An Apology, or Defence of the Divine Art of Natural Astrology

AN APOLOGY, Or, Defence of the Divine Art of Natural Aſtrologie.

Being an anſwer to a Sermon preached in Cambridge, July 25, 1652.

Wherein all the chief Objections againſt Aſtrology are fully anſwered, and the validity of the Art (in its purity) held forth and maintain'd, againſt Picus, Chambers, Geere, Vicars, Gattaker, Holmes, and others.

Written by the Learned and Ingenious Mathematician, Mr. GEORGE ATWEL, late Profeſſor of the Ma[•]hematicks in the Univerſity of Cambridg; and now publiſhed by a Friend, for the publike benefit of his native Countrymen of England. VVhoſe Preface is hereunto annexed.

Card. Seg. 1. Aph. 24.

[•]ulti negligunt & contemnunt Aſtrologiam, qui contradicit, ambitioſus eſt, qui maledicit, fatuus.

London, Printed for Samuel Speed, at the ſign of the Printing-preſs in Paul's Churchyard. Anno 1660.

TO THE READER.

Courteous Reader,

I Here preſent thee with a modeſt and learned Defence of Aſtrology, written by Mr. George Atwel late Profeſſor of the Mathematicks in the Univerſity of Cambridge[•] which being communicated unto me by the Noble Authour, and left at my diſpoſe, I thought meet (upon ſerious conſideration) to make thee partaker thereof; conſidering alſo with my ſelf, that at this time, the noble Science of Aſtrology hath many Adverſaries, the moſt whereof (I dare maintein) are altogether ignorant in the Art, and in the very principles thereof, who never obſerved, or took any notice of the Heavenly Influences, and whether theſe men be competent Judges to determine matters of ſuch great weight and importance (wherein they have as little judgment as honeſty) let all indifferent men judg; but I doe not much admire hereat, when I ſee it apparent in all other Arts and Profeſſions. Scientia non habet inimicum niſi ignorantem. How raſhly doe the ignorant and common ſort tax us for maintaining the truth and verity of the Copernican Syſteme of the World: Nay! how do the generality of men unjuſtly aſperſe and revile us for that rare diſcovery of the truth now ſo cleerly proved by undeniable Demonſtrations Geometrical. In like manner I could inſtance in the tenet of Antipodes, and ſhew how Lactantius, St. Auſtin, and others, were of the contrary opinion, but I need not trouble my ſelf, or the Reader to muſter us Examples of mens [••]lly in this kind, for it's cleer enough, that as there is no Art, or Invention whatſoever, (though never ſo commodious in a Common-wealth) but may have its Adverſaries and opponents; even ſo it is with Aſtrology, (which ſome of the Learned ſtyle Theologia naturalis) ſhee cannot go ſhot-free, or eſcape the malevolent rayes of the malecontented, and yet is ſhee not the Miſtriſs of Arts? yea, the hand-maid to Divinity? Univerſa enim vita noſtra abundè teſtatur, Aſtrologiam ſumme utitem eſſe, quippe ad praecavendum quae obfutura, aſſequendum quae profutura ſunt, maximam vim ob[•]ine[•], ut quae doceat praecognoſcere mutationes, quae in his inferioribus eventurae ſunt, item quae in corporibus noſtris ſecundum ſanitatem, aegritudinem, ac mores eveniunt: ac tandem in its contingunt, quibus ut alimentis ad vitam tuendam, & medicamentis ad ſanitatem procurandam, utimur. Add[•] quod Aſtrologia in piis orationem & pietatis ſtudium excitet: quandoquidem mala, quae ab aſtris ſignificantur, [〈◊〉] edicta praetoria, ſed Ʋitari & [〈…〉] precatione & ſtudio poſſunt. Orig. 399. de effectibus. I well know ſome there are that denie that the Stars have any influential operation on theſe elementary and ſublunary things, but theſe are a ſort of men (though perhaps otherwiſe learned enough) that we may juſtly think are ſolely byaſſed to their own perverſe and wilful opinions, who doubtleſs, deſerve reproof, for doth not the Word of God teach us the contrary? & are not the Stars there in many places called the ſignes of Heaven. Gen. 1. 14. Sunto luminaria in firmamento Coeli, &c. And God ſaid, Let there be lights in the Firmament of Heaven, to divide the Day from the Night: and let them be for Signes, and for ſeaſons, for dayes and years. Upon which words, Luther ſaith. Simpliciter Lunam cum Sole & Stellis in firmamento Coeli, Moſes dicit poſitas, ut [•]ſſent ſigna futurorum eventuum, ſicut experientia de eclipſibus, magnis conjunctionibus, & aliis quibuſdam meteoris, docet. That is, Moſes plainly ſaith, that the Moon with the Sun and Stars, were placed in the firmament of Heaven, that they [〈◊〉] be for ſignes of future events, as experience teacheth us in Eclipſes, great Conjunctions, Meteors, and the like. Again, in Deut. 33. 14. you ſhall find that the influence of the Heavens upon all vegetables is attributed to the Sun and Moon, where the Prohet bleſſeth the Lord for the precious hings of Heaven, for the dew, and ver. 14. or the precious things put forth by the un, and for the precious things put forth y the Moon. E coelis pugnârunt, ſydera ipſa ſuis agerribus pugnaverunt contra Siſeram. [•]udg. 5. 20. They fought from heaven, the [•]tars in their courſes fought againſt Siſera. And the Prophet Jeremy adds further, that we ſhould not be diſmai'd at the ſigns of heaven Upon wch words the divine Melancthon in his praeface to Job. Schonerus, ſpeaketh thus. Non [•]it Jeremias, nihil eſſe ſigna coeli, imò cum nominat ſigna portendi aliquid affirmat. Jeremy ſaith, not that the ſignes of heaven are nothing, but when he cals them ſignes, he affirmeth ſomething to be portended. So likewiſe the holy man, Job 38. 31, 32, 33. Canſt thou bind the ſweet influence of Ple[•••]es? Or looſe the bands of Orion? Canſt thou bring forth Mazzareth in his ſeaſon? Or canſt thou guide Arcturus with his ſonnes? Knoweſt thou the ordinances of Heaven, or the Dominions thereof on the Earth? Who is it now that dare denie the powerful operation and influence of the Stars when God by his meſſenger, avers it, and call them the hoaſt, and ordinance of Heaven, and tells us of their dominion in the earth. And although many other place[•] of holy writ might be quoted in defence o[•] this noble Science, yet for brevity fake theſe may ſuffice, as being plain and evident demonſtrations of the great power and influence of the Coeleſtial bodies. And to theſ[•] we may add the teſtimonies of many learned Divines and Scholars, but the day woul[•] fail me to enumerate them all. Corpor[•] coeleſtia agunt in haec inferior a tribus m[•]dis, videl[•] l[•]mine, influentiâ & motu; agunt no[•] [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], ſed [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]: [•]o[•] [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], ſed [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]. It is well worthy of our notice, & not to be doubted by any, but that the coeleſtial bodies are (under God) the univerſal cauſes of all Mundane alterations▪ having their ſingular influences upon the E[••]ments▪ Meteors, Metels, Stones, Vegitables, and Animals. But what need I ſpend time to [•]indicate the truth of this noble Science? For doth not all creatures participate of the heavenly influences? Quis e[•]im non videt [•]olem & Lunam [••]terare fruges & fruct us▪ Quis neſcit viciſsitudines temporu[•] [•]b [••]tri[•] [•]endere? And the learned Alſtedius the 17 Book 1 cap. 5 Reg. obſerves, that, Nihi[•] [•]agni in hoc mund[•] evenit, quod non ha[•]e[••] [•]eſtimonium in coelo. Eſt enim coelum velut [•]uidam liber manu D[•]i ſcriptus, in quo tan[•]uam liter as legibiles ſtellas coelipoſuit. Cer[•]ainly were it an art either Diabolical, or of [•]o certainty, it would never have gai[•]'d the favour and approbation of the learned in all ages, but we find that even of late times many learned men of ſingular skill in Aſtronomy and the Mathematicks, have travelled very far therein, and given exceeding commendation thereof as is manifeſt by the learned Epiſtles of Melanct hon to Schoner & Grynaeus, by the teſtimony of Magin[••], Stof[•]er, Leovitius, Junctine the Divine, Argol, Virdungus, Origan, Madronus, Alſtede, Eichſtadius our Country-man Dr. Dee, and others.

