An Advertisement to the Jury-men of England touching Witches

AN ADVERTISEMENT TO THE JURY-MEN OF ENGLAND, Touching Witches. TOGETHER WITH A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN An ENGLISH AND HEBREW VVitch.

LONDON, Printed by I. G. for Richard Royſton, At the Angel in Ivie-lane, 1653.

ADVERTISEMENT TO THE JƲRY-MEN, OF ENGLAND.

THe late Execution of Witches, at the Summer Aſsiſes in Kent, occaſioned this briefe Exercitation, which addreſſes it ſelfe to ſuch as have not deliberately thought upon the great difficulty in diſcovering, what, or who a Witch is. To have nothing but the publique faith of the preſent Age, is none of the beſt evidence, unleſſe the univerſality of Elder times doe concur with theſe Doctrines, which ignorance in the times of darkneſſe brought forth, and credulity in theſe dayes of light hath continued.

Such as ſhall not bee pleaſed with this Tractate, are left to their liberty to conſider, whether all thoſe Proofs and Preſumptions number'd up by Mr. Perkins, for the Conviction of a Witch, be not all condemned, or confeſſed by himſelfe to be unſufficient, or uncertaine.

He brings no leſſe then eighteene ſignes, or proofes whereby a VVitch may be diſcovered; Which are too many to be all true: His ſeven firſt he himſelf confeſſeth to be inſufficient for conviction of a VVitch; His eight next proofes (which he ſaith, men in place have uſed) he acknowledgeth to be falſe or inſufficient. Thus of his eighteen proofes, which made a great ſhew, fourteen of them are caſt off by himſelfe; there remaines then his ſixteenth, which is the confeſsion of a Witch, yet preſently he is forced to yeild that a bare confeſsion is not a ſufficient proofe, and ſo he commeth to his ſeaventeenth proof, which is, two credible witneſſes, and he here grants that the league between the Devill, and the Witch is cloſely made, and the practiſes of Witches be very ſecret, that hardly a Man can be brought, which upon his own knowledge can aver ſuch things. Therefore at laſt when all other proofes faile, he is forced to fly to his eighteenth proofe, and tels us, that yet there is a way to come to the knowledge of a Witch, which is, that Satan uſeth all meanes to diſcover a Witch; which how it can be well done, except the Devill be bound over to give in evidence againſt the Witch, cannot be underſtood.

And as Mr. Perkins weakens, and diſcredits all his own Proofes, ſo he doth the like for all thoſe of K. James, who as I remember hath but 3. Arguments for the diſcovery of a VVitch. Firſt, The ſecret Marke of a VVitch, of which M. Perkins ſaith, it hath no power by Gods Ordinance. Secondly, The diſcovery by a fellow-VVitch, this Mr. Perkins by no means will allow to be a good proof. Thirdly, the ſwimming of a VVitch, who is to be flung croſſe wayes into the water, that is, as VVierus interprets it, when the Thumb of the right hand is bound to the great Toe of the left Foot, and the Thumb of the left Hand, to the great Toe of the right Foot: againſt this Triall by water, together with a diſability in a VVitch to ſhed Tears (which K. James mentions) Delrio, and Mr. Perkins both argue, for it ſeems they both write after K. Iames, who put forth his Book of Doemonologie in his Youth, being in Scotland, about his age of thirty years.

It concernes the People of this Nation to be more diligently inſtructed, in the Doctrine of Witch-craft, then thoſe of forraigne Countries, becauſe here they are tyed to a ſtricter or exacter Rule in giving their ſentence, then others are; for all of them muſt agree in their Verdict, which in a caſe of extreame difficulty is very dangerous, and it is a ſad thing for Men to be reduced to that extremity, that they muſt hazard their Conſciences, or their lives.

Errata.

PAge 12. l. 32. for they have, read it hath. p. 3. l. 5. for theſe, read thoſe. p. 5. l. 3. for egrinus read egimus.

A DIFFERENCE BETVVEENE An ENGLISH AND HEBREW VVitch.

THe Point in Queſtion is briefly this; whether ſuch a Witch as is condemned by the Lawes, and Statutes of this Land, be one and the ſame with the Witch forbidden by the Law of Moſes.

The Witch condemned by our Statute-law is,

1 JACOB. CAP. 12.

One that ſhall uſe, practiſe, or exerciſe any invocation or conjuration of any evil or wicked ſpirit, or conſult, covenant with, entertaine or employ, féede or reward any evill or wicked ſpirit, to, or for any intent or purpoſe; or take up any dead man, woman, or child, out of his, her, or their grave, or any other place, where the dead body reſteth, or the skin, bone, or other part of any dead perſon, to be employed or uſed in any manner of Witchcraft, Sorcery, Charme or Enchantment; or ſhall uſe, practiſe, or exerciſe any Witchcraft, Enchantment, Charme, or Sorcery, whereby any perſon ſhall be killed, deſtroyed, waſted, conſumed, pined, or lamed in his, or her body, or any part thereof. Such offenders duly and lawfully convicted and attainted, ſhall ſuffer death.

If any perſon ſhall take upon him by Witchcraft, Inchantment, Charme, or Sorcery, to tell or declare in what place any treaſure of Gold, or Silver, ſhould or might be found, or had in the Earth, or other ſecret places, or where Goods, or things loſt or ſtolne ſhould be found or become: Or to the intent, to provoke any perſon to unlawfull love, or whereby any Cattell or Goods of any perſon ſhall be deſtroyed, waſted, or impaired, or to deſtroy or hurt any perſon, in his, or her body, though the ſame be not effected, &c. a yeares Impriſonment, and Pillory, &c. and the ſecond conviction, death.

In this Statute theſe Points are Obſervable.

1. That this Statute was firſt framed in 5. Eliz. and onely the penalties here a little altered, and the laſt clauſe concerning provoking of perſons to love, and deſtroying of Cattle, and Goods, &c. is ſo changed, that I cannot well make ſenſe of it, except it be rectified according to the words of the former Statute which ſtands repealed.

2. Although the Statute runs altogether in the disjunctive Or, and ſo makes every ſingle crime capitall, yet the Judges uſually by a favourable interpretation take the disjunctive Or for the copulative And; and therefore ordinarily they condemne none for Witches, unleſſe they be charged with the Murdering of ſome perſon.

3. This Statute preſuppoſeth that every one knowes what a Conjurer, a Witch, an Inchanter, a Charmer, and Sorcerer is, as being to be learned beſt of Divines; and therefore they have not deſcribed, or diſtinguiſhed betweene them: and yet the Law is very juſt in requiring a due and lawfull conviction.

The definition of Witch-craft.

