and of no verity; and first (he saith) because of the foresaid various varieties and uncertainties of the Stars, both in their own motions, and in comparison with others, but you have also afore received a confutation of these assertions of his, and therefore this his first reason is not one jot equivalent to his purpose.  
Secondly, Because no man knoweth the particular qualities of the Stars, but this is but one Doctor's opinion, and therefore I may as well, and with as good reason and strength of argument deny his words, and not show him to the contrary; but this were to deceive my Reader Homes like. And with this word only he cannot be willing to content himself, but he must strive to confirm it by his false allegations; No Artist yet ever undertook to speak of more than the seven Planets, and some few nominated fixed stars, of some few several magnitudes; with what slight expressions are these his scandalous allegations vented, 
Look Ptolomeus Copernicus. etc.  when it is clear and apparent to the world, that all those Stars from the first magnitude down to the sixth magnitude, and even to the cloudy and occult Stars as they call them, are made clear unto us, and the whole world, 
And for their natures, look Ptolemy, 1. Quadripartite, Cap. 8. Stadius, Sconerus, and Lucas Gauricus  whose works are so apparently extant, and yet so openly traduced and scandalised; what will he not then endeavour to hid that is not so apparent? he doth not only deny here neither so apparent a truth, but affirmeth as palpable an untruth in his very next words; they leave out saith he, or are ignorant of millions of Stars, that are neither named nor known. What nonsense & simplicity doth this his hatred against Astrology cause him to be guilty of? I would very fain know how he came to know these millions of Stars that he saith were never yet known or named? he knows that that was never known, sure he did not learn this great skill in Bredstreet, truly these ridiculous whimsies, makes me believe he is not well in his senses, since he was in the street aforesaid, and causes me also extremely to Pity the poor Pastor.  
Thirdly, Thousands of Stars cannot be so much as seen a minute together, as the Philosophers confess in their discourse of Via lactea, the milky way in the heavens, to be seen in a most starry night, especially in Winter. Before he was up with his millions, now he is come down to his thousands, I am confident at the last he will descend to his unites; yet here also may his Reader see how he strives to deceive and delude him with vain conceits, and to take effect the better, he father's them on the Philosophers, I believe his Philosophers will descend to be some whimsical Poets. For the Poets indeed feigned that on a day Ganymedes who (as they say) was Jupiter's Cupbearer, 
Of Via lactea; or the milky way.  carrying his Lord a sack Posset or a cup of Milk, stumbled in in the way at some great fixed Star (or at the paw of the Bear) and let fall all his liquor, which ever since hath caused the heavens to be in that place white or cloudish even in the most clear nights, but perhaps if Canis major and minor had been called on, 
Then M. Homes had not had this Via lactea to have prated on.  it had been otherwise; I may then with as good reason or ground conclude this story, as true as his allegation, that they are an innumerable company of small stars that cannot be discerned or distinguished; but I would very fain understand this paradox, that they cannot be seen, and yet they are known to be an innumerable company of Stars, sure he hath a very discerning eye, and rather one surpassing his judgement, for he but even now, knows more than all people ever yet knew, and now he seethe what was never yet seen: but these or any such whimsical expressions or arguments, are enough to fright the ignorant from the belief, either in the verity or legality of Astrology; he cares not how little he troubles them with reason or truth.  
Fourthly, Because all the Stars do shine on the earth at once jointly and promiscuously, so that they that are under them cannot by any rule from nature know what influences shall be predominant in their effects. But to answer this frivolous objection in every particular by plain proof, were too tedious here to relate, since for the instruction of the students herein, there hath been whole volumes writ, to whom I shall refer all that require farther satisfaction than what I here do say, which is only thus, that to determine either general or particular effects, it is not always necessary to consider all the Stars, for some never are seen in our horizon, and of those that are, half are ever under the earth, and of those that are above the earth, many are in such places of the heaven, as they are of little or no use in our ordinary practice: Wherefore he most weakly asserteth this reason, since as I said before, their virtues and natures are so plainly delivered us by the learned; and thus with such like frivolous and weak arguments and suppositions, he endeavours to confirm his objection against Astrology and its rules, as also that the complexions of people may be altered from their childhood to their manhood; and that there are causes between us and the Stars to alter their influence; and that Astrologers depend upon Clocks and Dial's to know the ground of their works, which Clocks and Dial's may fail, and so consequently needs must the ginger: and such simple cavils not knowing what indeed to object, for certainly all that knows any thing in the world, must needs judge this kind of arguing to be merely either for want of matter, or to patch up a simple discourse: for what can hereby in the least, or all that he doth farther rabble hereon be said, to prove Astrological rules uncertain; surely this is no more to the purpose, or to our dispute in hand, then for me to say I will, when one asketh me if Astrology be lawful or no? or any such ridiculous answer: But since in the subject of this preceding discourse, all these, together with the rest of his sophistications, are already answered; I hold it most vain longer here to dwell, but hasten to his fourth and last argument against Astrology: for our dispute is not to decide quicks and quillets, but answer those objections that are brought to prove the vanity and falseness of Astrological Predictions.   

