can you not as well conceiue that Mars and the rest of the Starres on which the qualities of these inferiour things depend maâ—… exercise their qualities and do the like in our Constitutions Thus you thinke you haue spoken soundly to the point Awake Sir Knight and defend your Cause You haue with great confidence incountred with a man of great Learning you haue vndertaken to satisfie the Learned Wee are come to a maine point whereat others haue stucke Whether these be naturall Causes or comprehended by naturall Reason You tell vs a tale of Spices and hot Simples and intreat vs to conceiue the like of Mars his operation Sir here remember that you are come to that difficulty wherewith you say others were grauelled you goe smoothly through thus Because Spice and hot Simples increase choller why can wee not as well conceiue that Mars may stirre and incline an Humour How doe you compare Effects together The one from a knowne Cause the other from an vnknowne The one a thing in Nature the other onely in Conceit And if wee yeeld you the Conclusion which you confesse by this manner of writing you cannot proue what haue you gotten The question is not of an Elementary humour but of the particular Euent that vpon such a day in such a part of his body by such meanes befell Henry 2. French King for in one Example for breuities sake wee insist When the question is of such a particular Euent whether there bee any naturall Cause thereof in the Starres Who can beare this idle answere that the Starres may moue a humour as Spice doth And who will grant you this Comparison betwixt Simples that goe into the Body and worke immediately vpon it and the Starres that are so remote These things you begge and when you haue them granted you can neuer frame a Conclusion from these Principles to such a particular Euent as that is whereof wee speake CHAP. IIII. The Conclusions of Astrologers depend vpon other Principles then them selues are willing to publish NOw Sir seeing you cannot satisfie vs in this point wee will try if happily we can satisfie you Philosophy and the light of Nature haue led men thus farre that when the Astrologer telleth a true Euent by the Starres they could say that the Starres were not the true Cause of that Euent But the Astrologer rageth and saith the Euents are true therefore there is some true Cause Heere the Naturall Philosopher leaueth him For he seeth that the Starres were not the true Cause of that Euent but what was the true Cause hee knoweth not And because hee findeth none in Nature therefore hee casteth it vpon Chance and Fortune thus farre the light of Nature leadeth Let vs come now to a greater Light that may lead vs where this faileth that is the light of Gods Word And as wee tooke one of the Knights Examples examining it by the light of Nature so let vs take it againe and examine it by the Word of God To insist still in the same Example That Henry 2. French King should receiue a sore wound in his head in such a yeare of his Age this Euent proued true Wee now seeke the Cause and means how the Astrologer might come to this knowledge You say hee saw it in the Starres but that is the thing in question Wee say that hee might come to the knowledge thereof by some vnlawfull meanes and yet vse the pretence of the Starres to colour the vnlawfulnesse of the meanes If a Chaldean had been asked in the flourishing estate of Iob what should haue beene Iobs Fortune You say by the Starres he might foretell his fortune which wee deny But when the Diuell had gotten leaue to vexe Iob if after that time and before his troubles the Chaldean had been asked of Iobs fortunes then wee see a meanes how he might haue come to the knowledge thereof as Saint Augustine saith Illudentibus eos praeuaricatoribus Angelis And hee might vse the Starres as Signes not framed by God to that end as also the flying of Birds was not but by Sorcery framing Signes thence as the same St. Augustine doth wisely admonish Nam iste opiniones quibusdam rerum signis humana praesumptione institutis ad eadem illa quasi cum doemonibus pacta conuenta referendae sunt So that in Diuinity this question might with no great difficulty bee decided For wee may say that the cause why the Astrologer sometimes speaketh true is not because hee seeth it in the Starres as in naturall causes of that Euent which thing you repeate often but neuer proue but because either by plaine compact or else by a secret illusion of Sathan hee commeth to the knowledge thereof which illusion may bee so great that the Astrologer may beleeue that hee readeth it in the Starres Albeit before that God hath opened his will by some meanes neither the Diuell nor the Astrologer is able to foretell it as may appeare in the example of Iob. If here you returne as often you say that the Starres cannot foreshew the actions of the regenerate and therefore that the Chaldean could not answer in the actions of Iob I thinke it would much trouble you to bring a good or probable reason why the Starres should not as well foretell the actions of the regenerate as that particular Euent of Henry 2. Did the Astrologer tro yee first consult whether that King was regenerate or no Will you haue vs to thinke that such things are incident to the study of Astrologie If it were so then should the knowledge of the Astrologer goe farre beyond the knowledge of the best Diuines and wee must repayre to the Astrologer to know who are regenerate in the Church and who are not But go which way you will Nunquam bodie effugies wee will followe you euen in this and we wil bring your Astrologer to such a King who was as vnregenerate as euer was Henry 2. French King Let the deathes of Henry 2. and Achab King of Israel be compared together Doe you thinke that any Astrologer could haue told Achab that he should either bee slaine or hurt with an Arrow at Ramoth Gilead at such a certaine time It is impossible to proue and absurd to thinke that any Chaldean could haue foretold this by the Starres because it was a secret which God kept in his secret Counsell vntill it pleased him to reueale it 2. Chron. 18. 19. Now after that God had once reuealed his will herein that Achab should fall at Ramoth Gilead and to that end giuen him ouer to the permission and meanes which Sathan deuised as we read in the same place verse 21. then may wee well vnderstand how a Chaldean hauing by some meanes warning thereof from Sathan might foretell the death of Achab the place the time as the Astrologer did in Henry 2. if happily hee did so and as they do in all such Euents For what can you finde vnlike in the deathes of these
their wisedome haue professed the former then this latter sorcery of Astrology If they will speak to these points and acquit Astrology then they say somewhat But must warne the Knight or any other that hee will be pleased not to take for granted the contradictory of these positions and so runne along in a flourishing discourse but these be the things that you must proue Now Sir to proue these things will much trouble you First you will rake vp the Arabian dunghill but that will not serue your turne For I graut the Arabians did honor this profession but wee speake here of the ancient times wherein good learning stood amongst the Heathen Neither will it serue you to reckon vp Adam Seth Mahaleel Iared Henoch Zoroastes Methusaleth Lamech Noah Sem Arphaxad Abraham Isaac Iacob Albion Ioseph Homer Hesiod c. And to tell vs that these were Astrologers Take Zoroastes from that company and then wee yeeld him to you he is the Father of your Art You challenge him you shall haue him But then let the world know what a goodly Father this profession hath CHAP. VIII That the operations of the Celestiall bodies do not helpe the Astrologers in their predictions COncerning the operation of the Celestiall bodies vpon these inferior by influence there is an influence granted but not this which the Astrologers haue by their imagination without profe deuised First this position is taken amongst the learned for certaine that the celestiall bodies do signifie nothing which they do not also effect that which they effect is produced by them as by naturall causes And therfore the things which God doth by himselfe cannot be foreseene in the Stars but such things proceed from supernaturall causes And things supernaturall cannot be demonstrated by a naturall agent Neither can those things be foretold by the Starres which are of fortuitall euents for such things haue no naturall cause such are