FOr the better diſcovery of the qualities of theſe crimes, I ſhall ſpend ſome diſcourſe upon the Definition of theſe arts by Divines, for both thoſe of the reformed Churches, as well as theſe of the Roman in a manner, agree in their Definition of the ſinne of Witch-craft. I ſhall inſtance in two late Writers, viz. Mr. W. Perkins in his Diſcourſe of Witch-craft, and in Martin Delrie a Juſuit of Loraine in his booke of Magicall diſquiſitions.

Our Engliſh word Witch is derived from the Dutch word, Witchelen, or Wijchelen, which doth properly ſignifie whinying o[•] neying like a Horſe, and doth alſo ſignifie to foretell, or prophecy; and Weicheler ſignifies a South ſayer, for that the Germans from whom our Anceſtors the Saxons deſcended uſually, and principally did as Tacitus tells us, Divine and foretell things to come by the whinying, and neying of their horſes, Hinitu & fremitu are his words.

^[1]For the Definition Mr. Perkins ſaith, Witch craft is an Art ſerving for the working of Wonders, by the aſſiſtance of the Devill, ſo far as God ſhall permit.

^[2] Delrio defineth it to be an Art which by the power of a contract, entred into with the Devill, ſome wonders are wrought which paſſe the common underſtanding of men. Ars qua vi pacti cum Daemonibus initi mira quaedam communem hominum captum ſuperantia officiuntur.

In theſe two Definitions, ſome Points are worth the noting.

1. They both agree in the maine Foundation, which is a Contract with the Devill, and therefore Mr. Perkins thought it moſt neceſſary, that this maine point ſhould be proved, to which purpoſe he promiſeth to define a Witch, by opening the nature of Witchcraft, ^[3] as it is delivered in the Old and new Teſtament, and yet after hee confeſſeth a manifeſt Covenant is not ſo fully ſet down in Scripture; ^[4] And out of the New Teſtament he offers no proofe at all, though he promiſed it, nevertheleſſe he reſolves us that a Covenant is a moſt evident and certaine truth, that may not be called in question.

For proofe of a Covenant he produceth onely one Text out of the old Teſtament, neither doth hee ſay, that the Text proveth a Contract with the Devill, but onely that it intimateth ſo much; Thus at the firſt hee falls from a proofe to an intimation onely.^[5] The Text is Pſal. 58. ver. 5. of which his words are theſe, howſoever the common tranſlation runeth in other termes, yet the words are properly to be read thus; which heareth not the voyce of the mutterer ioyning Societies cunningly—the maine Foundation of the Charme Societies or Confederacies cunningly made not between man and man, but as the words import between the Enchanter and the Devil Deuit. 18. 11.

Anſwer. Though there be neither mention of Spirit, or Devill in this Pſalme, yet Mr. Perkins would have us believe that there can be no conjoyning or conſociating but with the Devill: But Mr. Ainſworth as great a Rabby as Mr. Perkins, finds other interpretations of this Text, and though hee mentions fellowſhip with the Devill, yet hee puts it in the third and laſt place as the neweſt and lateſt interpretation; for hee teacheth us that the Enchanter had his title both in Pſalme 58. and in Deut. 18. either becauſe he aſſociats Serpents, making them tame and familiar that they hurt not, or becauſe ſuch perſons uſe to bind and tye bonds, or things about the body to heale or hurt by Sorcery; alſo he teacheth us that a Charmer doth joyne, or ſpeake words of a ſtrange language, and without ſenſe, &c.

Delrio, it ſeemes puts no confidence in this Text of Mr. Perkins, for hee doth not cite it to prove a Contract, yet he hath alſo one Text of his own to that purpoſe,^[6] it is Eſay 28. 15. where it is ſaid, wee have made a Covenant with Death, and with Hell we are at an agreement, percuſſimus faedus cum morte, & cum inferno fecimus pactum, and Delrio tells us that Tho Aquinas did apply this Text to Witches▪ magis ſatis probabili interpretatione.

Anſw. If this Text be conſidered, it proves nothing at all, for it doth not charge the proud and drunken Ephramites, of whom it is ſpoken that they had made any agreement with Hell, but it is onely a falſe brag of their own to juſtifie their wickedneſſe by a lie; for it is not poſſible to make a Covenant with Death, which in it ſelfe is nothing but a meere not being; and whereas it is called an agreement with Hell, it may be tranſlated as well, if not better in this place an agreement with the Grave, and ſo the interlineary Bible hath it, and Tnemelius and Junius render it pepigimus faedus cum morte, & cum ſepulcro egrinus cautum, which they terme a thraſonicall hyperbole, and Deodatus his Italian Bible hath habbiamo fatto lega col ſepolero, ſo likewiſe the Spaniſh Bible tranſlates it, concierto tenemos hecho con la muerte, è con la ſepultura hazimos acuerdo.

It may be wondered that neither Mr. Perkins nor the Jeſuit have any other, or better Texts to prove this Contract betweene the Witch and the Devill. But the truth is it is very little that either of them ſay of this great point, but paſſe it over perfunctorily. Perhaps it may be thought that King James hath ſaid, or brought more and better proofes in this point; but I doe not finde that he doth medle with it at all, but takes it for granted that if there be Witches, there muſt needs be a Covenant, and ſo leaves it without further proofe.

A ſecond note is that the agreement betweene the Witch, and the Devill they call a Covenant, and yet neither of the parties are any way bound to performe their part, and the Devill without doubt notwithſtanding all his craft hath far the worſt part of the bargaine.^[7] The bargaine runs thus in Mr. P. the Witch as a ſlave binds himſelfe by Vow to believe in the Devill, and to give him either Body, or Soule, or both under his hand Writing, or ſome part of his Bloud. The Divell promiſeth to be ready at his vaſſals command to appeare in the likeneſſe of any Creature, to conſult, and to aid him for the procuring of Pleaſure, Honour, Wealth, or Preferment, to goe for him, to carry him any whither, and doe any command. Whereby we ſee the Devill is not to have benefit of his bargaine till the Death of the Witch, in the meane time he is to appeare alwayes at the Witches command, to go for him, to carry him any whither, and to doe any command, which argues the Devill to be the Witches ſlave▪ and not the Witch the Divills.

Though it be true which Delrio affirmeth, that the Devill is at liberty to performe or breake his compact, for that not man can compell him to keepe his promiſe; yet on the other ſide it is as poſſible for the Witch to fruſtrate the Devills Contract, if hee or ſhee have ſo much grace as to repent, the which there may be good cauſe to do, if the Devill be found not to performe his promiſe: Beſides a Witch may many times require that to be done by the Devill, which God permits not the Devill to do; thus againſt his will the Devill may loſe his credit, and give occaſion of repentance though he endeavour to the utmoſt of his power to bring to paſſe whatſoever he hath promiſed, and ſo faile of the benefit of his bargaine, though he have the hand-writing, or ſome part of the bloud of the Witch for his ſecurity, or the ſolemnity before witneſſes as Delrio imagineth.