SECT. iv Wherein he thinketh the ground of the Art wholly shaken and overthrown, by affirming it merely imaginary, viz. the ninth and tenth sphere, and in them the Zodiac, therein proveth and showeth his own ignorance the more apparently manifest.  
BUt what doth this sophistical cavil avail him, to the subversion of the verity or certainty of Astrology, when the motions & effects of the Stars are known? but even as well may he condemn the rules, & precepts of all Arts which are also gathered by experience and reason, as Astrology, because the signs of the Zodiac are devised by men; but the reason they attribute these names, as Aries, Taurus, Gemini, and the like, to the constellations of the heaven is by reason of their forms and particular virtues expressed under these figures; 
Ptolemy, 1. Quadripartite.  for Ptolemy hath delivered the nature of the particular Stars in them by themselves, as also their particular complexions and efficacies, as also the Houses, exaltations, triplicities, terms and faces, and other dignities, of the signs, as they follow the nature of the Planets: and since these are known, to what end are all these his cavils whether there be a ninth or tenth sphere? for let there be none at all (as he saith) nor any thing called a Zodiac (as he would feign persuade the world) yet since clear experience and practice evinceth him, as also demonstration that there are such constellations (call them what you will) his sophistical weak argument will no wise serve his turn; for I may as well deny there is a Dog a Bear, both lesser and bigger a Swan, a Crown, a Wagoner and the like, as he denieth there is not a Bull a Ram or a Lion in the heavens, when it is not desired literally (by any ginger) to be understood. Wherefore I leave him here to bait Vrsa major with Canis major and minor, till I am of his weak opinion, or till he can persuade any judicious soul to believe this his doctrine: and hasten to conclude this our discourse.    

CHAP. V Wherein the confutation of the objections that are brought for Astrology is examined and refelled.  
THere remains nothing more to be answered of Mr Homes his discourse, but his confutations (as he calls them) of the objections that are brought for Astrology; which indeed is already refelled in what hath been already said; having consideration to the definition of Astrology, and the Tenants of Astrologers: but because I will not give him occasion to carp or brag of my leaving him here, I shall go along with him in every particular of his remaining cavils; that so the reader may see on what small grounds he builds up his tower of opposition against Astrology, and what small reason he hath to carp thereat.  
First he saith Melancthon standeth not for Astrology; 
Chap. 1. Sect. 6. Chap. 2. Sect. 2. of this discourse.  but you have heard before how he also thus falsely abused St. Augustine and Galen; but admit neither of all these were one jot for it, but positively against it; yet will not this (if granted) make a whit against Astrology; since he will not deny but these are men, and humanum est errare, man is subject to frailty and error, and therefore is not Astrology absolutely condemned hereby; since already you have heard it no wise condemned by the word of God, 
Chap. 3. of this Treatise.  but the effects of the Stars clearly thereby manifested; yet for the answer of this his delusive quirk, I shall only send him to Melancthon to be better perused, (which here to clear would be too too tedious) and then he will not thus inconsiderately wrong him, as the other two St. Augustine and Galen, the reason whereof was also a negligent perusal of them.  