all things which are directed by mans will that is in a word all mens actions to foretell these things as from naturall causes is vayne to seeke and impossible to find For of things that rest in mans will a naturall cause is not to be sought the things being voluntary which things cannot be foretold but by reuelation It remaines then that predictions naturall are of such things as haue naturall causes The things therefore that may be certainely foretold by the Starres as hauing their naturall causes are all such things as belong to the Theory of Astronomy as that the Sunne moueth swifter then Saturne or when is an opposition or coniunction when an Eclipse will be These things may be certainely foretold forasmuch as they depend vpon naturall principles there be other things of that kinde which are vsually though erroneously foretold by Astrologers hauing indeed naturall causes but not so euidently knowne to Astrologers the cause is for albeit these things belong to nature yet they haue not determinate causes and so regulated to one Euent as those that are in the Theory And therefore their error is in these things vsually seene such things are the predictions of raine of faire weather of wet times dry For that there are times of wet and siccitic it is true true also that these things depend vpon the ordinary course of nature and of such things as are vnder the gouernment of the superior bodies yet are they not so determinate nor so ineuitable nor so euident to the Astrologer as are those of the Theory For in the one the Astrologer erreth not in the other hee erreth commonly Of this kind are all Meteors which proceed of naturall causes but not determinate and ineuitable so that the Astrologer cannot iudge of these by such certitude as of the things belonging to the Theory After this manner the corruption of the Aire is also of naturall superior causes commonly whence come sicknes dearth and such like as also the contrary followeth plenty and healthfulnes These are of certaine causes but not so certainely knowne that they may allwayes certainely be foretould True it is that these things sometimes come not by naturall causes and in a naturall course altogether but God doth send them at his pleasure either for the punishment of some people or for their deliuerance as it seemeth best to him When God doth so send them then are they further out of the knowledge of the Astrologer so that in these things the knowledge of the Astrologer is partly nothing at all partly little worth being taken at the best For in matters of this kind that Astrologers haue either small or no knowledge may be collected from their common errors in this kinde as also from some places of the holy Scripture where Astrologers are found ignorant in these things A question may be moued whether those seauen yeares of plenty and seauen yeares of scarsitie foretold by Ioseph in the interpretation of Pharaoh his dream were of naturall causes or sent by God without respect of naturall causes This is certaine that the foretelling of them was not by naturall knowledge but by reuelation for all the Astrologers of Aegypt could not fore-tell them but Ioseph did by reuelation from God And yet the Astrologers were acquainted with the encreasing of Nilus whose measurable rising was the ordinary cause of plenty and fertility in that country the inordinate rising thereof either in too great abundance or in too greate defect was both a signe also a cause of scarsity The measurs of the rising of Nilus was precisely kept by the Priests of Egypt and vpon the sight of the rising of the Riuer they could know the fertility or sterility of the yeare folowing But this was no part of Astrology it belonged rather to Geometry and some report that the vse of Geometry was first found out by that means Then vpon the measure of the rising of that riuer they that obserued it could fore-tell the plenty or dearth which should be in that country but I neuer read that any Astrologer did fore-tell the iust measure of the rising of that riuer before hand The Knight that is better read in them may helpe vs in this For that the rising of Nilus did some way depēd vpon the heauens it wil not I suppose be denyed because whatsoeuer was the immediate cause of the rising thereof that did depend vpon the superior bodies if any thing depend vpon them So then the Astrologers knowledge cometh very short when as he knoweth not nor is able to fore tell the euent of those thinges that are confessed to depend vpon the superior heauenly bodies Now if this knowledge be so short and vncertaine in things which depend vpon the superior bodies it must needs be far shorter or nothing at all in such things that depend not of them Another kinde of things foretold by Astrologers is of such things as haue partly a cause of nature partly of mans will and operation To vndertake to foretell in such things cannot be without superstition For
albeit they challenge a cunning to foretell in things which hold a naturall course and subiect to the powers of the Heauens yet in things that are free as mansactions are nature hath no casualty but mans will They can challenge no skill in such things because these things are not gouerned by a naturall dependance from the Heauens but from other Causes of another nature As if an Astrologer should foretell that such a man shall bee sicke at such a time this iudgement is vaine and superstitious It is true that a Physitian may iudge of a mans health or sicknesse but not by Astrology but by the disposition of his body This thing depends vpon some natural Cause wherof notwithstanding the Astrologer can haue no knowledge by the Starres For in the order of actions if diuers Causes bee ordered to one Effect the Effect followeth the Cause deficient as may appeare in the actions of reason For if a dialecticall Syllogisme bee made of one true Proposition and another false the Conclusion is false vnlesse by accident And if it bee of one Proposition necessary and another contingent the Conclusion is contingent So is it in naturall operations if one Cause be naturall and another free the Effect is rather to bee said free then naturall And if one Cause bee contingent the other necessary the Effect is contingent Of such things there can bee no iudgement but as of things free and contingent An other kinde of things inquired by Astrologers is in those things which depend meerly of contingence in which things the connexion of the Cause and the Euent is a thing not knowne in which respect these things are said not to haue a naturall Cause because the connexion of such a Cause to such an Euent is not knowne in nature In such things to make Predictions is vtterly vaine and superstitious For as things haue their being so haue they their signification if then there be contingence in their being it must needs bee in their signification So that it is impossible to finde certaine signes or significations of things which are themselues contingent And yet in such things the Knight doth make especiall choyce to place Astrologie So it is in things that are meerely free For ouer a mans freedome the Positions of heauen haue no power And it is a most foolish thing for a man to seeke that without him whose cause is altogether within himselfe The Astrologers from such vncertaine grounds haue deuised foure wayes to seeke the Euents of things 1. By Reuolutions 2. By Natiuities 3. By Questions 4. By Elections In these things they are so vncertaine that some professing Astrologie are notwithstanding weary of the absurdities which they see in some of these and therefore disclaime them as the Knight doth some of these Yet such is the folly of others that they haue added a fift way to these former which they say is by Intentions If a man once giue way to vnnaturall grounds his minde can neuer be free from superstitious and absurd conceits which are impediments to faith and good manners and in the end make ship-wracke thereof CHAP. IX That Astrologie is an Instrument to Magicke FOr the better satisfaction of the Reader and clearing the truth Let vs here examine whether Astrologie hath any other vse then to bee an Instrument to Magicke Wee say there is no other vse thereof because wee finde that such Philosophers as did rest only vpon naturall Reason could finde no reason in Astrology And further because if any haue maintained Astrologie they haue beene such as were Magitians This question I rather moue because I am not ignorant how some learned men