I am certaine they will not ſay that Witch-craft is like the ſinne againſt the Holy Ghoſt, unpardonable, for Mr. Perkins confeſſeth the contrary,^[8] and Delrio denies it not, for hee allowes the Sacrament of the Euchariſt to be adminiſtred to a condemned Witch, with this limitation, that there may be about foure houres ſpace betweene the Communion, and the Execution, in which time it may be probably thought that the Sacramentall Species (as they call it) may be conſumed.

3. Delrio in his ſecond Booke, and fourth Queſtion gives this rule, which he ſaith, is common to all Contracts with the Devill, that first they muſt deny the Faith, and Chriſtianiſme, and Obedience to God, and reject the patronage of the Virgin Mary, and revile her. To the ſame purpoſe Mr. Perkins affirmes that Witches renounce God and their Baptiſme. But if this be common to all Contracts with the Devill, it will follow that none can be Witches but ſuch as have firſt beene Chriſtians, nay and Roman Catholiques, if Delrio ſay true, for who elſe can renounce the patronage of the Virgin Mary? And what ſhall be ſaid then of all thoſe Idolatrous Nations of Lapland, Finland, and of divers parts of Africa, and many other Heatheniſh Nations which our Travailers report to be full of Witches? And indeed what neede or benefit can the Devill gaine by contracting with thoſe Idolaters, who are ſurer his own, then any Covenant can make them?

4. Whereas it is ſaid that Witch craft is an Art working wonders, it muſt be underſtood that the art muſt be the Witches Art, and not the Devills, otherwiſe it is no Witch-craft, but Devils-craft: It is confeſſed on all hands that the Witch doth not worke the wonder, but the Devill onely. It is a rare Art for a Witch by her Art to be able to do nothing her ſelfe, but to command an other to practiſe the Art. In other Arts Mr. Perkins confeſſeth,^[9] that the Arts Maſter is able by himſelfe to practiſe his Art, and to doe things belonging thereunto without the helpe of an other, but in this it is otherwiſe—the power of effecting ſtrange workes doth not flow from the skill of the Witch, but is derived wholy from Satan. ^[10] To the ſame purpoſe he ſaith, that the means of working wonders are Charmes uſed as a Watch-word to the Devill to cauſe him to worke wonders: ſo that the Devill is the worker of the wonder, and the Witch but the Counſellor, Perſwader, or Commander of it, and onely acceſſary before the Fact, and the Devill onely principall. Now the difficulty will be how the acceſſary can be duely and lawfully convicted and attainted according as our Statute requires, unleſſe the Devill who is the Principall be firſt convicted, or at leaſt outlawed, which cannot be, becauſe the Devill can never be lawfully ſummoned according to the rules of our Common-law. For further proofe that the Devill is the principall in all ſuch wonders, I ſhall ſhew it by the teſtimony of King James, in a caſe of Murther, which is the moſt capitall crime our Lawes looke upon. Firſt he tells that the Devill teaches Witches how to make Pictures of Wax and Clay, that by the reſting thereof the perſons that they beare the Name of, may be continually melted or dried away by continuall ſickneſſe—not that any of theſe meanes which he teacheth them (except poyſons which are compoſed of things naturall) can of themſelves helpe any thing to theſe turnes they are imployed in. ^[11] Secondly, King James affirmes that Witches can bewitch, and take the life of Men, or Women by roſting of the Pictures, which is very poſſible to their Maſter to performe, for although that inſtrument of Wax have no vertue in the turne doing: yet may be not very well by that ſame meaſure that his conjured Slave melts that Wax at the fire, may he not I ſay at theſe ſame times ſubtilely as a ſpirit, ſo weaken and ſcatter the ſpirits of life of the patient, as may make him on the one part for faintneſſe to ſweate out the humours of his body; and on the other part for the not concurring of theſe spirits which cauſe his digeſtion, ſo debilitate his ſtomack that his humour radicall continually ſweating out on the one part, and no new good Suck being put in the place thereof, for lack of digestion on the other, he at laſt ſhall vaniſh away even as his Picture will doe at the Fire. Here we ſee the Picture of Wax roaſted by the Witch, hath no vertue in the Murdering, but the Devill only. It is neceſſary in the firſt place that it be duely proved that the party Murther'd be Murthered by the Devill, for it is a ſhame to bely the Devill, and it is not poſſible to be proved if it be Subtilely done as a spirit.

5. Our Definers of Witch-craft diſpute much, whether the Devill can worke a Miracle, they reſolve he can do a wonder, but not a Miracle, Mirum but not Miraculum. A Miracle ſaith Mr. Perkins, is that which is above, or againſt nature ſimply; a wonder is that which proceeds not from the ordinary courſe of nature. Delrio will have a Miracle to be Praeter, or ſupra naturae creatae vires, both ſeeme to agree in this that he had neede be an admirable or profound Philoſopher, that can diſtinguiſh between a Wonder and a Miracle; it would poſe Ariſtotle himſelfe, to tell us every thing that can be done by the power of Nature, and what things cannot, for there be dayly many things found out, and dayly more may be which our Fore-fathers never knew to be poſſible in Nature. Thoſe that were converted by the Miracles of our Saviour, never ſtayed to enquire of their Philoſophers what the power of Nature was, it was ſufficient to them when they ſaw things done, the like whereof they had neither ſeene, nor heard of to believe them to be Miracles.

6. It is commonly believed, and affirmed by Mr. Perkins, that the cauſe which moves the Devill to bargaine with a Witch, is a deſire to obtaine thereby the Soule and Body of the Witch. But I cannot ſee how this can agree with another Doctrine of his, where hee ſaith, the Precepts of Witch-craft are not delivered indifferently to every Man, but to his owne Subjects the wicked; and not to them all, but to speciall and tried ones, whom hee moſt betruſteth with his ſecrets, as being the fitteſt to ſerve his turne, both in reſpect of their willingneſſe to learne and practice; as alſo for their ability to become Inſtruments of the miſchiefe he intendeth to others. All this argues the end of the Devills rules of Witch-craft is not to gaine Novices for new Subjects, but to make uſe of old ones to ſerve his turne.

7. The laſt clauſe of Mr. Perkins definition is, that Witch-craft doth worke wonders ſo far as God ſhall permit. I ſhould here deſire to have known whether Mr. Perkins had thought that God doth permit farther power to the Devill upon his contracting with the Witch, then he had before the Contract; for if the Devill had the ſame permiſſion before the Contract, then he doth no more miſchiefe upon the Contract, then he would have gladly done before,^[12] ſeeing as Mr. Perkins ſaith, The Devills malice towards all Men is of ſo high a degree, that he cannot endure they ſhould enjoy the World, or the benefits of this life (if it were poſſible) ſo much as one houre. But yet afterwards I finde Maſter Perkins is more favourable to the Devill, where he writes, that if the Devill were not ſtirred up, and provoked by the Witch he would never do ſo much hu[•]t as he doth.