Secondly, to gainsay (as he thinks) Astrology, he saith, that some make a great matter of the Star that was seen at the birth of Christ: But I answer, that this appearance of this Star maketh neither for nor against Astrology, since as before you have heard Divine matters are not to be judged by natural causes; 
Chap. 4. Sect. 1 and Chap. 4. Sect. 2.  and all the world knows what manner of Birth Christ's was, viz. of a Virgin, and without the help of a man, this is rather a Miracle then a Natural Birth, and Miracles also are before excluded from the power of the Stars: Therefore his quirks of the nature of it, as also whether it be natural or supernatural, or whether it belong to meteorology or Astrology, must needs fall: and the wise men might well enough, (who could distinguish between a natural and a supernatural Star) know it foretold the Birth of the Messiah; when by all foregoing Prophecies the like and same was Predicted and pointed out.  
But to come to the objections Logical, which he saith are brought in defence of Astrology and his answers, the first is, that God made the Stars to be signs, Gen. 1.14. therefore the knowledge of the signification of these signs are lawful: his answer is, God made them to be signs of natural effects or events, not of arbitrary and moral, that depend on man's will. Wherefore here first the reader may take notice that Mr Homes doth now (contrary to what he hath all this while denied) confess the Stars to be signs of natural effects and events, 
Nota bene.  and whereas he denies them to be signs of arbitrary and moral events depending on the will, he gaineth little of the ginger, who as you have already heard acknowledgeth the same. Where is then the confutation of Astrology, or the objections brought for it? it is the abuse of Astrology he meaneth, yet me thinks a wise man should have distinguished between the lawfulness of an Art, and the abuse thereof; shall any man be counted rational that shall deny Religion to be, or that there is none lawful, because there are abuses therein? this is a strange way of condemning an Art.  
To handle here every particular objection and his answers hereon, would be too tedious, and indeed but vain, and to little purpose, since he can say no more than what hath been already (if rightly understood) answered: for to insist upon every vain quillet (as is most of his discourse) were an Herculean labour, and to render myself more weak than the propounders or authors thereof; wherefore with this text I conclude; Prov. 26.4. only I shall here make some Queries to the judicious Reader.  
My fist Quere is, whether the best of Arts and Sciences hath not been in one age or other ill thought on, and by some ignorant therein, most vildly tratraduced, as also the very word of God itself?  
Secondly, Whether the denying or writing against an Art, be a sufficient condemnation thereof, or proof of the illegality of it? (which to conclude or grant, were to deny the Scripture, since it also hath by Atheists and such like been censured.)  
Thirdly, Whether the warrant from Scripture, the Fathers, the Learned, and experience; be not a sufficient warrant for the lawfulness of an Art?  
Fourthly, Whether Astrology be not thus (if with diligence thou hast perused this discourse) warranted and up-held.  
Fifthly, Whether it may not then be practised by the best of God's people.  
Sixthly, Whether an Art that hath the word of God, experience and reason on its side, be a Doctrine of Devils or Diabolical?  
And seventhly and lastly, whether such ignorant traducers of so noble and worthy an Art, are not Diabolical teachers, and deserve exemplary punishment, thus to deny and gainsay truth.  
But whoso is delighteed in such like discourses, let him peruse that exquisite piece of Sir Christopher Heydon, lately published; wherein Astrology is clearly proved by Mathematical Demonstrations.  
And likewise to that short (but full) piece, of Magic and Astrology Vindicated, newly published: Both sold at the Angel in Cornhill.  
For truly I know not whether I have rendered myself more weak in the Vindicating of so apparent a a truth, than these puny Antagonists thereunto have in striving to Eclipse the glorious splendour thereof, in so much that let them henceforward, (or any one else) persist in this vain way of condemning truth; I shall take as slight notice thereof, as of a Dogs barking at a stranger whom he knoweth not: for did they know what they condemn, they would not render themselves so ridiculous.  