haue stumbled at this stone For albeit wee finde none that haue proued Astrologie to bee a part of Philosophy yet some haue thought that Magicke is a part of Philosophy And though that can helpe them little yet wee would not leaue the Astrologers that hole to hide themselues in Iohannes Baptista Porta hath written a Booke intituled Magia naturalis implying in the Title that some Magicke may bee a part of naturall Philosophy But in deliuering naturall Magicke as hee calleth it hee deliuereth diuers things which Philosophy reacheth not to but are done by the ministery of vncleane Spirits As of Elections to bee written in certaine stones whereby those stones are supposed to bee animated and to receiue an especiall grace from Heauen Et hoc saith hee fundamentum radicem statuunt omnium Lib. 4. Cap. 25. Coelius Rhodig a man of better name for Learning diuideth Magiam in infamem naturalem Lib. 3. Cap. 42. From him we adde another testimony for the honour of Astrologie Iam Magiae clauis commemoratur Astrologia Vnto this opinion of Coelius Iansenius seemeth to yeeld Com. in Concord Cap. 9. Perhaps not marking that Coelius hath that commendation of Magicke and euen those very words out of Cornelius Agrippa To fortifie their opinions because they are ashamed of Agrippa whose words they bring they send vs to Plato 1. Alcibiad who there saith That the Kings Sonnes of Persia were instructed therein If these things were true they make nothing for Astrologie But we take it by their fauour that these men though otherwise learned and iudicious yet herein were ouerseene For whereas they bring nothing for the confirmation of their opinion but the authority of Plato if any such thing bee found in Plato then wee yeeld that they might haue some reason for their opinion But in Plato wee finde the contrary for hee speaking of the Institution of the Kings Sonnes of Persia in Magicke describeth that Magicke which they learned thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In which words Plato telleth vs that the Magicke which the Sonnes of the Persian Kings learned was that which Zoroastes the Sonne of Horomasus taught and it is saith Plato the worship of the Gods Now if there bee no other naturall Magicke but that which can bee proued out of this place of Plato then assuredly naturall Magicke will neuer be proued For this Magicke Plato will not haue to consist in naturall knowledge but in the worship of their Gods which worship because it was Idolatry therefore from hence may be proued that Idolatry is a part of Magicke but nothing else from hence Then by this it appeareth it is not Naturall but Diabolicall Now these men resting vpon Plato his testimony can in this point stand vp no longer that staffe failing them whereon they leaned And howsoeuer it may bee suffered in an Heathen to giue an honourable testimony to Magicke as being a seruice that pleased their Gods yet is it not likewise tollerable in Christians to approue Magicke from the same reasons This hath deceiued diuers who looking more vnto a shew of Learning then into the study of the truth haue beene too easily carried away and deceiued by them that told them of a naturall Magicke These be but the opinions of men of latter times who were heerein deceiued by Agrippa
the whole Controuersie pronounceth sentence against Astrologie Iudiciary Ennius apud Cic. Lib. 2. de Diuinat Non habeo denique Marsurn Augurem Non vicanos Aruspices non de circo Astrologos Non Isiacos coniectores non interpretes somnium Non enim sunt ij aut Scientia aut Arte diuini Sed superstitiosi vates impudentesque harioli Aut inertes aut insani aut quibus egestas imperat Qui sibi semitam non sapiunt alteri monstrant viam Quibus diuitias pollicentur ab ijs drachmam ipsi petunt De hisdiuitijs sibi deducant drachmam reddant caetera CHAP. I. Wherein the Grounds which the Knight taketh without proofe and vpon which hee buildeth his Booke are called in question M R Chambers a man for his Life and Learning worthily honoured of all that knew him by his learned Labours known fâ—…r and neere hath written against Iudiciary Astrologie as many of the best learned before him haue done Wherein hauing done no lesse then a Christian learned man ought to doe hee had reason to looke for another reward of his Labours then hee found For in stead of thankes and commendation for his learned Labours so well placed hee is roughly entertained by Sir Christopher Heydon Knight a man that hath taken much paines to hold vp a Cause which cannot bee holden vp by mans strength For albeit the illusions of Iudiciary Astrologie haue long beene maintained by the pollicies of Sathan yet when the light shineth vpon it it will neuer be able to stand And in truth in the hearts and Consciences of the godly in the Church or of the wise and learned without the Church was neuer yet thought able to stand Now after so many men my comming into this cause can adde nothing vnto it What can I bring hereto which hath not been brought by the Learned long since Yet that the same truth may be confirmed by the mouthes of many witnesses and that others may not bee abused by the Knights Booke and that himselfe also may haue occasion to consider the whole matter afresh I will examine this matter once more and open to the Knight the weakenes vnsound foundations of his vnprofitable Labours Wherin I leaue not onely the intemperancie of words with which hee hath so much enlarged his Booke but euen so much as the cause will suffer the multitude of words For the pleasure that some â—…ke in long writing neither can I allow in iudgement nor for my businesse practise I purpose to examine the grounds that the Knight hath brought or any other may bring for Astrologie wherein the Reader may know who they bee that stand against Astrology and who for it I shall also open to what part of knowledge Astrologie is referred that is to speake shortly to Magicke One principall ground vpon which he much resteth is that Astrologie is a part of naturall Pholosophy for thus hee writeth Pag. 18. concerning Natiuities and Predictions I confesse that Astrologers containing themselues within the bounds of Naturall Philosophy and reason doe take vpon them so much as lawfully they may c. And this is the common Answere almost to euery obiection Pag. 19. No man I thinke of indifferency or common sense will censure the Astrologer who iudgeth no farther of future effects then as they are contained and reuealed in the starres and second and remote causes to busie himselfe farther in Gods vnknowne Secrets Pag. 29. Astrologie professeth onely to foresee naturall mutations accidents Pag. 30. To place confidence in Starres as in diuine causes and powers is one thing and to esteeme them but as subordinate and second causes in Nature is another Pag. 36. The question betweene vs is whether the Starres be signes or second causes of naturall mutations or euents and whether the study thereof be vnlawfull It were too much trouble to recite euery place where hee repeateth thus much It is in a manner all hee saith take away this Answer and ye take away all from him Now Sir wee charge you for abusing your Reader in writing so long a Booke and throughout the whole Booke neuer once making offer to proue the thing in question For you confesse the question betweene you and vs is whether the Starres be second causes of naturall mutations which I admit to be part of the question but not all But by your owne grant if this bee the question then a man of your learning vnderstanding should haue spoken somewhat for the proofe of the question Could you finde in your heart to write so large a Booke and yet not once proue the question vpon proofe whereof all your Booke must rest And thought you Sir that men of iudgement would take these things at your hands It is an easie matter I perceiue to write Bookes if this liberty were granted were it not better with modesty to hold your peace then to be called to such a reckoning I say your Booke is idle and to no purpose as long as that is not proued which your selfe maketh the question betweene vs. But least this might seeme to be rather an imperfection in the man then in the cause it selfe For my meaning is not to take any aduantage of selected ouersights or slippes as he seemeth to feare Let vs consider this thing a little farther Then let this be the first question which you confesse is the question betweene vs whether the Starres as they are the subiect of Astrology be naturall causes remote or