Of the Diſcerning, and Diſcovery of a Witch.

^[13] A Magistrate, ſaith Mr. Perkins, may not take upon him to examine whom, and how he willeth of any Crime, nor to proceede upon ſlight cauſes, or to ſhew his Authority, or upon ſiniſter respects, or to revenge his malice, or to bring parties into danger, and ſuspition, but hee muſt proceede upon speciall preſumptions.

^[14]He calls thoſe preſumptions which doe at leaſt probably, and conjecturally note one to be a Witch, and are certaine ſignes whereby the Witch may be diſcovered. I cannot but wonder that Mr. Perkins ſhould ſay that preſumptions do at leaſt probably, and conjecturally note, and are certaine ſignes to diſcover a Witch; when he confeſſeth that though preſumptions give occaſion to examine, yet they are no ſufficient cauſes of conviction: and though preſumptions be never ſo ſtrong, yet they are not proofes ſufficient for conviction, but onely for examination. Therefore no credit is to be given to thoſe preſumptions hee reckons up. 1. For common fame, it falls out many times, ſaith he, That the innocent may be ſuspected, and ſome of the better ſort notoriouſly defamed. 2. The testimony of a fellow Witch, hee confeſſeth, doth not probably note one to be a Witch. The like may be ſaid of his third and fourth preſumption, if after curſing, or quarreling, or threatning there follow preſent miſchiefe; And the fifth preſumption is more frivolous, which is, if the party be the Son, or Daughter, or Servant, or Friend neer Neighbour, or old Companion of a VVitch. The ſixt preſumption Mr. Perkins dares not, or is loath to owne, but ſaith, ſome adde, if the party Suſpected have the Devills Marke, and yet he reſolves if ſuch a Marke be deſcried, whereof no evident reaſon in nature can be given, the Magiſtrate may cauſe ſuch to be examined, or take the matter into his owne hands, that the truth may appeare, but hee doth not teach how the truth may be made to appeare. The laſt preſumption hee names is, if the party examined be unconſtant, or contrary to himſelfe, here hee confeſſeth, a good Man may be fearefull in a good cauſe, ſometimes by Nature, ſometimes in regard of the preſence of the Judge, or the greatneſſe of the Audience, ſome may be ſuddenly taken, and others want that liberty of ſpeech, which other Men have.

Touching Examination Mr. Perkins names two kindes of proceedings, either by ſimple Queſtion, or by Torture. Torture, when beſides the enquiry by words, the Magiſtrate uſeth the Rack, or ſome other violent meanes to urge Confeſſion; this he ſaith, may be lawfully uſed, howbeit not in every caſe, but onely upon ſtrong, and great preſumptions, and when the party is obſtinate. Here it may be noted that it is not lawfull for any perſon, but the Judge onely to allow Torture, ſuſpitious Neighbours may not of their own heads uſe either Threats, Terrors, or Tortures; I know not any one of thoſe preſumptions before cited to be ſufficient to warrant a Magiſtrate to uſe Torture, or whether when the party conſtantly denies the Fact, it muſt be counted obſtinacy. In caſe of Treaſon ſometimes, when the maine Fact hath beene either confeſſed, or by ſome infallible proofes manifeſted, the Magiſtrate for a farther diſcovery of ſome circumſtance of the Time, the Place, and the Perſons, or the like, have made uſe of the Rack, and yet that kinde of torture hath not beene of ancient uſage in this Kingdome, for if my memory fail not, I have read that the Rack hath been called the Duke of Exceters Daughter, and was firſt uſed about Hen. 6. days.

From preſumptions, Mr. Perkins proceeds to proofes of a Witch, and here he hath a neat diſtinction of proofes, leſſe ſufficient, or more ſufficient; by leſſe ſufficient he meaneth inſufficient, but gives them this mild and ſtrange phraſe of leſſe ſufficient, that it may not diſpleaſe ſuch friends (as I conceive) allow thoſe leſſe ſufficient proofes for ſufficient, though he reckons them for no better then Witch-craft. Thoſe unſufficient ſufficient proofes are weaker, and worſe then his preſumptions which hee confeſſeth are no proofes at all; yet wee muſt reckon them up, his firſt leſſe ſufficient proofe is, The ancient triall by taking red hot Irons, or putting the hand in hot ſcalding water, this hee ſaith, hath been condemned for Diabolicall, and wicked, as in truth it is, for an innocent Man may thereby be condemned, and a ranke Witch ſcape unpuniſhed. A ſecond inſufficient proofe is, Scratching of the ſuſpected party, and the preſent recovery thereupon. A third is the burning the thing bewitched, as a Hog, an Ox, or other Creature, it is imagined a forcible meanes to cauſe the Witch to diſcover her ſelfe. A fourth is the burning the Thatch of the ſuſpected parties Houſe. The fift leſſe ſufficient proofe is the binding of the party hand and foote, and caſting croſſe wayes into the water, if ſhee ſinkes ſhee is counted innocent, if ſhee floate on the water, and ſinke not, ſhe is taken for a Witch, convicted, and puniſhed. The Germans uſed this triall by cold water, and it was imagined that the Devill being moſt light, as participating more of Aire then of Water, would hold them up above the Water, either by putting himſelfe under the Witch, and lifting her up, as it were with his backe, or by uniting himſelfe, and poſſeſſing her whole body.

All theſe leſſe ſufficient proofes, ſaith Mr. Perkins, are ſo far from being ſufficient, that ſome of them, if not all are after a ſort practiſes of witch-craft, having no power by Gods Ordinance. Hereby hee condemnes point blanke King James's judgement as ſavouring of Witch-craft in allowing of the triall of a Witch by ſwimming as a principall proofe. And, as I take it, he condemnes himſelfe alſo, except he can finde any ordinance of God, that the having of an incurable, and inſenſible marke, or ſore, ſhall be a preſumption, or certaine ſigne of a Witch.

A ſixt leſſe ſufficient proofe is the Testimony of a Wiſard, Witch, or cunning Man, who is gone or ſent unto, and informes that he can ſhew in a Glaſſe the Face of the Witch. This accuſation of a Witch by an other Witch, Mr. Perkins denies to be ſufficient, and he puts this caſe. If the Devill appeare to a Grand Jury, in the likeneſſe of ſome known Man, and offer to take his Oath that the perſon in question is a Witch ſhould the Enqueſt receive his Oath, or accuſation to condemne the party? He anſwers, Surely No; and yet that is as much as the Teſtimony of an other Witch, who only by the helpe of the Devill revealeth the Witch: if this ſhould be taken for a ſufficient proofe, the Devill would not leave one good Man alive in the World.