But let our Adverſaries both ſpeak and write what they pleaſe againſt the Art, and the Profeſſors thereof, for my own part, I never knew any Aſtrologer that maintain'd any fatality in the ſtars, that this, or tha[•] thing muſt come to paſs, as they unjuſtly charge againſt us. Aſtra inclinant v[•]luntatem, in n[•]llo tamen neceſsitant. Accidit tame[•] frequentèr Aſtrolog[•]s vera prognoſticare d[•] m[•]ribus hominum, propter pronitatem [•]or[••] ad ſequendum appetitum ſenſitivam. Th[•] ſtars incline the will (ſaith Scotus) yet in n[•] wiſe neceſſitate it, notwithſtanding it ofte[•] hapneth that Aſtrologers fore-tel truth[•] concerning the manners of men, by reaſo[•] of their proneneſs to follow their ſenſitiv[•] appetite. And though ſome pretending t[•] the Art have abuſed it, onely to pleaſe thoſ[•] that have imployed them, upon hopes to have the more liberal reward, yet what is that to us, or againſt pure Aſtrology? T[•] metſi [••]tē tantus hujus doctrinae ſit abuſus, n[••] tamen ideo rejiciendus eſt uſus, ſed potius a[•] illo peſsimo abuſu diſtinguendus. Although the abuſe of this doctrine is ſo great, yet the uſe thereof is not to be rejected, but rather to be ſeparated from that foul abuſe▪ Let us hear what that famous Mathemetician and Aſtrologer Mr. D. Origanus ſaith▪ againſt ſome in his time. Merit[•] reprehen[•]en[•]i ſunt illi deceptores▪ juventutis, qui A[•]ologica turpis lucr[•] cauſſa, & ut ipſi ſaltem [•]cepta eô commodius repetant, & ſibi fami[•]ria, faciant, in trivio p[•]eris vel adoleſcen[•]us prop[•]nunt, quibus adminicula deſunt, [•] dum judicium ullum eſt, a[•] rim[•]ndas & [•]udican[•]as cauſſas & rationes variarum in [•]tura action[•]m; quod Simiae caput funda[•]nta ipſa [•]equaquam intelligens p[•]rum at[•]ndit.

But the honeſt, ſober and learned Aſtro[•]ger (that makes reaſon his guide, and [•]oks onely upon the natural and influen[•]al operation of the Planets and Stars) [•]orns & utterly abominates theſe actions, [•]e it is that diligently weighs and conſiders [•]he natural operation and ſecret influence [•]f the Stars and Planets, whoſe diſpoſitions [•]nd vertue depend upon the heavenly mo[•]ions, and their various configurations at [•]he earth. We ſee (indeed) that ſome Aſtro[•]ogers have a greater in ſight and profounder knowledg therein then others, and ſome [•]here are that ſeldome fail in their praedictions, and theſe are men that are well ex[•]erienced, and not raſh and over▪haſty i[•] giving judgment, whileſt others again[•] [•]oo apt upon every occaſion (when t[•] is no remarkable poſition of heaven) venture their credit and repute to the ſc[•]dal and diſcredit of the Art they prof[•] In Aſtrologo requiritur naturatis, inclin[•] ad divinandum, ſaith Or[•]gan, fol. 400. A really (as my noble friend Mr. John G[•]bury obſerves) it is not for every man hope to be an Aſtrologer, for heav[•] clubs to the act of his Creation in an eſpcial manner! an Artiſt (as a Poet) is bo[•] and not made.

As touching the firſt inventions of t[•] art, I will not here take upon me to d[•]pute, though I verily believe 'twas inve[•]ted and practiſed long before the Floud, [•] the old World, but however there may b[•] brought authorities of two or three thouſand years antiquity of moſt learned a[•] godly men, who have by their knowledg in this Art, performed many excelle[•] atchievements, and contrariwiſe that ha[•] eſchewed many eminent dangers.

Julius Caeſar (who was a learned Aſtronomer, and ſpent many hours in the company of Soſigenes, to correct the motion of [〈◊〉] Sun and Solar-year) was fore-warn'd [•]he day of his death, and there upon was [•]iſed by Spurina, that he ſhould (in an [•]cial manner beware of the Ides of [•]rch, but when the day came (ſeeing Spu[•] as he was going to the Senat-houſe) ſaid unto him; Spurina! the Ides are [•] come, who anſwered, They are come, [〈◊〉] not paſt, but immediately he was there [••]in, according to his prediction.

Aechilus the Phiſoſopher knowing by [〈◊〉] Nativity that he ſhould periſh with a [•]den ſtroke, and the time of his predi[•]on approaching, he went abroad, & ſub [•] extra Civitatem degebat, the better to [•]ape the danger, but as he was walking [〈◊〉] the field, an Eagle ſuddenly let fall a [•]ortoiſe, or Shel-crab, upon his naked [•]d, whereby he ſuddenly periſhed.

Vitellius deriding the Aſtrologers of his [•]e for their predicting he ſhould be Em[•]our (thinking with himſelf that he [•]uld never obtein ſuch honour) but [•]en he had obtein'd it, as they fore-told, [〈◊〉] notwithſtanding baniſhed all the Aſtrologers out of Rome, and that by a [•] day they ſhould depart Italy, whereupo[•] they fore-ſeeing (by the Figure of his N[•]tivity) his end approaching, fore-told th[•] time thereof addiem, as it exactly c[•]me [•] paſs.

Sulla, a Mathematician foretold th[•] death of Caligula, as it punctually hap[•]ned.

Picus Mirandulanus, when he was for[•] told by Bellantius; of his death that ſhou[•] happen in the 33 year of his age, was [•] moved with wrath, that he wrote a Boo[•] againſt Aſtrologers, but notwithſtandin[•] he co[•]ld not evade the immutable decr[•] of the heavenly Book, for he died the ſam[•] year.

Petrus Leonius the Phyſician, when [•] Aſtrologer fore-told him of the time [•] ſhould periſh by water, he wholly avoid[•] to come neer the Sea, and other Rive[•] nevertheleſs (about the time predicted) [•] was found drowned in a Well not [•] from Florence, in a Village, called Caregio.

Paulus Tertius, or Paul the Third, a skilful Aſtrologer (cui Pontificatus fuerat prae▪ dictus à Paride Cereſari[•] Mantuano) wrote to Peter Aloyſius his ſonne, that in the year 1547 he ſhould beware of the 7 day of September (the Father could fore-ſee the danger, but his ſonne could not avoid it) for under pretence of diſcourſe, Landus, Angoſ[•]iola, and Scotus, ſlew him the ſame day in his own Caſtle.

Zonarus reports that an Artiſt hearing that Julian was ingaged with his army to fight his enemy, ſpake theſe words. Hodiè Julius in Perſia occiditur. To day is Julian ſlain in Perſia: and this doubtleſs he foreſaw by the Figure of his Nativity.

I could here heap up infinite Examples of this kind, but I have neither time no[•] room to inſert them: beſides our learned Authour having taken the paines, to write the whole ſubſequent diſcourſe pu[•]poſely, poſely, in vindication of the ART, to ſatisfie the ingenious, and to un-deceiv[•] all ſuch as doubt any way of the unlawfulneſs thereof, I ſhall therefore not detein you any longer, but commend th[•] Book it ſelf to your ſerious conſideration.

VINCENT WING.

QUESTIONS Concerning ASTROLOGY, Wheter lawful or un-lawful.

IF Aſtrology be unlawful, whether is it in erecting the figure, or in judgment? If in erecting the figure, what is there in it, but plain Aſtronomy? and what is it but a map of the heavens at ſome particular time? for though Cities▪ Towns, nor Houſes on earth change their places, yet the Stars doe, at leaſt in reſpect of us. And is not our Anography as lawful as Geography. ▪For if there be nothing in it more then Aſtronomy, why is it not as lawful as any other of the ſeven liberal Arts.