subordinate of such euents Or which is all one and deliuered likewise by himselfe whether the Astrologers in their Predictions containe themselues within the bounds of naturall Philosophy You hold the affirmatiue through al your Book though neuer prouing it whensoeuer you finde your selfe thrust to the wall and held hard then you runne continually to this help as the halting man to the horse and without this poore shift so often repeated you are not able to goe one foote forward First then let vs reason this point wee deny that the Starres are naturall causes of those euents which the Astrologers presume to foretell by them or that heerein the Astrologer containes himselfe within the bounds of naturall Philosophy That the truth may the better appeare in this point first wee moue this question To what part of learning Astrologie belongeth Wee looke for your Answere you tell vs it is a part of the Mathematickes And that Astrologie which you say is the same with Astronomy hath two parts the one speculatiue the other practicall which you call Iudiciary Astrologie pag. 2. I omit the escapes of this vnwarranted diuision We examine now to what part of Learning this Iudiciary Astrology is referred You tell vs sometimes it is a part of the Mathematickes sometimes you say it is a part of Naturall Philosophy These things are so diuers that you cannot bring them to any accord For the Mathematickes are distinguished from Naturall Philosophy so farre as when you set Astrologie sometime
in the one learning sometimes in the other we are perswaded that you doe heerein as men shifting and not vsing plaine dealing not being able soundly to speake to the point you confound your selfe by confounding things which are in themselues distinguished This confusion in speech is a signe of feare confusion in your cause For if Indiciary Astrology bee a part of the Mathematickes as you would haue it then the subiect thereof is certaine true no way subiect to error as is the subiect of the Mathematickes But because you dare not say that it handleth such a subiect therefore you reserue this hole to hide your selfe in that it handleth naturall causes and euents But no part of the Mathematickes handleth naturall causes and euents which are neuer separated from the matter wherein there is mutability but the Mathematicall considerations are abstract from the mutability of naturall matter And the Mathematician frameth thence such conceits as whether we regard the manner of knowledge or the subiect are no way subiect to error or mutability and in this respect deserue onely the name of Sciences because no humane knowledge can bee so certaine as this knowledge is If therefore this bee a part of the Mathematickes it is not contained within the bounds of Naturall Philosophy if it bee within those bounds it is no part of the Mathematickes If this were a true Art or if the Professors thereof were plaine dealers they would not thus collude betweene these startingholes of Mathematickes naturall Philosophy Now Sir we whom you account vnlearned opinion-Masters grauelled with the difficulties of the mysteries of this deepe Art maintaining a senslesse scruple and as you say monsters of opinions in denying Astrologie intreat your Worship with your great learning to edisie vs in this point heere in the entrance and to certifie vs to what part of learning you will referre Iudiciary Astrologie You tell vs a tale that Aristotle calleth it Scientiam mediam betweene the Mathematickes and Naturall Philosophy To proue this you cite Aristotle Li. 2. Cap. 2. Physic. and your reason is because the Principles thereof are purely and meerely Mathematicall which in the practise are applyed to sensible matter as the Physicall subiect thereof Sir you dreamed so for this is no better then a dreame to tell vs of an Art that hath Principles purely Mathematicall a subiect Physicall As for Aristotle it seemeth you cared not whether hee said so or no it was enough to bring his name For Aristotle doth not say it is Scientia media betweene those two as you father vpon him but disputing quo Mathematicus à naturali Philosopho differat doth consider that which wee now call Astronomy as a part of Mathematickes and not of Naturall Philosophy neither doth he leaue it hanging in the middest betweene them but giueth it directly to the Mathematickes If the Knight here shall catch at a word to helpe himselfe it is but a poore helpe For the Learned know well that the vse of words receiue great change in diuers Ages In some Age Astrologia and Astronomia were the same especially in those old times when no man did euer dreame that they who then were called Chaldei should at any time bee called Astrologi or that Art Astrologia For they were called Astrologers long after Aristotle his time who are now called Astronomers Now Aristotle who litle wist God wot how the vse of names should runne after his time vseth the word Astrologia as then it was vsed for that which wee now for distinctions sake call Astronomy for saith he Astrologia est in ijs rebus de quibus Mathematicus considerat which words if they had beene written in those times when the Chaldei were called Astrologi and Mathematici they might haue serued the Knights purpose but being written in Aristotle his time to turne them to this purpose is either palpable ignorance or wilful collusion wittingly wrangling to no purpose For who is so ignorant that knoweth not that Mathematicus in Aristotle his time did not signifie a Chaldean as afterward it did but onely a Professor of those Arts which then were called Mathematicae whereof that which now is called Astrologie was not thought to be any Then where hee saith that Aristotle maketh it Scientiam mediam between the Mathematickes and Naturall Philosophy hee is found many wayes faulty For Astrologia in Aristotle his opinion and the Knights meaning is not the same thing Further Astrologia in Aristotle his meaning is not Scientia media but a part of the Mathematickes and Aristotle doth not once say that the naturall Philosopher medleth with it For he vnderstood then by that word that which wee call Astronomy Much lesse doth Aristotle admit the Knights reason that it should therefore be Scientia media because the Principles thereof are purely Mathematicall which in the practise are applyed to sensible matter as the Physicall subiect thereof which words without vnderstanding the Knight often repeateth Those bee the Knights dreames not Aristotle his reasons Then still wee vrge for an Answer to what part of learning you will referre your Astrologie You thinke perhaps you haue said enough if you referre it in some respect to the Mathematickes and in some respect to Naturall Philosophy but we will not leaue you so Wee say in no respect it can be referred to either of them Not to the Mathematickes because it considereth not things certaine and infallible which the Mathematickes doe It will not helpe you to say it considereth the Starres and the Starres in some respect are the subiect of the Mathematickes For it were a foolish and vnlearned speech to say because the naturall Philosopher considereth a Body as in a place and the Mathematickes consider a body as with his dimensions that therefore naturall Philosophie should bee referred to the Mathematicks so vnlearned and vnreasonable is the assertion that saith because the Astrologer considereth the Starres as causes of inferiour euents and the Mathematickes consider the starres so farre as toucheth their bodies or motion that therefore Astrologie should be a part of Mathematickes Now if wee driue this your pretended Art from these two parts of Learning it will neuer finde any resting place in any other part of good learning And therefore wheresoeuer it is found it will bee taken for a Rogue that hath no certaine abiding place as it hath beene taken for the same by the learned in former times and for the same whipped by them First then Astrology is no part of the Mathematicks because it proceedeth not by demonstration from certaine and knowne Principles And euen they who would haue it a part of Naturall Philosophy acknowledge so much Now let vs examine whether it be contained within the bounds of Naturall Philosophy If they tell vs that the Starres are causes remote and Subordinate of inferiour effects they come not to the point For that is not heere in question whether the Starres bee causes of some