This diſcrediting of the Teſtimony of a Witch takes away the other (for hee hath but two) of King James maine proofs, for the diſcovery of a Witch, for hee ſaith, Who but Witches can be provers, and ſo witneſſes of the doings of Witches? and to the ſame purpoſe Mr. Perkins himſelfe confeſſeth, that the Precepts of Witch-craft are not delivered, but to the Devills own ſubjects, the wicked.

A ſeventh leſſe ſufficient proofe is, when a Man in open Court affirmes, ſuch a one fell out with mee, and curſed me, threatning I ſhould ſmart for it in my perſon or goods, upon theſe threats ſuch Evills and Loſſes preſently befell mee; This is no ſure ground for conviction, ſaith Mr. Perkins, for it pleaſeth God many times to lay his Hands upon Mens perſons and goods, without the procurement of Witches; and yet ſaith Mr. Perkins, Experience ſhewes that ignorant people will make ſtrong proofes of ſuch preſumptions, whereupon ſometimes Jurors doe give their Verdict against parties innocent.

The laſt leſſe ſufficient proofe is, if a Man being ſicke, upon ſuspition, will take it on his Death, that ſuch a one hath bewitched him, it is of no moment, ſaith Mr. Perkins, it is but the ſuspition of one Man for himſelfe, and is of no more force then an other Mans word against him.

All theſe proofes, ſaith Mr. Perkins, which Men in place have ordinarily uſed, be either falſe, or inſufficient ſignes.

At the laſt Mr. Perkins comes to his more ſufficient proofes, which in all are but two. The confeſſion of the Witch, or the proofe of two witneſſes. Againſt the Confeſſion of a Witch Mr. Perkins confeſſeth,^[15] it is objected that one may confeſſe againſt himſelfe an untruth being urged by force, or threatning, or by deſire upon ſome griefe to be out of the World or at leaſt being in trouble, and perſwaded it is the best courſe to ſave their lives, and obtaine their liberty, they may upon ſimplicity be induced to confeſſe that they never did, even againſt themſelves. The truth of this allegation Mr. Perkins doth not deny, but grants it, in that his Anſwer is, That he doth not ſay a bare Confeſſion is ſufficient, but a Confeſſion after due Examination taken upon pregnant preſumptions. But if a bare Confeſſion be not a ſufficient proofe, a pregnant preſumption can never make it ſuch; or if it could, then it would not be a ſufficient proofe. For the farther weakning of the Confeſſion of a ſuſpected Witch, wee may remember what Mr. Perkins hath formerly anſwered, when it was alleaged that upon a melancholy humor many confeſſe of themſelves things falſe,^[16] and impoſſible; that they are carried through the Aire in a moment, that they paſſe through Keyholes, and cleffs of Doores, that they be ſometimes turn'd into Cats, Hares, and other Creatures, and ſuch like, all which are meer Fables and things impoſſible. Here Maſter Perkins anſwers, that when Witches begin to make a league, they are ſober and ſound in underſtanding, but after they be once in the league, their reaſon, and underſtanding may be depraved, memory weakned and all the powers of their ſoule blemiſhed, they are deluded and ſo intoxicated that they will run into a thouſand of fantaſticall imaginations, holding themſelves to be transformed into the ſhapes of other Creatures, to be tranſported in the Aire, to do many ſtrange things, which in truth they do not.

Now Mr. Perkins will confeſſe that the Examination, and Confeſſion of a ſuſpected Witch is alwayes after ſuch time as her Covenant is made; when ſhee is by his Confeſſion deluded, and not fit to give teſtimony againſt her ſelfe.

His ſecond more ſufficient proofe (hee ſaith, if the party will not confeſſe, as commonly it falleth out) is two witneſſes avouching upon their own knowledge, either that the party accuſed hath made league with the Devill, or hath done ſome known practiſes of Witch craft, or hath invocated the Devill, or deſired his helpe. But if every Man that hath invocated the Devill, or deſired his helpe muſt have formerly made a league with him, then whole Nations are every Man of them VVitches, which I thinke none will ſay.

As for the League, and Proofe of VVitch-craft, Mr. Perkins confeſſeth, Some may ſay, if theſe be the only ſtrong proofes for the conviction of a Witch, it will be then impoſſible to put any one to Death; becauſe the League with Satan is cloſely made, and the Practiſes of Witch-craft are alſo very ſecret, and hardly can a Man be brought, which upon his own knowledge can aver ſuch things. To this Mr. Perkins anſwer is a confeſſion, that howſoever the ground and practiſe be ſecret, and be to many unknown, yet there is a way to come to the knowledge thereof—Satan endeavoreth the diſcovery, and uſeth all meanes to diſcloſe Witches. This meanes he ſpeakes of ſhould be in the power of the Judge, or elſe it is no helpe for the Diſcovery of a Witch, but onely when the Devill pleaſeth. I do not finde hee proves that it is uſuall with Satan to endeavour any ſuch Diſcovery; neither doe I ſee how it is practicable by the Devill, for either hee muſt doe it by his own relation, or report, which as it cannot be proved he ever did, ſo it is vaine, and to no purpoſe if hee doe it, for Mr. Perkins hath diſcredited the teſtimony of the Devill as invalid, and of no force for conviction, or elſe the Devill muſt diſcover it by ſome ſecond meanes; and if there had beene any ſuch ſecond meanes uſuall, Mr. Perkins would have taught us what they are, and not have left us onely to his two more ſufficient proofes, which hee confeſſeth are not infallible.

^[17]King James tells us, that the Devills firſt diſcovering of himſelf for the gaining of a Witch, is either upon their walking ſolitarily in the Fields, or elſe lying pauſing in their Bed, but alwayes without the company of any other; and at the making of Circles and Conjurations, none of that craft will permit any others to behold; when the Devill and his ſubjects are thus cloſe, and ſecret in their Actions, it cannot be imagined that hee will uſe all meanes to diſcover his moſt ſpeciall and truſtieſt ſubjects, and though Mr. Perkins tells us,^[18] that by vertue of the precontract, the Devill is cock-ſure of his instruments; yet within a few lines he changeth his note, and ſaith, though he have good hope of them, yet he is not certaine of their continuance, becauſe ſome by the Mercy of God have bin reclaimed, and freed from his Covenant. Beſides hee confeſſeth, the Devill ſuffereth ſome to live long undiſcloſed, that they may Exerciſe the greater meaſure of his Malice in the World. It remaines that if the two true Proofes of Mr. Perkins, which are the Witches Confeſſion, or ſufficient witneſſes faile, we have not warrant, as hee ſaith, in the word to put ſuch an one to Death.

I conclude this Point in the words of Mr. Perkins; I adviſe all Jurors that as they be diligent in the zeal of Gods Glory, ſo they would be carefull what they do, and not condemne any party ſuſpected upon bare preſumptions, without ſound and ſufficient proofes, that they be not guilty through their own raſhnes of ſhedding innocent Bloud.

Of the Hebrew Witch.