II. If judgment be unlawful, I ask whether if upon mine own, and many others obſervations, we finding for the moſt part, we have hot weather in the Dog-dayes, is it not lawful for me to judge, it will be ſo this or the next year, though God can alter it as he pleaſe? And ſo if I ſee the Moon full South, may I not judg it full Sea at ſuch a place, becauſe God can alter it? We tie not God, but alwayes Deo volente is underſtood, neither in humane actions doe we tie the will of man: yet we ſay the Stars doe ſo ſtrongly incline that they guide the will very often.

Now then if both parts, that is all the parts, both erecting and judgment are lawful, then the whole Aſtrology is lawful, neither may the whole be condemned for a part of a part, if any ſuch be found unlawful, we muſt not blame Moſes for having skill in Aſtrology, becauſe the Chaldeans and Egyptians joyned inchantments with it, for which they are blamed in divers places of the Prophets, which indeed is the ignorance, not the learning, of the Egyptians, and which Moſes withſtood, Exod. 2. 11. Nor yet if Horary queſtions ſhould prove unlawfull, blame neither Ptolomy nor Sir Chriſtopher Heyden, who, though they never uſed them, yet wrote not againſt them, & mutato nomine Chambers, Sir Chriſtopher take you to task, and then de te fabula narratur, rumpuntur ilia Codro. But I would fain ſee his Book anſwered.

^[1] But for further confirmation, let us examine the lawfulneſs of judgement, of ſuch things wherein wee have a ſet time, by theſe Queſtions following, and afterwards the Horary.

1 Whether the Stars are not made for ſignes, Gen. 1. 14. Jer. 10. 2. Mat. 24. V. 39. 2 If for ſignes, and ſo all men call them muſt they not foretel ſomething, otherwiſe it is contrary to their names, their nature, and Gods^[2] purpoſe in making them, neither are they for ſignes of ſeaſons, as ſome would have, but for ſignes and ſeaſons. If they doe not foretell ſomething, what need men be afraid of them, or be forewarned from fear of them, Jer. 10. 2. But I ſuppoſe this bidding them not to be afraid both there and in Pſal. 91. and Matth. 24. and ſundry other places, is not to tell them ſuch events ſhall not come, but rather that they ſhall come, as in Math. 24. 2. and therefore to forewarn them againſt theſe times to make their peace with God, and to ſhrowd themſelves under the covert of his wings, Pſal. 91. 1. And then though [•] plague ſhall come▪ it ſhall not as he ſaith, come neer their dwelling. Not but that a Godly mans houſe may be infected with the plague, and a daughter of Abraham poſſeſſed with a Divel as well as a wicked perſon; But that their ſhall no affliction come to them, but ſuch as ſhall work together for the beſt to them, Rom. 8. For in common calamities the godly muſt ſhare with the wicked: Jeremy muſt go unto captivity with others, and to tell them ſuch plagues ſhall not come, is but to ſow pillows under their armholes.

3 If they doe foretell, is it not a meere accuſing of God of idleneſs, if he doth not withall both allow land give to ſome knowledge and skil to underſtand their ſignifications, otherwiſe the trumpet will give but an uncertain ſound, and who will prepare himſelfe to the battel?

4 Is there any other way to underſtand their meaning beſides Aſtrology.

5 If God made the Stars, all but the Sun only for lights for the night, why might not the Moon have ſerved for all, as well as the Sun for the day, by placing it in a continual courſe oppoſite to the Sun, for ſo it would have been full Moon, and then all the fixed Stars, and five leſſer Planets, might well have been ſpared. Ye, is there any other uſe of them? I think it no leſſe then blaſphemy, to accuſe God of making them in vain.

6 What is the influence of the Pleiades, and of Orion, Job 18.

7 And what is that Lunacy, Math. 17. 14.

8 And doth not the Prophet Eſa. 3. V. 2. threaten it as a plague, that the Aſtrologer ſhall be taken away. Our Engliſh hath it, the Prudent; but the Hebrew, the Aſtrologer.

9 What was that learning of the Egyptians that Moſes was ſo well skil'd in? Acts 7. not their enchantments, for them he withſtood, Exe. 2. 11.

10 What was that cup wherein Joſeph divined and propheſied?

11 Whether is it lawful in it ſelf[•] to erect a figure?

12 Whether experience doth not ſhew many things in Aſtrology, even to ignorant people: As every Phyſicia and each Midwife can tell us, that the Child born in the new or full moon is either ſhort lived, or never healthful: and is this unlawful to think it, or judge it to be ſo? and are the dumb creatures the Bees able to foretel the weather, and the Mouſe when an houſe will fall, and muſt man that ſtudies for it tell nothing, the Swan celebrates her own funerals, and me thinks it ſhould be poſsible for a man that ſtudies for it, in time to atteine as much wit as a Gooſe?

Suppoſe Biſhop Ʋſher in his Macedonian year, tels us that the 24th. of his firſt Moneth Dius, which is about our 17th. of October, there will be magna aëris turbatio, great trouble of the air, becauſe then the Hyades roſe at Sun-ſetting, and though no reaſon can be given for them more then others, yet it ſeems Adam knew their qualities well enough, he would never elſe have called them the rainers of "[〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] to rain, and is this unlawful, either in Adam or in Biſhop Ʋſher. So alſo for the Winds, the 21 of his 6th. moneth Zanticus, which is about our 14 of March, he fore-tels the Oetrithiae begin to blow, when the crown riſeth in the evening, and hold till the Aequinoctial, a ſtrange thing to tell, for they were Aeteſae. And I think they that know the reaſons of other things in Aſtrology, will as litle find fault with them as with theſe.

13 What is the reaſon that a child born at 7, 9, 10 or 11 moneths from the Conception ordinarily liveth, but a child at the eighth dieth, lives not long, or is alwayes ſickly?

14 If there be not ſomething at leaſt exceeding probable in Aſtrology, how is it poſsible that knowing what accidents have befalne you, and at what age, together with the year and day of your birth, or perhaps in an ordinary birth by the Chriſtning day, if it be not above a fortnight after, to know the true hour and minute, and again, by knowing the true time of the birth, can it be either impoſsible by reduction to find out either the ſame accidents, or others that have befalne you, and at what time, and is it not the ſelf-ſame labour, to find what is to come as what is paſt, and which of theſe three is unlawful?

15 How came the Magi to know that the Star ſignified that?

16 Were the Magi any other then plain Aſtrologers?

17 How came they above all others to be ſo much reſpected, that God ſhould make a new Star on purpoſed to ſend ſo far for them?

18 If there be not ſomething in Aſtrology, how came ſo many to know the times of their deaths before hand, Julius Caeſar, Vitellius, Caligula, Domitian, Picus Mirandula, Galeatius Duke of Millaine, Peter Leonicis, Peter Aloiſius, Archbiſhop Piſan, Philip king of Macedon, Machabeus king of Scots, Cambiſis, Epamonandas, Amilcar, Daphadus the Sophiſter, Sigthimus king of Sweſia, Frederick the II, Ezelinus the Roman tyrant, cum multis aliis.

19 Doth not that anſwer of our Saviour, John 11. 19. ſeeme to defend elections of time? are there not 12 hours in a day, as if he ſhould ſay, in one hour he might walk ſafe among them, in another nor.

20 Quorſum haec

21 Would you have all theſe Phaenomena's, all theſe new Stars, Comets, Eclipſes, and Parhelii, that have been within theſe 80 years laſt paſt to ſignifie nothing? never were the like in ſo ſhort a time ſince the creation, Annus 1572, 77, 80, 85, 90, 93, 96. 1600, 602, 604, 607, 618. in every of theſe years were either new Stars or Comets, as Doctor Boreman in his Nuntius Propheticus, hath reckoned them up: Beſides the Parhelii or three Suns, that were ſeen in Lancaſhire, Febr. 28, 1648. being the birth day of Charles the firſt, though not in the ſame year. As alſo the Eclipſe of the Sun, the birth of Charles the ſecond, beſides the Stars then appearing in the day time, and ſeen of divers, his birth was May 29 Saturday 1630, & on Sunday following king Charles went to Pauls to give thanks, and in the afternoon was a great Eclipſe of the Sun, which according to Maginus Ephemerides for the longitude of Venice, he reckoned 10 digits, 35 m. but he ſaith, England & Scotland ſhould find a totall Eclipſe, upon which one wrote theſe verſes:

Thus much in Engliſh.