effects in these inferiour Bodies For that influence which is apparant in the Moone and Sunne may bee gathered in other Planets This is granted concerning such Bodies as are subiect to their Vertue But here to cut off their long idle discourses to bring our disputation to a short issue the question is Whether the Stars are naturall causes of those euents which the Astrologers presume to foretell For these men meddle onely with mens actions If Astrologie stayed it selfe in this to foretell the naturall Humours or their effects which shall be in such Plants and Bodies as are somewhat gouerned by Planets it might seeme to haue some likelihood But with this they meddle little or nothing their curiosity is about mens Fortunes Now the Principles by which the Astrologer commeth to his conclusion are no naturall Principles but Sorcery For curious men wandring after the knowledge of hid and vnknowne things seeke the cloake and pretence of an Art and haue called it Astrologie which they seeke to bring within the bounds of Naturall Philosophy when as their Principles haue no Affinity with naturall causes but with those illusions which Sathan inuenteth to deceiue and draw away simple and vnstable Soules into an admiration of curious and impious sleights and vanities Let Philosophers iudge of these Principles That a Sextile and Trine Aspect are fortunate but a Quadrate vnfortunate That the first House signifieth the life and body of him that is borne the second his riches the third Brethren the fourth Parents the fist Children the sixt sicknesse the seauenth Marriage the eighth Death the ninth Religion and God the tenth Rule and Dignities the eleuenth the good Spirit the twelfth the euill Spirit That in each of these the three Lords of the Triplicities haue their seuerall Vertues and significations As in the first House the first Lord of the Triplicity must shew the Life and nature of him that is borne The second Lord of the Triplicity the force and strength of his Body The third his oldage and with such conceits you must-runne through the rest That in whose House Mercury is found to occupy the dignities of Mars Aries then ascending it will dispose him to Contention Are these and such like naturall Principles Or are they meanes subordinate betweene a naturall cause and a naturall effect The way to bring any thing to the knowledge of a man is either by probable Sillogisme or by demonstation or by faith Now these things stand not by demonstration themselues doe not challenge that neither can they stand by Logicall deduction For what absurdity or improbability would follow if a man deny any of these things Nay what absurdity were it withoutreason to yeeld to any It remaineth then if any man know these things hee must know them by faith but not by that faith which God taught his Church therefore by that faith which the Diuell teacheth CAP. II. That the Conclusions of Astrologers cannot by naturall Reason be drawne from their Principles THat these things may the more clearely appeare wee will shew that those men who haue farthest pierced and with greatest Learning and Iudgement searched through all the poynts of Naturall Philosophy haue reiected these vanities and branded them with the Title of Magicall Superstitions and Sorceries excluding them from all parts of naturall knowledge and good Learning But of this in his due place Heere let vs follow this poynt in hand a little further Wee may better vnderstand the meaning of these men by their owne examples For in their Disputations they are neuer willing to come to the point but they mince the question and like men oppressed with feares which Iudgement followeth the maintainers of an euill cause they seeme to looke euery way for helpe and thus forsooth they come warily to the matter The starres incline the humour the humour inclineth the body the body inclineth the minde through all these inclinations the starres come at last to worke vpon the Soule But the force of the Starres is spent in many inclinations before it come to the Soule that they dare not say it worketh directly vpon the minde no not vpon the body but onely vpon the humour for so the Knight saith This being brought either to a Mathematicall demonstration or to a probable Sillogisme would proue a feeble consequence and yet in disputation they are affraid to proceed any further here they sticke But if you looke vpon their examples wherein they set the glory of their Art you shall finde another matter For in the examples of their Predictions they foretell the deaths of Princes vpon such a day the fortunes of Kings the ruines of Kingdomes the ouerthrow of Armies Compare their Principles with their Conclusions and there is matter to wonder at the absurdity or to laugh at the folly For from these Principles the Starres incline onely the humor the humor only inclineth the body the body onely inclineth the minde this Conclusion will hardly be gotten that therefore the Starres incline the minde But they proceed from these inclinations to Predictions of the greatest Euents which euents whether they can be concluded by naturall Reason let vs consider And because this Gentleman might happily deny the examples brought by others as not proceeding from naturall causes therefore to preuent all his exceptions I will insist onely in those examples which himselfe bringeth wherin he glorieth much Paulus tertius warned his Sonne long before of the very day of his death Pag. 81. Picus being foretold by three Astrologers that hee should not liue aboue the age of thirty three yeares confirmed the Prediction Pag. 193. Gauricus warned Henry 2. French King not to run at Tilt in the 41. yeare of his Age for that the Starres did then threaten a wound in his head Pag. 194. The Bishop of Vienna by Astrology assured Don Fredericke then seruing the Duke of Bourgundy that he should be King of Naples Ibid. The same Bishop of Vienna did foretell the two ouerthrowes of Charles Duke of Bourgundy Ibid. These examples he rangeth with the forewarnings of Spurinae to Caesar of Publius Nigidius and Theagenes concerning Augustus of Scribonius and Thrasillus touching Tiberius of Ptolomy and Seleucus to Otho of Ascletarian to Domitian Pag. 193. Now if this Knight or any other man of Learning can shew vs that these euents were naturall euents of the Stars or that the Starres were naturall causes of these things and that by Astrology these things may beeforeseene as in their naturall causes then will wee honour Astrologie But how will they conclude It will not serue to say the Starres moued the humour the humour moued the Body the body affecteth the minde therefore King Henry 2. shall haue a wound in his head in the 41. yeare of his Age. Neither will it serue to say at his Birth the Lord of the ascendant did behold Saturne the greater misfortune and Mars the lesse misfortune with quadrat Aspect or Opposition or the Lord of the
wee seeke by what meanes the Astrologer came by that knowledge There are but two wayes to know the truth hereof By the light of Nature or by the word of God The Naturall men that haue beene guided by the light of Nature could neuer finde out the Affection of the Starres to such an Euent they could not vnderstand why the Starres should either cause it or incline it or signifie it more then the flying of a Bird and as many as wise and learned haue held the flying of Birds or the entrailes of Beasts to bee Causes or signes of such Euents Then it would trouble you to giue a good naturall Reason for your supernaturall superstitions wee reiect otherwise wee should receiue Aruspicine as well as Astrologie we look I say for one good reason from you why you should not iudge of Astrologie as you do of Augury One great Maister of this Profession Corn. Agrippa Lib. 1. Cap. 53. perceiuing such affinity betweene Astrologie and Augary both depending vpon Principles so like affected to the Conclusion seeketh likewise to confirme that Diuination which is from Augury and Auspicie The best learned in Naturall Philosophy and the best learned in Magicke haue adiudged these things like And because wee striue to doe this seruice to the truth wee must examine and follow you into these blind corners wherevnto you flye you must be holden vp to some particular Euent For the question is not whether the Starres signifie any thing but whether they cause or incline or signifie such a particular Euent as that of Henry 2. the time of his death or danger the wound in his head or any such as your other examples imply If they shew such particular Euents then all your Answeres of a generall