I thought here to have concluded this Treatise, but as I was upon closing, appears a Pamphlet from one John Raunce, who had formerly put out a Declaration against Astrology, yet declared himself more simple therein then at this time I will make known, yet because in my reply thereunto, he (as well as some others that was not well acquained with his scope or intention therein, or what small reason he had for the writing of his simple Pamphlet) found fault with some words I had therein against him; I thought good here, both for his and their better satisfaction, to give them the reasons of my expressions against him. Yet in a Letter I sent him the same reasons which I here relate in answer to a part of a Letter I received from him, wherein he hath these words, Your Pamphlet is nothing to the purpose, being so full of expressions of hatred against me; to which I say, I returned him this answer, viz. that this was the worst I was confident he could say of it, yet if he better considered it, he would find it deserved not altogether this rash condemnation; 
A Vindication of the Author's reply to Raunces' Declaration against Astrology.  for, first I said nothing but what I proved: and secondly, I play with him at his own weapon; I will begin with the latter, and would know of him, if I have not as good liberty to call him an instrument and child of the Devil, as he calleth the professors of Astrology, instruments of the Devil, Page 1. line 11. of his scandalous Pamphlet, and if in any place I call him Idiot (as in the third Page of my reply to his Declaration) it is for concluding his cavil as granted, before he either brought proof or reason for it; and in so doing, let any one or himself judge, what he rendereth himself to be: and in my sixth Page perhaps I call him Dunce; I pray is it without cause, when he telleth me he was sometimes a Practitioner in Astrology, and yet he is so ignorant of the rules thereof, as that he imagineth them to be Diabolical? upon which consideration (as I remember) in the same place, I call him Shallow-brains, and also at the lower end of the Page Fool, to condemn what he neither understood nor apprehended, which if he had, he would have showed by his arguments (which was no wise to the purpose, but only his own conceits and words) wherefore I thought good to acquaint the Reader herewith, that since nothing is therein spoken without reason or proof, they might not be so transported with negligence, to conclude or condemn my reply without better consideration than a mere slight view thereof.  
And since in that Letter he sent me, he challengeth either myself or any, or all that profess the Art of Astrology, to convince him by argument or reason; he may perhaps expect I should say something to his latter discourse (which is more weak and simple than his former) which since I have been of late acquainted with his quality, I shall not trouble myself further, nor indeed my Reader but with this word, 
I leave it to himself to make application or interpretation.  Ne suitor ultra crepidam, let not the Cobbler go beyond the last, or let no man meddle with what is beyond his reach or capacity; yet lest I should have given the vaine-Coxcombe cause of boasting by my silence. 
Aliquid latet quod non patet.  I have by the last Carrier sent him an answer (in a Box) to his simple paper, with a Letter, a Copy of which that the vulgar may not be ignorant of, as also that they may not be led away by the weak cavils of so sophistical a Jack; I here commend unto their view. For indeed there is an old proverb yet true (though a homely one) which causes me take no more notice of him, being of that quality he is of, Stir in a— and it will stink the worse. For had I had the relation of him before my Reply to his nonsense, I had never undervalved myself to have appeared his Antagonist, but had buried both him & his brat in perpetual silence; what he is and was, you shall here have, as was sent to Mr. Lily by a Gentleman that knows his former and present way of living.    

A Copy of a Letter sent by me, to John Raunce.  
Ars non habet inimicum nisi ignorantem. Nemo potest artem judicare, nisi Artifex.  
Ne suitor ultra crepidam. William ramsey. Die ☿ 4. Decemb. 1650.   

A Copy of a Letter sent to Mr. Lilly, by a Gentleman in the Country.  
SIR,  
I Doubt not but you have seen a tract written by one rance of Chippin Wickham where I live, which Raunce did formerly profess himself to have been a servant unto you, but you denied it before myself and some Aldermen which were with me, at which he was much troubled; the tract is against Astrology, but it is very wittily answered by one Mr. William ramsey, and that you may the better know this rance, I shall tell you what he hath been, and what he is, he hath been a Shoemaker, and I think he did twice break, and had he not been of the Gentle-craft, Mr. ramsey had wronged him extremely in calling him Mr. Raunce; he confesses he hath often spoken with the Devil and that is very likely; for oftentimes being at work he would suddenly hit shoe and tools out of the window, and run the Devil knew whither for the space of one, two or three weeks some times together, but not thriving by Cobbling, he came to Wickham and taught Children to write and read, and after that he practised of a sudden Physic and Chirurgery, and so continues, but a pitiful ignorant sneaking fellow; a fellow that goes not to Church, cried up by some sort of people, especially the weaker and more factious sort, one of Sedgewicks' tribe as Mr. ramsey styles him; one which to my knowledge, being to discourse of Astrology, could not give any distinction of it, but only that it was a speaking of the Stars: some of his Companions and he are about to answer Mr. ramsey, if they do, I desire all Artists should take notice what he is, and judge of him accordingly.  
Thus with my hearty loving respects to you, I rest your loving friend. J. B.  
FINIS.