Now which of theſe will you find fault with? either you muſt deny there were ſuch apparitions, but you may as well deny there is any Sun at all, or will you accuſe God for making them, then I confeſſe you ſilence me indeed. Or will you denie they ſignifie no ſuch thing that the event ſhewed. Or will you denie the iugdment lawful? then either ſhew ſome other way whereby Gods meaning may be known, or elſe for ſhame never open your mouth more againſt Aſtrology, but rather confeſs your fault, and give glory to God with Acham, for you have robbed him of his chief end in creating them, in denying them to be ſignes, or that no man knoweth their meaning. I could name a hundred more the like events if time would permit.

22 And who ſhall tell us the ſignification of all theſe but the Aſtrologer? let the Miniſter interpret the word of God, but the Aſtrologer his works, eſpecially of the Stars, no queſtion but God would have both interpreted, & ne ſutor, &c. Theſe Phaenomena's are Gods Embaſſadors to a land, and that land is in an ill caſe that hath never a one that knowes their language: No marvel then, though Eſay count it as a plague to have the Aſtrologer taken away. And I fear if ſuch Miniſters as ſpeak againſt Aſtrology ſhould change places with Aſtrologers, they would prove more unable to interpret theſe, then the Aſtrologers the word.

23 Is it likely that God, that was ſo careful in time of the Prophets to forewarn his people and to comfort them alwayes in their miſeries, to ſend them ſtill one Prophet, or other, to tell them of their freedome, and hath he left us now no meanes in the time of the Goſpel? hath he no care of his Church now, hath he forgot to be gracious? God forbid.

Now if this or any other of theſe be granted, then Aſtrology in general cannot be condemned, but rather be commended, and is it not an heynous ſin in any, eſpecially in Miniſters that will uphold Gods truth with a lie, and ſo call evil good, and good evil.

But you will object ſome goe too far in it, I anſwer, prove who they are, and blame them that doe it, and not the Art it ſelf. Blame not Moſes, becauſe the Egyptians joyned inchantments with it. But you will object that Horary Queſtions are unlawful, becauſe you ſay, there can be no reaſon given that the propounding a queſtion at ſuch or ſuch a time, should produce a true anſwer. I anſwer, though no reaſon could be given, yet finding by continual experience that they doe produce true anſwers, wee cannot condemn them. And you may aſwel condemn laying Iron over Beer to keep it from ſowring as this: for no reaſon can be given either why thunder ſhould ſowre it, or the Iron preſerve it.

But beſides experience, we can give you reaſon ſufficient, if you are able to underſtand reaſon. You know that though the will of man be free to propound his queſtion when he will, yet as I ſaid before, Deo volente, God firſt willing, is alwayes underſtood. And you know alſo▪ that not a hair can fall from his head, nor yet a word from his mouth, without his providence, both for quid and quando▪ what, and when. And therefore as the Stars are his ſervants to effect his pleaſure, they do ſo incline the will and other concurrences withall, whereof there be many, neither doth the quaerent ſtand upon ſuch preciſe election of time, but onely when he can conveniently meet with the Aſtrologers, they ſo incline him to propound the queſtion at ſuch a time as that the Heavens ſhall be in ſuch a poſition as to give a true anſwer to the queſtion demanded. And this is ſtrongly backt by that which Aſtrologers obſerve daily, but none other can, that a man by reaſon of that inclination can, or at leaſt ſcarce ever doth move a queſtion at any time with earneſt deſire of ſatisfaction, but the Aſcendent thereof will be either the ſame ſigne or at leaſt one of the ſame Triplicity with the ſigne of the Aſcendant of the Radix of his nativity. If tendanda gratta▪ then it falls between two ſignes or very neer. See this throughly proved in Geo. Trapezuntius his Comment. on Ptolomies ſecond Aphoriſme.

Beſides all this, I think our game is as faire as ſuch Divines as ſpeak againſt it, or as they can produce againſt it; we can produce as learned, judicious, painful, holy men for it, as they can againſt it, to the full. Mr. Gregory, Mr. Sparke, Melancthon, Dr. Gell▪ Dr. Dee, Dr. Preſton, Dr. Fulke, Biſhop Laud, Biſhop Ʋſher, cum multis aliis, and Garſaeus pag. 396.

Certain verſes made upon another former king of this land, one of the Edwards or Richards, I have forgotten which, for it is 60 years ago ſince I read them.

Engliſhed thus,

Quis cordatas dicat Stellas & Come[•] Annis 1572, 77, 80, 85, 90, 93, 9[•] 1600, 602, 604, 607, 618. nihil ſignif[•] care? quis dicat Deum fruſtra aliqu[•] facere. H. Alſted.

Bapt. Laurus Pp. Ʋrban. 8. a cubicu[•] Ediſt. 6.

Coelum tot facibus, quaſi linguis [•] pertius numquam antia proloquitur.

Will they ſay God made theſe fo[•] ornament? every Eclipſe is defect us they may aſwell ſay an earthquak[•] that turns mountains upon Cities [•] an ornament to the earth, ſuch as tha[•] was which fell the ſame year 161[•] wherein the laſt blaſing Star was whereof I my ſelf know one Mr. Robert Hatley of Maulden in Bedfordſhire then an eye witneſs, and whereof Calviſius ſaith thus:

In montana Griſonum regione terrae motus factus eſt, & mons ſummae magnitu[•] dinis Aug. 15. ſubcrepuſculum veſpe[•] [•] num commotus tantam ſubito ruina[•] fecit ſub Pluravicus (my friend calls i[•] Plowers) cum edificiis Templis Pala[•] [•]iſque egregiis exornatus dicto çitius cu[•] [•]ominibus 1500. ab ortus fuerit, & ne [•]veſtigium ullum conſpiciendam amplius [•]eliquerit.

Or was that Star of fiery Foot-ball what to call it I know not, that came July the 25, 1628 to Shithington in Bedfordſhire, the young men having appointed a Match at Foot-ball with Luton, and to meet in the midway to get together, they goe to ring, in the midſt of their zeale comes this Star, firſt up a narrow lane to the Churchyard, where it overthrew a little Maid named Heſter, but did her no harm: it comes unto the Churchporch where it overthrows on Mr. Malineux, and took the ring off his finger, it goes into the Church where Mr. Parrat the Miniſter was praying at the corner of the Mid-alley, it paſt him and did him no harm, it goes into the Belfree, layes dead every one of the Ringers, it ſtrikes againſt the wall and breakes to pieces, whereon fell ſuch thunder, rain, and lightning as I never heard before: the firſt that came to live again, was one Kitchiner a Shoemaker & kindſman of mine, all recovered ſave one Deare that made the Foot-ball, who never revived, was this Star an ornament either to heaven or earth. I think all the paper in the town will no t hold what I can ſay for it, if time an d meanes would ſerue. Now I am in I cannot get out, but I will not write one word more of this, and yet I cannot leave off, but I muſt needs have a queſtion or two more: and anſwer an objection or two of Dr. Wendilius, who is Picus his head Scholler, and thereon quotes him in divers places▪ but withall betrayes both himſelf and his Maſter, to have ſmall skill in Aſtrology, and therefore I may well ſay, Scienti[•] nullum habe[•] inimicum prae[•]er ignorantem. He writes in page 625, that if ♄ be 26 of ♏ and ♃ in the 6 of ♉ then platick they are in an ☍ though 20 deg. diſtant from a partile, whereas the largeſt orbs that are given by any are but 10 deg. to ♄ and 12 to ♃, and ſome give but 9 to either, as himſelf for Example page [•]22 line 44. Now in a dexter Aſpect they muſt be within half the raie[•] of both added, viz. within 11, but in a ſiniſter within ½ the degrees of the applier which is but 6 at the moſt, ſo that where he gives 20 deg. it is more by 2 then the whole Orbs of both joyned, ſo that this is as far as York [•]rom London of being any aſpect at [•]ll. And in another example, if ♃ be in ♈, and ☿ in ♉ 15, that is a pla[•]icke ſextile, whereas indeed it is [•]uſt as neer a ſemiſ[•]xtile as a ſextile, [•]s neer 30 d. as ♉ 0, and if we com[•]are theſe examples with his rule, [•]e can do no leſſe then conclude that [•]e puts no difference between a pla[•]ick ⚹, and a partil □: nay between a platick △, and a partil □: the one [〈◊〉] aſpect of perfect amitie, the other [•]f perfect enmitie; for if there be no [•]ounds to aſpects; as neither his rule [•]hich is this, page 625, Platicum ap[•]llarant, appelo he ſhould have ſaid, [•]r elſe, appellamus, his Mr. Pacus and [•]imſelfe, cum à ſtella adſttellam, plu[•]s vel pau[•]iores, partes quàm aſpectus, [•]antit as numerantur. Now if there [•]ay be two more then the ſumme of both or 11 as in the dexter, and 14 as in the ſiniſter, then both by his rule and examples there are no bounds, and ſo no diſtinction of aſpects. Alas, good Wendiline thou mu[••] to thy croſſe row again for Aſtrology, and get thee a better Maſter the[•] Picus, leaſt the blind lead the blind[•] I dare undertake neither of you bot[•] know what this character ⚺ of a ſemiſextile meaneth, if you had yo[•] would never have called that a ⚹ no marvel thē that though you trie[•] you did toto coelo errare, and coul[•] never find truth in it, and that mak[•] you think there is no truth in th[•] Art, becauſe there is no truth in you[•] work.