inclination of the humour only but not of the actions of men which you euery where lay downe as grounds are in truth brought in by you but as cloakes to couer some secret to try whether in the mist of these clouds you can escape from such Arguments as presse you This is the very point that troubled Cicero and other Philosophers for when they came to this point they were at a stand and could proceed no further not through dulnesse of wit as you impute but because they following the matteras farre as the light of Nature did direct them would goe no further then naturall Reason could warrant It is agreed vpon betweene Cicero and his Aduersary in that disputation de Diuinatione that no naturall Reason can be giuen Cur à dextris coruus a sinistra cornix faciat ratum cur Stella Iouis aut Veneris coniuncta cum Luna ad ortus puerorum salutaris sit Saturni Martisuecontraria He ioyneth these together as alwayes his manner is the flying of Birds and Aspect of Starres because toward a particular Euent there is iust like affection in both these Causes And whereas the common reply of Astrologers is sometimes their Predictions fall out true may wee not answer them in Cicero his words Ipsa varietas fortunam esse causam non naturam docet Si tua Conclusio vera est nonne intelligis eadem vti posse Aruspicies fulgatores interpretes ostentorum Augures sorti legos quorum generum nullum est ex quo non aliquid sicut Praedictum sit euaseret Now if Augury Aruspicine and all such Sorceries are iustly condemned as not standing with Christianity yea euen by naturall men as not standing with Nature though their Predictions were sometimes true what reason hath any man to maintaine Astrology and condemne these Or to thinke that the truth of a Prediction should Priuiledge Astrologie more then these Neither is it any reasonable or tollerable Answere to tell vs of the truth of a Prediction when wee see the Cause And yet this Gentleman confesseth Pag. 195. I for my part saith hee doe freely confesse that there is no one thing that hath made me so confident in the validity of this Art as that which I haue seene to fall out true If no one thing haue made you so confident herein then you haue freely told vs that in your owne iudgement you doe not so much esteeme of your long Discourses of the naturall Causes that the Starres are naturall Causes of such Effects these bee not the things that moue you most but you are most of all moued by the Euents Yet the wise and learned are not carried to such a confidence vpon the sight of the Euents but vpon the knowledge of the Cause and Reason And therefore Cicero and before him as hee witnesseth Eudoxus a Platonicke whom hee and others much esteeme for Learning and Panaetius whom hee accounteth the worthiest of the Stoicks and diuers likewise after him men of great Learning in Philosophy did reiect this Art for that these Causes are not Naturall albeit some Euents fell out true For if the question bee of a thing determinable by the light of Nature that Rule of Cicero holdeth alwayes It is a foule shame for a Philosopher to speake any thing without a naturall Reason And if this bee a sufficient warrant to make a man confident in the validity of an Art because he seeth Predictions to fall out true then must this Gentleman be very confident in Witchcraft because hee seeth that all that which was foretold to Saul by Witchcraft 1. Sam. 29. fell out true And shall the truth of that Prediction make a man so confident in the validity of that Art They who are gouerned by the Spirit of God and seeke knowledge according to Godlinesse may not bee confident vpon the truth of Euents And seeing by this example wee see euidently that God in his iust iudgement against the wicked King Saul did suffer Sathan thus to deceiue and illude Saul euen by foretelling him a true Euent because by vnlawfull means he sought the knowledge of things to come They that would iudge the like of the like things must needs thinke that God in the like sort suffereth the Diuell to deceiue and illude Astrologers by suffering them to foretell true things sometimes that curious men that will not containe themselues within lawfull knowledge may bee deceiued and drawne into a great confidence of the validity of this Art Heerein Gods Iudgement is fearefull but iust against such as seeke the knowledge of things to come by vnwarranted meanes Now this Gentleman writing for Astrologie after so many Ages and comming to that very point which so much troubled Cicero and the rest and caused them vtterly to abandon the Art because by the light of Nature they saw no way to goe through this difficulty He comming I say to the same point is to be obserued well how he in his imagination goeth through where they all stucke For hee vseth no other means to informe vs in the Mistery but this Pag. 99. If Spice and other hot Simples are of force to stirre and alter our humours by their specificall qualities why
two Kings Was not the death of Henry 2. as well directed by Gods Prouidence as the death of Achab Was not Achabs death as much seene in the Starres as Henries And if it be blasphemy to say that either the Diuell or any Astrologer could foretell Achabs death before such time as God had reuealed it is it any lesse to pronounce the same of Henry 2. But hee telleth vs that if Mr. Chambers or any other know any Astrologer that vseth the familiarity of euill Spirits those hee will not defend or excuse But wee say that no Astrologer can make a Prediction of such particular Euents wherein himselfe giueth instance but by the familiarity of an vncleane Spirit And yet vnlesse wee driue them to confesse it hee will still shift vs off with this Answere that hee knoweth none that doth it What shall wee doe heere Must we not beleeue it till we heare the Astrologers themselues confesse it It is plaine enough by that which wee haue already proued because to know a particular future Euent is beyond the compasse of Nature beyond the Reason of naturall men therefore if a man attaine to this knowledge it is not by naturall meanes Yet the Knight laboureth to proue this to be naturall from contingence But how is this proued forsooth First that there are some things contingent For thus hee saith Pag. 210. The Astrologer inquireth not whether hee shall dye or no yet the time when the place where how and by what kinde of death or by whom to dye is contingent and not necessary and in that respect subiect to Astrologie Thus farre the Knight You tell vs that Astrologicall Predictions are not in things necessary but contingent When necessary and contingent are opposed one against the other Necessary importeth alwayes the dependance betweene a naturall Cause and his Effect Contingent is a fortuitall Effect whereof there is no naturall Cause apparant Haue you not thus confirmed to vs that the Starres are not naturall Causes of such Effects Surely if you can make any sense of your words it must bee to exclude Predictions from naturall Effects For no contingent Effect hath any apparant naturall Cause apparant I meane to the naturall man Here it must bee obserued that Astrologers haue bid Nature farewell and haue betaken themselues and the hope of their cause to fortune and chance therein their Trade standeth by their owne confession Now that the thing which consisteth in fortune and chance is out of the compasse of naturall Causes it is apparant because no Philosopher to this day did euer acknowledge the Cause of a fortuitall Effect to bee naturall but because they know no naturall Cause thereof therefore they call it Fortune Now they called Chance and Fortune a Cause accidentall which cannot bee reduced to a naturall Cause but may bee reduced to some other Cause namely to Gods Prouidence Aristotle admitting that Chance and Fortune may be reduced to some Cause doth not expresse how But Hippocrates doth for hee teacheth Lib. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Fortunam medicam a Dijs esse Where hee saith also Medicos quando cum fide Artem adhibuerint reliqua fortunae committere And expressing the same in other words hee saith Medici Dijs locum dant So that the Philosophers that would reduce it to a cause can reduce it to no other then the prouidence of God And it is chance only in respect of mans knowledge and purpose otherwise there is no chance at all Now saith the Astrologer all Astrologicall Predictions are of such things which are in Chance then it followeth that they are not naturall neither to bee reduced to a naturall Cause but only to Gods prouidence By this Astrology must bee reduced not to Philosophy but to Diuinity if it bee an explication of such Euents as belong to Gods prouidence Then must you tell vs no more of naturall Causes but teach vs these things out of Gods word Now where you take paines Pag. 227 to proue that there is contingence in Nature which when M. Chambers hath taken away you say if hee shall dare to defend his Assertion you will not feare likewise to affirme that with contingence he takes away the Prescience of God or otherwise induceth fatall necessity You striue not against M. Chambers but you speake at random like a rauing man you know not what For hee that taketh away contingence in Nature or that which men call Fortune doth not take away Gods prescience but rather confirmeth it For in regard of Gods prescience there is nothing contingent In this point you trouble your selfe more then M. Chambers doth trouble you For to proue contingence in Naeture you tell vs of contingent Propositions in Logick Pag. 227. you take exception against this Proposition of M. Chambers If Predictions bee true they are of necessity the consequence you say is not onely false but draweth with it impieties and absurdities It is false you say because in Logicke euery true Proposition is not necessary it may be contingent To proue it impious and absurd you say would require a longer Disputation and therefore you will not enter into it Wee returne that M. Chambers his Proposition is neither false nor impious as you are pleased to terme it For admitting your Principles that Astrologicall Predictions are no other then the foretelling of naturall Effects from the knowledge of their naturall Causes then wee say it is a most true Proposition If their Predictions bee true they are necessary for true and necessary is all one in nature Tell vs not here of contingent Propositions in Logicke for what Logicke or Philosophy taught you so to proceed in Disputation from a contingent Euent in Nature to a contingent Proposition in Logicke These differ toto coelo Then wee yeeld that a Proposition may be true and yet not necessarily true but contingently but euery Effect that is a true Effect of a naturall Cause followeth his Cause non contingenter sed necessario by a naturall necessity not by hap hazard For if it bee a true and naturall Effect of the fire to heate then it heareth non contingenter sed necessario So if it bee the true and naturall Effect of the Starres to worke such a particular Euent as you speake of then it must bee necessary For you cannot shew vs any naturall Effect depending on a naturall Cause which dependeth thereon contingently Then that which M. Chambers saith is true you haue nothing against it But mark good Reader how the Knight disputing of contingence openeth his meaning For he perceiuing belike that if hee should attribute these Predictions wholly to contingence hee must needs thrust them out of naturall Causes is much troubled wrestling with himselfe and interferring hee cannot tell what to make of the matter which he hath begun For to make vs vnderstand how these Predictions may bee true though not necessary he telleth vs Pag. 283. It is not simply necessary that the fire should heate the water yet if
the like secrecies in Astrologicall Diuination This knowledge that thus flyeth the light sheweth euidently whence it commeth Iamblicus disputing against Porphyry telleth vs that Porphyry following Astrologicall diuination went not foundly to the way of foretelling but the Egyptian way was as hee thought the surer Both did seeke to know the Lord of the Figure which in truth was a Diuell but they were not well agreed to what Diuell to giue the place but the Egyptians saith hee went more directly to it Quidnam prohibet figurae dominum atque daemonem per Astrologiam quidem difficile inueniri facillime vero per diuinum vaticinium atque sacrificia Where hee plainly confesseth that Dominus figurae whom the Astrologers seeke so much is in truth Daemon a Diuell Sir you vnderstand by this how your Astrologie is censured There is no certainty in it till you come to Magicke that is the sure way so that Iamblicus telleth you that Astrologers doe but spend the time in vaine till they come to the Egyptian sacrificing that is to plaine Magicke Plotinus qui inscribitur si faciant astra saith as Macrobius citeth him Pronunciat Plotinus nihil vi vel potestate corum hominibus euenire sed ea quae decreti necessitas in singulis sanxit ita per horum septem transitum statione recessiue monstrari vt aues seu praeter volando seu stando futura pnnis vel voce significant nes ientes Whereby it appeareth that in his iudgement there is no more naturall cause of a particular Euent in the Starres then in the flying of Birds And therefore these things being shut out from naturall Causes are found onely amongst diabolicall Superstitions My purpose is heerein to refute Astrologicall Predictions as standing against nature by the voyce of the naturall man by Philosophers and the confessions of them that haue beene reputed most learned in that fession And I haue dealt little with Diuines I will adde a few Origen vpon the Booke of Numbers expounding those words There is no Sorcery in Iacob nor Diuination in Israell in due time it shall bee reuealed to Iacob and Israell what the Lord will doe speaketh of the curiosity which men by vnlawfull meanes vse in seeking the knowledge of things to come Hee sheweth that there are but two waies to know those things either from God as the Prophets spake or from the Diuell as all other doe that seeke the knowledge of particular Euents Est talis quaedam saith he in Ministerio praesciētiae operatio Daemonum qua artibus quibusdam ab ijs qui se Daemonibus maciparint colligitur And expounding the latter part of that Verse In tempore dicitur Iacobo Israeli quid perficiet Deus Quid est saith he in tempore dicetur cum oportet expedit hoc est in tempore Si ergo expedit pranoscere nos futura diceture Deo per Prophetam Dei per spiritum sāctum Si vero non dicuntur neque denuntiantur scito quia nobis non expedit futura pranoscere Quod si idcirco non dicuntur nobis quia nobis ea scire non expedit qui diuersis artibus daemonum inuocationibus gestiunt futura praenoscere quid aliud faciunt nisi ea cupiunt discere qua sibi scire non expedit And a little after after A solo Deo debemus de futuris discere neque diuinum neque augurem neque aliud quodcunque horum recipere The Knight would make Origen to stand for Astrologie and produceth a testimony of Origen as he dreameth out of the narration of Ioseph in which Iacob is said to tell his Sonnes that Heauen was a Booke wherein they might reade whatsoeuer should befall them This howsoeuer the Knight thought worthy his Relation yet I doe not account it worthy my Refutation It is grosse ignorance or wilfull collusion to thinke that Origen gaue credit to any such Booke or wrote any such thing it is true that many such tricks are put vpon Origen by deceiuers and thrust in amongst his workes of which Origen complained in his life time confessing that his workes were interpolated by couseners but for this particular 1. It is against the vsuall Doctrine of Origen in other places 2. It is reiected by the Church as fabulous 3. It is refuted by S. Augustine and others Augustine teacheth no otherwise speaking of Astrologie and of Diuination in generall He saith Omnes Artes huiusmodi vel nugatoria velnoxiae superstitionis ex quadam pestifera societate hominum Daemonum Hee calleth it pestifera curiositas crucians sollicitudo mortifera seruitus And reckoning all the kindes of Magicke haruspicum Augurum libros ligaturas remedia in praecationibus Characteribus and other things of that sort at last hee saith Nec ab hoc genere pernitiosae superstitionis segregandi sunt qui genethliaci propter natalium dierum considerationes nunc autem vulgo Mathematici vocantur For anciently these were not called Mathematici and therefore hee seemeth loth to giue them that name as a name vndue to their occupation For himselfe obserueth so much Non cos appellarunt Mathematicos veteres qui nunc appellantur sed illos qui temporum numeros motu coeli ac Syderum peruestigarunt This amongst the Ancients was the knowne Subiect of the Mathematickes the supputation of times by the motion of the Starres And anciently Predictions were neuer accounted any part of the Mathematickes The Knight vtterly scorneth this ancient vse as idle and vaine