IN Deut. 18. The Witch is named with divers other ſorts of ſuch as uſed the like unlawfull Arts, as the Diviner, the Obſerver of times, an Inchanter, a Charmer, a Conſulter with a familiar Spirit, a Wiſard, or a Necromancer. The Text addeth, all that doe theſe things are an abomination to the Lord, and becauſe of theſe abominations, the Lord thy God doth drive them [the Nations] out from before thee. If wee deſire to know what thoſe abominations of the Nations were, wee are told in generall in the 14. Verſe of the ſame Chapter. Theſe Nations harkned unto obſervers of times and unto Diviners: There is no other crime in this Chapter laid to the charge of all, or any of theſe practiſers of ſuch unlawfull Arts, but of lying Prophecies; and therefore the Text addeth, the Lord thy God will raiſe up unto thee a Prophet from the mideſt of thee of thy Brethren, like unto me, unto him ſhall ye harken, and not to the Diviners, Wiſards, Charmers, &c.

Setting aſide the caſe of Job (wherein God gave a ſpeciall and extraordinary Commiſſion) I doe not finde in Scripture that the Devill, or Witch, or any other had power ordinarily permitted them, either to kill or hurt any Man, or to medle with the Goods of any: for though for the triall of the hearts of men, God doth permit the Devill ordinarily to tempt them; yet hee hath no Commiſſion to deſtroy the Lives or Goods of Men, it is little leſſe then blaſphemy to ſay any ſuch thing of the admirable Providence of God, whereby he preſerves all his Creatures.

It was crime ſufficient for all thoſe practicers of unlawfull Arts to delude the people, with falſe and lying Prophecies, thereby to make them forget to depend upon God, and to have their Soules turne after ſuch as have Familiar Spirits, and after Wiſards, to go a whoring after them, as the Lord ſaith, Levit. 20. 6. This ſpirituall whoredome is flat Idolatry in the common phraſe of the Old Teſtament; and thoſe that be entiſers to it, thereby endeavour to deſtroy the Soules of the People, and are by many degrees more worthy of death, then thoſe that only deſtroy the Bodies or Goods of Men.

If there were a Law that every one ſhould be put to Death, or puniſhed that ſhould adviſedly endeavour to perſwade Men that they are skilfull in thoſe forbidden Arts, or in foretelling of things to come, or that they have contracted with the Devill, and can thereby Murder or deſtroy Mens Goods, I ſhould never deny ſuch a Law to be moſt conſonant, and agreeing with the Law of Moſes.

But becauſe I may be thought by ſome a favourer of theſe forbidden Arts, through want of underſtanding the Scripture, about the quality of them; I have made choice of a Man who is no friend to Witches, and whoſe learning in this point will not be denied. In his own words I ſhall ſet downe, what either out of the Hebrew Names of thoſe prohibited Arts, or out of the expoſition of the Jewiſh Doctors can be gathered, for the underſtanding of them.

A Diviner in Hebrew, ^[19] a Foreſeer, or Preſager, a Foreteller of things to come, as doth a Prophet—the Hebrews take a Diviner to be one that doth things whereby hee may foretell things to come, and ſay, ſuch a thing ſhall be, or not be, or ſay, It is good to doe Such a thing—the meanes of Divining; ſome doing it with Sand, ſome with Stones, ſome by lying downe on the Ground, ſome with Iron, ſome with a Staffe—he that asked of a Diviner, is chaſtiſed with ſtripes.

2. An obſerver of times, or Soothſayer, an Obſerver of the Clouds, a Planetary, or an obſerver of the flying of Foules, an Augur. As the Diviners were carried much by inward, and Spirituall Motions, ſo theſe by outward Obſervations in the Creatures. The Hebrews ſay, they were ſuch as did ſet times for the doing of things, ſaying, Such a day is good, and ſuch a day is naught.

3. An Obſerver of Fortunes, one that curiouſly ſearcheth ſignes of good or evill luck, which are learned by Experience: the Hebrew is to finde out by Experience; Whereupon the word here uſed is one that too curiouſly obſerveth, and abuſeth things that doe fall out as lucky, or unlucky. The Hebrews deſcribe it thus, as if one ſhould ſay, becauſe the morſell of Bread is fallen out of my mouth, or my Staffe out of my hand, I will not go to ſuch a place: becauſe a Fox paſſed by on my right hand, I will not go out of my Houſe this day. Our new tranſlation renders this word an Inchanter.

4. A Witch a Sorcerer, ſuch as do bewitch the ſenſes, or minds of Men, by changing the formes of things to another hew. The Hebrew word for a Witch properly ſignifies a Jugler, and is derived from a word which ſignifies changing or turning. and Moſes teacheth Exod. 7. that Witches wrought by Enchantments, that is, by ſecret Sleights Juglings, Cloſe conveyance, or of Gliſtering like the flame of Fire, or a Sword wherewith Mens Eyes were dazled.

5. A Charmer, or one that conjureth Conjurations, the Hebrew ſignifies conjoyning or conſociating—the Charmer is ſaid to be hee, that ſpeaketh words of a ſtrange Language, and without ſenſe; that if one ſay, ſo or ſo unto a Serpent, it cannot hurt him; hee that whiſpereth over a wound, or that readeth over an Infant, that it may not be frighted, or layeth the Bible upon a Child that it may ſleepe.

6. A Wiſard, or cunning Man in Hebrew named of his knowledge, or cunning—the Hebrews deſcribe him thus, that he put in his mouth a bone of a Bird, and burned incenſe, and did other things untill hee fell downe with ſhame, and ſpake with his mouth things that were to come to paſſe.

7. A Necromancer, one that ſeeketh unto the Dead: of him they ſay, he made himſelfe hungry, and went and lodged among the Graves, that the dead might come unto him in a Dreame, and make known unto him that which he asked of him, and others there were that clad themſelves with Cloaths for that purpoſe, and ſpake certaine words, and burned Incenſe, and ſlept by themſelves, that ſuch a dead perſon might come and talke with them in a Dream.