24 Why may you not better den[•] that hearbs were ever created fo[•] Phyſick, rather then the Stars f[•] ſignes? ſince in their very ordinatio[•] Gen. 1. 14. the ſtars are expreſſely ſai[•] to be both for lights and for ſigne[•] not for ſeaſons, as Picus, Wendilin[•] and Gauh would have them, helpi[•] God with a lie, and making a no[•] of wax of his word, but for ſignes a[•] for ſeaſons, but as for hearbs in the ſame chapter v. 29. there ſuch hearbs as have ſeed in themſelves, are appointed to man for meat, and in Verſe the 30, every green hearb for food for cattel. Now if that be a good reaſon that becauſe the Stars are made for lights and for ſignes of ſeaſons, therefore not for ſignes and ſeaſons, notwithſtanding the word is expreſſe for ſignes and ſeaſons. I may more ſafely reaſon thus, God creates the hearbs for food, and will you turn them to Phyſick? where is your warrant? you know what is ſaid of the holy writings Exo. 30. 33. whoſoever uſeth it to any other purpoſe then that which it was made for muſt be cut off. Yet you will uſe hearbs for Phyſick that were made for food, & will not uſe the Sars for ſigns wch were made for ſignes. Alſo if it be unlawful to uſe the Stars for ſignes, (I mean Aſtrology) becauſe the Chaldeans and Egyptians uſed enchantments with it: Ergo, it is unlawful for them to uſe hearbs for Phyſick, becauſe Witches and Conjurers uſe enchantments with them: yea even in the very gathering of them, this is juſt like many that cry out againſt Engliſh conſtruing books for children, yet they themſelves will uſe them for Greek, Hebrew, French, Spaniſh, and Italian. Beſides that, where can you produce any one place of Canonical Scripture where ever they were commanded to be uſed in Phyſick. And therefore no marvel, though there was a time when Phyſick was as much cried down as Aſtrology is now. Beſides that it is as likely that Phyſicians in curing any diſeaſe, make a ſecret compact with the Devils and more then Aſtrologers, for it is certain that together with a green ointment which cures all diſeaſes new and old, hot and cold, they have their charmes for Tooth-ake, for biting with a mad Dog, for the falling ſickneſſe, convulſion fit, &c. Again it experience will doe nothing in Aſtrology, what reaſon beſides experience can be given that ſuch an hearb ſhould cure ſucha diſeaſe. If any could be given, Phiſicians might quickly learne to cure all diſeaſes. Or if that be ſo as they ſay, that if an Aſtrologer doth not know, both all the Stars and the nature of them, he cannot give a right judgment. Where is that Phyſician, that B[•]tomiſt, that Chiru[•]geon, that knows all hearbs, plants, trees, minerals, and drugs, together with their natures uſeful in Phyſick, who can give the reaſon why an Ivy leaſe ſhould ſtay the bleeding of a wound though never ſo faſt, that it ſhould ſtay it at the firſt touch? Surely you will ſay, if an Aſtrologer layes it on, that he did it by ſecret compact with the Devil, as ſome great Profeſſors told me long before I knew what Aſtrology ment, that becauſe in Surveying I could tell diſtances before I meaſured them, that I could do it by no good meanes, and that I ſcandalized the Goſpel by it wiſhing me either to give it over, or my profeſſion. And how know you that ſuch an hearb is in ſuch a degree of heat, or of cold? Phyſicians differ as much about them as Aſtrologers about Aſtrology. Beſides Phyſitians may uſe Aſtrology, but no other, Hypoc[•]ates and Galen may doe without controlment: or any other Phyſician in his critical dayes, a Phyſician hath as much priviledge in this as a Prieſt to keep a Concubine. And the truth is, a Phyſician without it, is ſcarce half a Phyſician, for I dare boldly ſay, that a Phyſician working Mathematically will three to one tell both the ſtate of the diſeaſe, the place afflicted, and the danger of death, or hope of recovery, without failing▪ one, to the Urine thrice, witneſſe Dr. Napier, [•]lias Sands, brother to the famous Lord Napier, of Scotland, firſt inventer of Logarithms, who was Miniſter of Linford in Buckinghamſhire and withall practiſing Phyſick, and with whom I have often been for Phyſick, who continually uſed both the Urine and erected a figure alſo▪ not for the time of decumbiture for in Chronical diſeaſes few know that: but as a Horary Queſtion▪ who being demanded by Mr. Bowles of Sutton, and Mr. Wilſon of Hawnes, ſucceſſor to the famous Brightman, both for place and vertues, what truth he found in his figure (for of the lawfulneſſe they doubted not) his anſwer was, that where his figure deceived him once, the Urine did it ten times, and that ſometime they would ſpeak quite contrary things: but he always found in his figure moſt truth. And for that the Urine would not ſhew many things that the figure would, as about women with child. And this Mr. Wilſon told me▪ of whom I was an often hearer, and that time did ſcruple Aſtrology very much, and this anſwer he told me, ſatisfied both Mr. Bowles and him. And I fully believe, the Urine will not tell whether a woman be with child or no, upon this ground. My wife practiſing Midwifery, and going into Kent, to lay a Daughter of hers, one Mr. Sparks wife, Miniſter of Cooling, whiles ſhe was there▪ another Gentlewoman not far of, who had been in labour a week together, who having three Midwives with her, two gave her over, the third hearing of my wife, comes to her, acquaints her with the buſineſſe, and craved her aſſiſtance, to whom ſhe conſented, together they went, and finding the Gentlewoman diſconſolate without hope of life, yet committed her ſelf to my wife, who finding no ſuch danger as the other feared, bids her be of good comfort for ſhe doubted not but all would be well quickly, the word was no ſooner ſpoken, but in comes a meſſenger whom they had ſent to Dr. Caeſar of Rocheſter, forbidding the women to uſe any more ado, for ſhe was not in labour▪ (No? quoth my wife, I ſee then the Doctor hath no skill) and I doubt not but by Gods goodneſſe it ſhall appear within this quarter of this hour, and accordingly it fell out preſently, God gave a ſave deliverance both of woman and child, and the woman mended quickly after. If an Aſtrologer ſhould commit ſuch an errour, it would be recorded againſt him to all poſterity.

And whereas Wendeline objects that an Aſtrologer can not give a right judgment becauſe he knowes [•]ot the true number and nature of all the Stars. I confeſſe indeed ſometimes the moſt skilful of all miſſe, both of Aſtrologers and Phyſicians. But what ſhall Wendeline doe then, that knoweth not what an aſpect is or his maſter Picus? But though men doe not know all the Stars and [•]earbs now, yet Adam knew all, but [•]n him we loſt it, we have ſtill the [•]parks we know now but in part, ſo that God made them not in vain in reſpect of their ſignifications.

Therefore I end this argument with this, that like as in Phy[•]ick Art [•]ut of the knowledge of cauſes, ſignes [•]nd effects ariſeth the art both of [•]udging & foretelling many changes and alterations of mens bodies, [•]ea even of death it ſelf: yet this is [•]onfeſt to be free from ſuperſtition, becauſe it is the meditation of the divine works: ſo in this divining art [•]udging by the poſition and nature of [•]he Stars of the cauſes, ſignes, and effects, what other is the conſideration [•]ereof then the beholding the divine works of God? and therefore as worthy the name of an art free from all ſuperſtition as Phyſick without Aſtrology is, and far more, for Phyſick cannot well exiſt without Aſtrology, but Aſtrology can without Phyſick. Beſides, I wonder they ſhould approve it in Hypocrates, and condemn it in all others.

And whereas W[•]ndoline thinks he hath wonne Bullen, or rather defended it againſt two or three of our breaches with his one bulwark, this one diſtinction that the cauſes of all things either came by neceſſity, or by contingency, thinking thereby that becauſe he knowes we maintain as litle neceſſity in them as himſelf, therefore he would fain denie all influence and inclination of the Stars at all, for my part I hold that the principal cauſe of all is God himſelf who ſometimes indeed works alone by himſelf, by ſtirring up principal motions in the minds of mens wherein the inclinations of the Stars have no place, but proceed immediately from God ſuch as in David, who immediately was indued with ſingular courage and ſtirred up by Gods ſpirit to fight with Goliah.

A ſecond cauſe is mans free will, which either followes or reſiſts the temperament of the body. This free will of man ſhould govern the Stars which both can and ought both by meditation, invocation, the fear of God, and daily exerciſe, bridle, correct and take away invading evils, and ingendred vices, leaſt that common ſong prove true,

Natura ſequitur ſemina quiſque ſuae.

So that we maintain no neceſſity that Nero, Caligula, or Anthony, were compelled to commit their wicked acts, but this we hold, Fata mover[•] Deus tollere fata poteſt, and that the will eſpecially being holpen from above, yea even its owne power may avoid many ſuch inclinations of the Stars, though it be ſeldome done.

A third cauſe is the Divel himſelf, who doth often involve the wretched minds of men in this ſo great infirmitie in horid wickedneſſe. And thus Nero's fury riſeth not onely out [〈◊〉] his temperament, but he alſo earnſtl[•] affecting it, and being in love wit[•] pleaſures and covetouſneſſe is mor[•] and more inſtigated of the Devil▪ and he himſelf forcing it forward[•] is become much worſe then his ow[•] nature though otherwiſe bad enough of it ſelf gave him to be. And [〈◊〉] an innumerable company of men▪ who together with the helpe of th[•] Stars are of very good natures moſ[•] horribly ruſh into ſuch wickedneſſe▪ whole facts and events are not to b[•] referred to coeleſtial cauſes and th[•] will of man.

25 Whether is it poſſible or whether is it lawful for one to tell of one that died this very hour 100 miles off. This is not a foretelling, but an[•] aftertelling, but ſuch a one as exceeds the common apprehenſion of man. If you ſay it is impoſſible, I proove it thus, I teaching a School at Hitchi[•] in Hartfordſhere, about anno 16[•]4▪ where amongſt others, I teaching three of one Mr. Chriſtopher Butler[•] children of Stapleford neer Hartford, who inviting me to keep my Chriſtmas with them, I being there diſcour[•]ing with his wife, a godly Gentlewoman, ſhe told me ſhe was the famous Doctor Foxes grand-child, that wrote the Book of Martyrs, and withall told me this ſtory of him, that he being beyond Sea at the time of the death of Queen Mary as he was preaching, about the midſt of his Sermon he ſtood ſtill a pretty while and pauſed, in[•]omuch that the people marveiled, by and by he ſtands up, and utters theſe words: My Brethren, I can do no leſſe then impart unto you what the Spirit of God hath now revealed to me, that this very hour Queen Mary is dead in England, and ſo it proved. And further ſhe told me of an old man (then alive that heard him,) which thing I being there at Whit-ſuntide following meeting there with him he did conſtantly affirm. And I fully beleeve Sr. Ken[•]elme Digby her neer kinſman can ſay more in it then I have done. And thus much and a great deale more is recorded of him of the like kind, in a Book intitled the lives of holy men of theſe latter times. Now if you ſay that he did this by revelation, our Church will condemn you for an Heritick. If you ſay they are all deceived, I ask why may not a few of you more eaſily be miſtaken in point of Aſtrology then all of them in point of revelation. Again, if you ſay he did it by Aſtrology, then you not onely confeſſe that you denied all this while that an Aſtrologer can not tell true. Wendol[•]ne page 646, but it is either by ſome compact with the Divel or by his ſecret inſtinct whereon he quotes Aug. lib. 5. cap. 7 De civitat. De[•]. I ſay, as much credit is to be given to Doctor Fox as to Auguſtin. Dare you or Auguſtine either, if he were living, ſay Doctor Fox did it either by compact of the Devil▪ ſurely if you ſay that he caſts out Devils through Beelzebub we leſſer punies muſt not take it a mis, however you raile of us.

26 What I pray you is becomge of Mercury, when ſaw you him, ſure he is but an ill ſervant to you that will ſcarce be feen three times in a twelve moneth, he alwayes hides himſelf that ſeldome or never he will hold the Caldle unto you, yet I beleeve that is all the work you have to ſet him on, other ſervice he doth you little. They count him a great Aſtronomer, but I doubt he will ſcarce tell when begins Spring, Summer, Autumn, or Winter, nor when Sunday comes, nor yet whether Eaſter-day will fall on the Sunday this year or no, me thinks ſuch a ſervant ſhould be ſmall ornament to your houſe, and my thinks ſuch idle Fellowes as will no wayes doe you good. If you love to keep ſuch, God ſend you enough of them. When he was my ſervant, you ſee he is pictur'd with wings. If I ſent him preſently he would fly to heaven. If I were caſting a Nativity, he would ſtraight bring me word whether the Child would be a good Mathematician, and whether he would prove ingenious or not, and of this he never failed me, if he had, I would never have owned him but have blotted him out of the number of my ſervants for ever.

27 Laſtly, is it not the conſtant tene[•] of all Divines that that doctrin[•] which makes moſt for the glory of God, that is the trueſt doctrine, that this is ſuch appeareth thus: what was the reaſon the Chaldeans and Egyptians worſhipped the whole hoſt of Heaven, but this that generally they were Aſtrologians, and that by their skill they found out their wonderful effects and operations, and withall not knowing the Maker of them went as far as their knowledge led them to worſhip the creature in ſtead of the Creator. And what can more move a Chriſtian Aſtrologer to admire the wiſedome, the glory, the bounty and goodneſſe of God, that knows there is a God that made them, then this it will enforce him with David to ſay, Lord, When I conſider the Sun, Moon, and Stars the works of thy hands, eſpecially in their uſes, what is mā thē that thou ſhouldſt once remember him to make him little inferiour to the angels? to crown him with glory in making ſo many glorious lights not onely to give him [•]ight both day & night & to diſtinguiſh [•]eaſons; but infinitely more when he conſiders Gods mercy and goodneſs, in ſending ſuch Heralds and Embaſ[•]adours to tell wife men of a plague a far of that they may hide themselves. But as for the Chriſtian Aſtrologer to whom God reveals this Magnalia Dei, & makes him in ſtead of a Prophet amongſt the people, I know not what to make of him if he ſhould not cry out, and ſay, I thank thee O Father▪ Lord of Heaven and Earth, that thou haſt hid theſe things from the wiſe, and prudent, and haſt revealed them to me a Babe and a Suckling, and, me thinks, I can but wonder that ſuch a one ſhall not at one time or other in the conſideration and meditation thereof be as it were raviſht in ſpirit, and in ſome meaſure to think himſelf with Paul taken up into the third Heaven, and to feele ſuch joy as Salomon ſaith a ſtranger ſhal not meddle withal.