8. Laſtly, The Conſulter with Familiar Spirits, in Hebrew a Conſulter with Ob, applied here to Magitians, who poſſeſſed with an evill Spirit, ſpake with a hollow voyce, as out of a Bottle.—The Hebrews explaine it thus, that he which had a Familiar ſpirit ſtood and burned Incenſe, and held a rod of Mirtle-tree in his hand, and waved it, and ſpake certaine words in ſecret, untill he that enquired did heare one ſpeak unto him, and anſwer him touching that hee enquired with words from under the Earth, with a very low voyce, &c. Likewiſe one tooke a dead Mans Skull, and burnt Incenſe thereto, and inchanted thereby till hee heard a very low voyce, &c. This Text in our Engliſh tranſlation being expounded a Familiar Spirit, and ſeconded by the Hiſtory of the Woman of Endor, may ſeeme a ſtrong evidence that the Devill covenanted with Witches; But if all be granted that can be deſired, that this Familiar Spirit ſignifies a Devill, yet it comes not home to prove the maine point, for it is no proofe that the Familiar Spirit enter'd upon Covenant, or had or could give power to others to kill the perſons, or deſtroy the Goods of others, Kings James confeſſeth, the Devill can make ſome to be poſſeſſed, and ſo become very Demoniaques, and that ſhe who had the ſpirit of Python in Acts 16. Whereby ſhe conquested ſuch gaine to her Master that ſpirit was not of her own raiſing, or commanding as ſhe pleaſed to appoint but spake by her Tongue as well privately as publiquely. Wee do not finde the Pythoneſſe condemned or reproved, but the uncleane Spirit commanded in the name of Jeſus Chriſt to come out of her. The Child which was too young to make a Covenant with the Devill was poſſeſſed with a dumb and deafe Spirit, and the Devill charged to come out, and enter no more into him Marke 9. A Daughter of Abraham (that is, of the Faith of Abraham) was troubled with a ſpirit of infirmity 18 years, and bowed together, that ſhee could not lift her ſelfe up. Luke 13. 10. 16.

It is obſervable that in Deut. 18. where all the unlawfull Arts are reckoned up, and moſt fully prohibited, the crime of them is charged upon the practiſers of thoſe Arts, but the crime of having a Familiar Spirit is not there condemned, but the Conſulter of a Familiar Spirit, ſo in Levit. 19. 31. the prohibition is, Regard not them that have Familiar Spirits, and ſo in Levit. 20. 6. The Soule that turneth after ſuch as have Familiar Spirits, ſo that it was not the having, but the conſulting was condemned.

If we draw neerer to the words of the Text, it will be found that theſe words a Conſulter with a Familiar Spirit are no other then a Conſulter with Ob. Where the queſtion will be what Ob ſignifieth. Expoſitors agree that originally Ob ſignifieth a Bottle, and they ſay is applied here to one poſſeſſed with an evill Spirit, and ſpeaketh with a hollow voyce as out of a Bottle; but for this I finde no proofe, they bring out of Scripture that ſaith, or expoundeth that Ob ſignifieth one poſſeſſed with a Familiar Spirit in the Belly; the onely proofe is that the Greeke Interpreters of the Bible Tranſlate it Engaſtromuthi, which is, ſpeaking in the Belly, and the word anciently, and long before the time of the Septuagint Tranſlators was properly uſed for one that had the cunning or ſlight to ſhut his mouth, and ſeeme to ſpeake with his Belly, which that it can be done without the helpe of a Familiar Spirit, experience of this Age ſheweth in an Iriſh-man; We do not find it ſaid that the Woman of Endo did foretell any thing to Saul, by the hollow voyce of a Familiar Spirit in her Belly; neither did Saul require, nor the Woman promiſe ſo to anſwer him, but hee required, bring me him up who I ſhall name unto thee, and ſhe undertooke to do it; which argues a deſire in Saul to conſult with the dead, which is called Necromancy, or conſulting with the dead.

But it hath beene ſaid, ſhee raiſed the Devill in Samuels likeneſſe, yet there is no ſuch thing ſaid in the Text: when the Woman went about her worke, the firſt thing noted is, that when ſhe ſaw Samuel, ſhe cried out with a loud voyce: an Argument ſhee was frighted with ſeeing ſomething ſhee did not expect to ſee; it is not ſaid that when ſhee knew Saul, but when ſhee ſaw Samuel, She cryed out with a loud voyce: when ſhee knew Saul ſhee had no reaſon to be afraid, but rather comforted, for that ſhee had his Oath for her ſecurity.

It may well be that if either ſhee had a Familiar Spirit, or the Art of hollow-ſpeaking, her intention was to deceive Saul and by her ſecret voyce to have made him believe that Samuel in another roome had anſwered him; for it appeares that Saul was not in the place where ſhe made a ſhew of raiſing Samuel, for when ſhee cried out with a loud voyce, Saul comforted her, and bid her not be afraid, and asked her what ſhe ſaw? and what forme is he of? which queſtions need not have beene if Saul had beene in the Chamber with the Witch. King James confeſſeth that Saul was in another chalmer at the conjuration, and it is likely the Woman had told Saul ſhee had ſeene ſome fearfull ſight, which made him aske her what ſhe ſaw? and her anſwer was, She ſaw Gods aſcending out of the Earth, and it may be underſtood that Angels waited upon Samuel, who was raiſed by God, and not any Puppets, or Divells that ſhee conjured up: otherwiſe the words may be tranſlated as Deodat in the Margent of his Italian Bible hath it, She ſaw a Man of Majesty, or Divine Authority aſcend, un' huomo di Majeſta è d' Authorita Divina, which well anſwers the queſtion of what forme is he of? which is in the ſingular, not in the plurall number.

Wee finde it ſaid in Eſay 29. 4. thou ſhalt be brought downe, and ſhalt speake out of the ground, and thy ſpeech ſhall be low out of the duſt, and thy voyce ſhall be as one that hath a Familiar Spirit out of the ground and thy ſpeech ſhall whiſper out of the Earth; which argues the voyce of Ob was out of the Earth, rather then out of the Belly, and ſo the Hebrew Expoſition which I cited before affirmes; ſome learned have beene of Opinion that a naturall reaſon may be given why in ſome places certaine exhalations out of the earth may give to ſome a propheticall ſpirit. Adde hereunto that ſome of the Heathen Oracles were ſaid to ſpeake out of the Earth: and among thoſe five ſorts of Necromancy, mentioned by Doctor Reynolds in his 76 Lecture of his cenſure of the Apocryphals, not any of them is ſaid to have any Spirit in their Belly. The Ronaniſts who are all great affirmers of the power of Witches agree, that the ſoule of Samuel was ſent by God to the Woman of Endor: to this not onely Delrio, but Bellarmin before him agrees. That true Samuel did appear as ſent by God, as hee ſent Elias to Ochoſias King of Iſrael. who being ſick ſent to conſult with Belzebub the God of Echron, may appeare, for that Samuel is ſo true, and certaine in his prediction to Saul, which no Witch, no Devill could ever have told; for though the Wiſdome, and Experience of the Devill doe enable him to conjecture probably of many events, yet poſitively to ſay, to morrow thou and thy Sonnes ſhall die, is more then naturally the Devill could know.

Mr. Perkins confeſſeth the Devill could not foretell the exact time of Sauls death; and therefore hee anſwers that God revealed to the Devill as his inſtrument Sauls overthrow, by which meanes, and no other the Devill was inabled to foretell the death of Saul. Here Mr. Perkins proves not, that Satan was appointed by God to worke Sauls overthrow, or that it was made known to him, when it ſhould be done.