But this is the reaſon that the Divines are ſo miſtaken, your taking things upon truſt one of another without examination. I remember that this was the reaſon that M. Wilſon beforenamed, gave to one Ms. Hatley, who deſiring of him the reaſon why that doctrine of the return of the Jews to Jeruſalem ſhould lie hid and altogether unknown till Mr. Brightman found it out: gave her (as I ſay) this the onely cauſe thereof, never was there that Divine known to this day, that can be prooved to have had any good knowledge in Aſtrology, that ever wrote againſt it, and therefore I conclude with that in Judges, firſt conſider, then conſult, and laſt of all give ſentence.

All that I have yet ſpoken with finding no uſe for divers Stars, here eſpecially Mercury are driven to this that there may be uſe for them in the world of the moon, let us therefore eſſay to take that away alſo and to leave them no colour for it. Si[•] probo. Where Chriſt never redeemed any, God never created any. But Chriſt never redeemed any in the moon. Ergo the Major▪ thus God never^[3] created any reaſonable creature, viz. angels or men, but he in his ſecret election created, or at leaſt permitted ſome to proove Veſſels or Inſtruments to glorifie his mercies, others to glorifie his Juſtice, but ſuch God created not in the moon. Ergo, where Chriſt redeemed no elect, God created n[•]ne elect, but Chriſt redeemed none there. Ergo.

The Minor thus. Chriſt redeemed none but the ſeed of Adam, and ſuch as were loſt in his fall. 1 Cor. 15. v. 21. 32. Or thus, Chriſt redeemed none but in that world in which he was both born, lived, and did miracles, and ſuffered, but none of theſe he did in the moon, for as it had been injuſtice in God to have caſt off Adam for the fall of the angels in another world ſo neither ſhall the fall of angels nor of Adam be imputed to them to ther condemnation, nor yet any actions of Chriſt here to their ſalvation.

^[4] As man ſinned, ſo Chriſt muſt be made man, as man ſinned in this world, ſo Chriſt muſt become a man and ſuffer for man in this world not in heaven, much leſſe in the moon for us, nor here for thoſe in the moon.

^[5] Neither did Chriſt die anywhere elſe but here, for he died but once, Heb. 9. 28. and where is now the man in the moon?

But grant it, yet Mercury is as ſeldome in the moon as here, by reaſon of his proximity to the Sun.

But they ſay each ſtar is a ſeveral world, neither doth Mendeline content himſelf with 1022, but ſaith they are infinitely more, now if Chriſt muſt ſuffer once for each Star, how many times muſt he ſuffer in all. He had better content himſelf with the redemption of one, then be troubed with ſo many. Suppoſe there be but 1022 of them, and that each of them coſt him but 33 years time in redeeming, it will take him up 33726 years, which in the judgment of moſt, if he [•]ad begun as ſoone as Adam had fell [•]ould have took him up as much [•]ime as the laſting of five worlds one [•]fter another, Heb. 1. 11.

Look where the ſame reaſon o [•]overnment holds, there the ſamſ [•]dminiſtration. But the ſame reaſone [•]olds with them as with us. Ergo.

If each world ſhould have a ſeve[•]al government and there can be but [•]ne beſt, then God did not order all [•]y the beſt. But God did order all [•]y the beſt, Ergo; Sun, Moon, Stars [•]nd Earth, are ordered all by the [•]ame government. But there is but [•]ne faith, one Chriſt, one Baptiſme, [•]nd thus Chriſt died but once, and in he earth, and for the ſeed of Adam onely, Ergo.

THere is one Rowland who hath lately wrote againſt Aſtrology, but all that he hath of his own is not worth the naming, onely to make up his Book, he comes at laſt to quote ſome arguments of Mr. Perkins againſt it, where two eſpecially are Mr. Perkins own, the reſt are common with others, and anſwered before. The firſt is, that men have more truſt to it then to Gods word, and thereupon if the Aſtrologer tell them by a figure that Corne will be dear ſuch a year, they will hard it up till it rot: I anſwer, that though I ingenuoſly confeſſe Mr. Perkins to have been a worthy Divine of his time, and one whom I ever reverenced, and further to be, as I verily think, the beſt skild in Aſtrology of all that ever wrote againſt it, yet he is but a man and ſubject to errour as well as others, and one that divers good Divines will beg leave to deſſent from in ſome of his tenents As firſt the unlawfulneſſe of Cock-fightings, and Dog-fightings. Secondly, that it is unlawful to buy an Almanack, becauſe if that ſaith grain will [•]e dear, it makes men truſt in it and [•]liſtruft God, I can not deny, but if [•]ny ſhall doe ſo as to put any abſo[•]ute confidence in an Almanack or [•]igure they greatly ſin, becauſe there [•]s in them a poſſibility of errour, for [•]everal occaſions before alledged: ſo [•]s there not in Gods word; yet there may be a kind of truſt (I doubt not) [•]n ſome meaſure, or perſwaſion at [•]eaſt of the truth of the Almanack or Figure by how much the more experience I have had of the truth of the [•]ike or the ſame mans making before. For ſuppoſe I owe 20 l. to be paid upon bond the firſt day of April, to ſuch a one as I am ſure will [•]tand upon the forefeiter, but I have [•] truſty Tenant that never failes me, [•]ut payes me 40 l. Rent the 25 or 26 of March, at furtheſt, will not any one rather truſt to ſuch a Tenant, though there be a poſſibility of fail[•]ng as by thieves, fire, &c) rather then [•]o borrow it elſewhere, or ſell commodities to leſſe? Neither can I think but according to Joſephs example, it is lawful in a plentiful time with the one to lay up againſt a time of ſcarcity.

The other of Mr. Perkins quoted by the ſaid Rowland, is concerning a rule uſed by ſome Aſtrologers concerning the time when the effects of an Eclipſe begins, which is this: Obſerve at the middle of the Eclipſe how far the Luminary eclipſed, is diſtant from its riſing, and how long it continueth above the Horizon, then reduce them into minutes, and ſay by the golden Rule: If the whole continuance of the Luminarie eclipſed give 365 dayes, what ſhall its time from the riſing give? The time hereby found, ſay ſome, is the time of the beginning of the effects. But Mr. Perkins there reckons many ſeveral Eclipſes whoſe effects, (of his own knowledge) began preſently after the Eclipſes. Where note, that we need no ſtronger witneſs to prove that Eclipſes have their effects▪ and that theſe effects are found by Aſtrology, deny it they that can, and for my part, I am of his mind, for the time of the beginning of the effects, and ſo is Origanus and ſo is Mr. Wings Ephemeris.

Yet let me anſwer one objection more, which is this. Though in erecting of Figures you doe not work by the Devil, yet they that come to you doe beleeve you doe. I aske, muſt I give over my calling of a Surveyor or Inginee[•] becauſe ſome great Profeſſors thinking (becauſe I could tell diſtances without meaſuring them) that I wrought by the Devil? and thereon moved me to either leave it or my profeſſion of the Goſpel, for I was a ſcandal to it. Or muſt our Saviour Chriſt give over caſting out Devils, becauſe ſome thought he wrought by Beelzebub, yet I would have none ſo bold to tell the effects of Eclipſes or great conjunctions before they fall, leaſt they miſſe of the time when they will fall, as Lilly did, for as K[•]pler ſaith, it is hard [•]o hit.

Near the beginning of this letter I ſpake a word or two in commendation of Sr. Chriſtopher Heydens Book, and that I would fain ſee that anſwered. It hath been mine hap very lately to ſee a Book coming under the name of one Vicars B. D. as if he were a Bachelor of Divinity. But if that can be called an anſwer, certainly it is ſo ſtrange an anſwer, that it gives me as little ſatisfaction as Rowland[•] book, that promiſed in the beginning of it to anſwer Sr. Chriſtopher in the end of it: but he would firſt anſwer an other: which by that time he had done anſwering him, Mr. Finis called him away, that he could never attend to anſwer him ſince. Juſt ſo deale[•] Mr. Vicars, he promiſeth in his Title Page great matters: but truly ſo far as I read (which was more then [•] quartern) I may well ſay:

Parturiunt m[•]rtes naſ[••]tur ridiculu[•] inus.

Much is promiſed, but nothing performed. I read till I was weary, ſtil[•] expecting ſome arguments tha[•] ſhould either diſproove the lawfulneſſe of Aſtrology in general: or a[•] [•]eaſt ſomething that Sir Chriſtopher [•]ad defended. But I found my expe[•]tation failed me: for all that time [•]o far was ſpent againſt Conjurers, Witches▪ Charmers, Inchanters, and [•]uch as obſerve the flying of birds are [•]uch as look into the River, as if Sir Chr[•]ſ[•]opher had mainteined theſe [•]hings. I[•] you did it not to make the world believe ſo, truly you have [•]aken a great deale of paines, but nihil [•]d thumbum, you may as well tax M[•][•]es as Sir Chriſtopher for theſe things.

Again, you ſay, you have known [•]ome were ſuch dunſes in the Univer[•]ities that being fit for no learning, hey then ſet upon Aſtrology, that hey may have the Devils help in it, [•]hough you ſpeak never ſo myſtically [•]et I have a ſound witneſs, even your [•]wn conſcience, that you would make [•]en believe Sr. Chriſtopher to be ſuch [•] one. I[•] he be not ſuch a one, why do [•]ou ſpeak it? if he be ſuch a one ſpeak [•]lain Engliſh, a man may more eaſily [•]e[•]end himſelf from a maſty dog that flies at his face, then from a little Whirpet that bites one by the heeles▪ Truly, Sir, this is but backbiting at the beſt, far unbeſeeming the profeſſion of a Divine, neither, is it the breach of the leaſt Commandement though it were, yet if you teach men ſo, you are unfit for the kingdome o[•] God. Beſides this, whether he be more in wealth, or poor in gifts, the Wiſe man tels you, he that deſpiſet[•] the poor, reprocheth him that made him. He could have made him wiſe and you fooliſh. But what is this to the matter? this is onely againſt the man. Beſides this. How common a thing is it throughout your Book, to call him, My Gentleman, My Gentleman. Hath king James m[•]de him a Knight, and will you degrade him and make him but a Gentleman? Sir I am ſure if I ſhould call you ſo Would you not take it as ir[•]nically ſpoken, and is this to fulfill the Royal Law of Liberty to doe as you would be done to. Quod tibi fier[•] non vis [•]lteri ne feceris. But whether this will beare an action in the Court of Honour, I leave to others to judg.

Non noſtram inter vos tant[•]s componere lates.

am ſure it will beare an action in he high Court of Heaven. But ſure [〈◊〉] his ſhews that learned king, king Iames, that great enemy to Aſtrolo[•]ie, whom you ſo boaſt of, ſaw more [•] him then Aſtrology, though you [•]ee it not: otherwiſe he would never have made him a Knight, for that he was ſo great an enemy, to pretenders [•]e did it after he had wrote his Book gainſt Mr. Chambers, for the bookes [•]ake, as I believe, rather that it was ſo, for that I have ſeen king James [•]uoted in defence of Aſtrology, whatſoever you ſay. But here is [•]othing yet againſt the matter. Oney it argues a wrangling ſpirit, and you know what the Apoſtle ſaith: If any man luſt to be contentious we have no ſuch cuſtome neither have the Churches of Chriſt, for the wrath of man doth not accompliſh the righteouſneſs of God. But a meek Spirit is a thing before God much ſet by.

Again, that that hath any ſeeming ſhew to be againſt the matter, you altogether deſire to draw from a confeſſion of approving that which neither he nor M[•]ſes, nor any honeſt Aſtrologer will approve of▪ As concerning his Definition of Aſtrology, he ſets it down as he mainteins it: you as the Chaldeans uſed it, ſo that becauſe you can pick no hole in his coat for his Aſtrology, therefore you quarrel againſt the Chaldeans Aſtrology. Go tell the Chaldeans of it, what is that to Sr Chriſtopher, it argues a wrangling Spirit?

Again, how often boiles that Crambe of yours, concerning the prediction of the death of Henry II. king of France, upon a certain day, by a wound in his head, by a Conjurer: if a Conjurer, what is that to Aſtrology?

But I pray how did Doctor Fox tell that Queen Mary died that very hour in England he being in Germany? Or Mr. Brightman, the downfall of the Biſhops? doe you think they did it by help of the Devil? I confeſſe, I have found it the raſh judgement of ſome, that if they ſee any excellency in any thing that their ſhallow reach cannot aprehend. Becauſe mount Taurus ſhadows the Bull of Lemnos, though 20 miles off, they would have it removed if they could.

But, Sir, ſtill you charge Sir Chriſtopher with other mens tenents. I do not think that you can prove, that ever he predicted the very day of any mans death: if he did, you might have done well to have quoted the Page, and not put us to read all his Book, and yet miſſe of it when we have done, and you to mock us for our labour? Yet we ſee Phyſicians do [•]t ſometimes, though perhaps more [•]y help of Aſtrology then any phy[•]ical notions. If Hip[•]crates, or Gallen, [•]ell you of ſuch a thing you will not [•]ay they work by the Devil, but Sci[••]tia nu[•]lum habet inimicum pr[•]ter ign[•][•]ant[•]m, yet this I will ſay, it is poſi[•]le out of a mans Nativity to give a [•]hrewd conjecture of ſuch a thing, [•]erhaps within a moneth or a week, perhaps within a day, & why not [•] ſame day. Yea, & whether he ſhall[•] a violent death or no▪ I pray, Sir, h[••] you any skill in Aſtrology or not? you have not, then I ſay you kno[•] as little what you ſay as they did th[•] condemne me for working by [〈◊〉] Divel, for telling diſtances before had meaſured them: yet they [〈◊〉] honeſt men too. But if you have sk[•] you either got it by help of the Devi[•] as you ſay, others doe, or elſe by reading the Rules & Aphoriſ[••]es of [•] as we doe. Which if that be wor[•]ing by the Devil in us; it is ſo in yo[•] alſo. But if it be lawful to read [〈◊〉] Rules (or elſe how ſhall you be ab[•] to confute them) Sir, if you wi[•] vouchſafe to take a little mo[•] paines, I doubt not but yo[•] your ſe[•] ſhall eaſily be able to give a ver[•] neer conjecture of almoſt as great thing. Then if you find the reaſo[•] in the one you may doe it in the other. And having done, I pray the[•] tell me where lies the errour, let th[•] Queſtion be how king Charles com[•] to be beheaded, and that time, [〈◊〉] January 30, 1648/1649. He was born in Scotland Anno 1600 Nov. 19 hora 10 4′ p. m. latitudo loci 57 medium coeli. is ♉ 37 the R. Aſc. 17 13 oculus ♉ and the △ of ☽ being both in ♊ 4′ if you direct M. C. to them being both together and both ſignifying preferment eſpecially oculus ♉, as you may ſee in the rules of directions the R. Aſc. of oculus ♉ being 61 41. If thence you take the R. A. of M. C. 37. 13 the art of directions is 25. 28 which gives in time 25 years and ſomewhat more. Likewiſe ☾ in 4. 29 of ♎ makes her △ dexter in 4▪ 29 of ♊, the R. Aſ. thereof is 62. 30, whence take 37. 13 reſts 25. 17; which is a little leſs then ocu. ♉, but both are 25 years, which added to 1600 the year of his birth, being come to his kingdom Mar. 27, 1625.

And if you have skill as you pretend to have, doth not the direction of M. C to the □ of ♃ tell you nothing of the difference between him and the Parliament, Anno 1641.

And can you gather nothing out of M. C. to the Seſquiquadrant of ♄ concerning the many battels fought in Anno 1643. And[〈1… pages missing〉]