As the reſt of the Speech of Samuel is true, ſo theſe words of his, Why haſt thou diſquieted me to bring me up? may be alſo true, which cannot be if it be ſpoken by the Devill; or why ſhould the Devil tell truths in all other things elſe, and lie only in this, I know no reaſon. Doctor Reynolds preſſeth theſe words againſt the appearing of Samuel thus, If Samuel I had ſaid to them he had lied, but Samuel could not lie, for Samuel could not be diſquieted, nor raiſed by Saul. It is true God only raiſed Samuel effectually, but occaſionally Saul might raiſe him. But ſaith Doctor Reynolds though Saul was the occaſion, yet Samuel could not truely ſay that Saul had diſquieted him, for bleſſed are they that die in the Lord ſaith the spirit, becauſe they reſt from their labours; and Samuel was no more to be diſquieted (if he were ſent by God) then Moſes aad Elias were when they appeared to ſhew the Glory of Christ. Mat. 17. Anſwer, it did not diſpleaſe Samuel to be imployed in the Office of an Angell, but hee obeyed God gladly; yet ſince the occaſion of his appearing diſpleaſed God, it might for that cauſe diſpleaſe alſo Samuel. Beſides wee neede not underſtand the diſquieting of Samuels mind, but of his body by not ſuffering it to reſt in peace after death, according to the common, and uſuall condition of Mankinde, this ſenſe the Originall will well beare. Againe, it cannot be believed that the Devill would ever have preached ſo Divine and excellent a Sermon to Saul, which was able to have converted, and brought him to Repentance, this was not the way for the Devill to bring either Saul, or the Woman to renounce God. Laſtly, the Text doth not ſay that the Woman raiſed Samuel, yet it calls him Samuel, and ſaith that Saul perceived, or underſtood that it was Samuel.

Mr. Perkins and many others eſteeme Balam to have beene a Witch, or Conjurer, but I finde no ſuch thing in the Text; when hee was required to curſe the people of Iſrael, his anſwer was, I will bring you word as the Lord ſhall speak unto me. Numb 22. 8. and God came unto Balaam in v. 9. and in v. 13. Balaam ſaith, the Lord refuſeth to give me leave, and when Balak ſent a ſecond time, his anſwer was, if Balak would give me his houſe full of ſilver and gold I cannot goe beyond the Word of the Lord my God to do leſſe or more, in v. the 20. God commeth to Balaam, and ſaid, if the Men come to call thee, go, but yet the words which I ſhall ſay unto thee, that ſhalt thou do. And when Balaam came before Balak hee ſaid, v. 38. Lo I am come unto thee, have I now any power at all to ſay any thing? the Word which God putteth into my mouth, that ſhall I ſpeake: and in the 23 Chap. v. 18. Balaam ſaith, how ſhall I curſe whom God hath not curſed? and in v. 12. hee ſaith, muſt I not take heed to speake that which the Lord hath put into my Mouth? Theſe places laid together prove Balaam to have beene a true Prophet of the Lord, and hee propheſied nothing contrary to the Lords command, therefore St. Peter calls him a Prophet.

Nevertheleſſe it is true that Balaam finned notoriouſly, though not by being a Witch or Conjurer, or a falſe Prophet, his faults were, that when God had told him hee ſhould not go to Balak, yet in his covetous heart hee deſired to go, being tempted with the rewards of Divination, and promiſe of promotion; ſo that upon a ſecond Meſſage from Balak hee ſtayed the Meſſengers to ſee if God would ſuffer him to go, wherefore the Lord in his anger ſent Balam. Alſo when God had told Balam that hee would bleſſe Iſrael, yet Balam did ſtrive to tempt God, and by ſeverall Altars and Sacrifices to change the mind of God. Againe when Balam ſaw God immutable in bleſſing Iſrael, hee taught Balak to lay a ſtumbling block before the Sonnes of Iſrael, to eat things ſacrificed to Idolls, and to commit Fornication. Rev. 2. 4. Whereas it is ſaid that Balaam went not up as other times to ſeek for Enchantments, Num. 24 2. the Originall is to meete Divinations, that is, he did not go ſeek the Lord by Sacrifices, as he did, Numb. 23. 3. 15.

An exact difference betweene all thoſe Arts prohibited in Deut. no Man I thinke can give, that in ſome they did agree, and in others differed, ſeemes probable. That they were all lying and falſe Prophets, though in ſeverall wayes, I thinke none can deny; That they differed in their degrees of puniſhments is poſſible, there are but three ſorts that can be proved were to be put to death, viz. the Witch, the Familiar Spirit, the Wiſard. As for the Witch there hath beene ſome doubt made of it. The Hebrew Doctors that were skild in the Lawes of Moſes, obſerve that whereſoever one was to die by their Law, the Law alwayes did run in an affirmative precept; as, the the Man ſhall be ſtoned, ſhall die, ſhall be put to death, or the like; but in this Text, and no where elſe in Scripture the ſentence is onely a Prohibition negative, Thou ſhalt not ſuffer a Witch to live, and not Thou ſhalt put her to death, or ſtone her or the like. Hence ſome have beene of Opinion that not to ſuffer a Witch to live, was meant not to relieve or maintaine her by running after her, and rewarding her. The Hebrews ſeeme to have two ſorts of Witches, ſome that did hurt, others that did hold the Eyes, that is, by jugling and ſleights deceived Mens ſenſes. The firſt they ſay, was to be ſtoned, the other which according to the proper notation of the word, was the true Witch, was only to be beaten.

The Septuagent have tranſlated a Witch, an Apothecary, a Druggiſter, one that compounds poyſons, and ſo the Latin word for a Witch is venefica, a maker of poyſons: if any ſuch there ever were, or be that by the helpe of t[•]e Devill do poyſon, ſuch a one is to be put to death, though there be no Covenant with the Devill, becauſe ſhee is an Actor, and principall her ſelfe, not by any wonder wrought by the Devill, but by the naturall, or occult property of the Poyſon.

For the time of Christ, ſaith Mr. Perkins, though there be no particular mention made of any ſuch Witch, yet thence it followeth not that there were none, for all things that then happened are not Recorded, and I would faine know of the chiefe Patrons of them, whether thoſe perſons poſſeſſed with the Devill, and troubled with ſtrange Diſeaſes, whom Chriſt healed, were not bewitched with ſome ſuch people as our Witches are? if they ſay no, let them if they can prove the contrary.

Here it may be thought that Mr. Perkins puts his Adverſaries to a great pinch; but it doth not prove ſo, for the Queſtion being onely, whether thoſe that were poſſeſſed in our Saviours Time were bewitched. The Oppoſers of Mr. Perkins, ſay they, were not bewitched, but if hee or any other ſay they were, the Proofe will reſt wholy on him, or them to make good their Affirmative; it cannot in reaſon be expected that his Adverſaries ſhould prove the Negative, it is againſt the Rules of Diſputation to require it.

FINIS.