without Predictions For an answere to S. Augustine the Knight telleth vs that S. Augustine reproueth onely such as either follow the Idolatry of the Heathen or suppose a fatall necessity in those things that depend vpon our will in all things else confessing the gouernment of the Heauenly Bodies and both the Starres to haue their properties and the Astrologer to know the same This was soon said and boldly but when will it be proued The truth is that S. Augustine and the rest of the Fathers reproue Astrologie for the vaine curiosity of foretelling things to come which cannot bee foretold but by God and his Prophets or to the Diuell and his Prophets This is that which moued the Fathers against Prediction because a Prediction cannot bee foretold but by the Spirit of God This saith Origen this saith S. Augustine That the Predictions of those that are called genethliaci is nothing but pernitiosa superstitio Cyrill writing against Iulian the Apostate answereth an Obiection that Iulian hath made that Abraham was an Astrologer that hee did vse Diuination or Prediction by the Starres Cyrill answereth that there is no such Diuination or Prediction the Starres haue no such vse they were not made for any such thing but as hee saith Factum ab ipso Deo dicimus Astrorum chorum non quod sanctorum Prophetarum dignitatem habeat vel aliud quicquam preter quam vt luceant hominibus sint in signa temporum
it bee applyed in due manner vpon supposition it must needs heate So hee saith presupposing that the matter or subiect whereof the Astrologer speaketh be conuenient and well disposed that which they conclude by the Position of Heauen will come to passe Before you can conclude any thing you must haue liberty granted to coyne a new Philosophy For how many errors are contained in these words Consider your wordes First whereas you would shew in these words the difference betweene absolute necessity and that which is called ex hypothesi It seemeth you were neuer carefull to vnderstand what is absolute and what vpon supposition And whereas you call it necessity vpon condition when the fire heateth or burneth this is not necessity vpon condition but it is necessity secundum consuetum naturae ordinem naturall necessity That the fire should heate or burne matter applyed to it is not necessary vpon condition For that which is necessary vpon condition doth infallibly follow the condition being admitted therefore is called necessitas infallibilitatis but fire doth not infallibly heate or burne the matter applyed for it is hindred by a Miracle if a Miracle cease then it heateth necessarily but this necessity is naturall necessity and not necessity vpon condition Consider yet another error in those words and in Philosophy not tollerable Hauing taught that Astrologicall Predictions are of things not necessary but contingent to proue this you giue instance in the fire whose effect is to heate yet it heateth you say not simply necessarily but vpon condition whereby you inferre that the Starres worke vpon that which you take to bee their Subiect as the fire worketh vpon his Subiect Then it must needs follow that either in the worke of the Starres there is naturall necessity or in the worke of the fire vpon an apt subiect there is contingence You impute to M. Chambers errors ignorance impiety absurdity forwriting that which agreeth with good Learning and will be iustified But are you Sir or any man in the world by disputation able to iustifie these things That the Starres worke vpon their Subiect as the fire vpon his yet that the Starres worke contingently or that the fire worketh contingently Or that a thing contingent is necessary Or that an Effect which is granted to be contingent is an Effect of a knowne naturall Cause These things neither your selfe nor any for you can make agreeable to Philosophy These are the nets wherein you haue wil fully intangled your selfe and your Astrologie cannot helpe you out Keepe the distinction of things that in themselues are distinct distinguish naturall necessity from absolute because the one may bee hindred the other cannot then distinguish it from necessity vpon coaction and from necessity vpon condition place naturall necessity in things that are according to the ordinary course of Nature distinguish all necessity from contingence that is of things Philosophicall speake like a Philosopher and then shall you neuer be able to answer these things whereunto the iniquity of your cause hath drawne you but by plaine confessing of your error Now least you might thinke that this was rather your euill lucke then any fault in the Cause and Art of Astrology wee will admit for your pleasure all these errors vnsaid againe And if you can take better aduice defend the Cause as you will you shall be brought about to the same absurdities againe For your Predictions are either of things necessary or contingent answer what you will you are caught If of things necessary then holding as you doe the Starres naturall Causes of such Effects this necessity must bee according to the ordinary Course of Nature the bond whereof is not broken but by Miracle then your Predictions cannot be hindred but by Miracle But you see they are hindred ordinarily and without Miracles and it is a greater Miracle to see them fall out true then to see them proue false which your selfe perceiuing dare not affirme to be of things necessary but of contingents onely But now when you say they are of things contingent you exclude them from the ordinary Course of Nature For those Effects that are produced according to the ordinary Course of Nature are not contingent but alwayes necessary by Naturall necessity Thus say what you will your Predictions fall to the ground Yet if words will hold them vp they want no helpe For hauing brought your selfe into a great perplexity concerning Contingents you goe through as though you would see no danger and you tell vs that Astrologers doe not meddle at all with rare Contingents or such as haue an indifferent respect to the Opposites which may happen one way or another Pag. 283. It is as if you should say Astrologicall Predictions are in things contingent not necessary and yet Astrologers meddle not at all with things contingent but onely with things necessary For you call that a rare Contingent which hath an indifferent respect to the Opposites Now the truth is there are no other Contingents but onely such For all Contingence is in respect of mans Will and purpose which hath his naturall freedome and liberty where some things fall out besides the purpose and Counsell of man there and there onely Contingence hath place This is alwaies in such Actions as in respect of the liberty of the Will haue an indifferent respect to the Opposites If you say true then they meddle with no Contingents But see good Reader when a man is once ouer the shooes how hee runneth through thicke and thinne This hee saith to perswade if he could haue a Reader that would beleeue him that their Predictions are not in such Contingents as these but in another soâ—…t of Contingents which hee dreameth to bee such as when the fire burneth this hee calleth Contingence But this is so hot and heauy that it would burne his fingers that maintaineth it it needeth no Refutation Moreouer whereas M. Chambers prouing that there can be no Predictions being of future particular Euents for that purpose alledgeth a sentence of Aristotle that of future Euents there is no certaine knowledge or things that are so to happen can neither bee said true nor false Thus Aristotle expresseth a thing contingent like a naturall man the Knight sore troubled with this sentence at last giueth that Answer which bruiseth Astrologie in pieces His Answer is Pag. 282. To affirme that there is no truth of future Euents contingent because it appeareth not to vs is erroneous for all things are present to God and all axiomes or affirmations of future Accidents appeare to him as they are either true or false Neither is it alone knowne to him but farther to such to whom hee shall vouchsafe to reueale it or otherwise to them that are able to discerne Euents in their determinate Causes Thus farre the Knight Were it not better vtterly to renounce the defence of Astrology then thus to defend it The question is whether future particular Euents can bee foretold
And Agrippa for a Cousener dealeth somwhat plainly For he saith in his Epistle to Tritemius Tres libros de Magia composui de occulta Philosophia minus infesto titulo inscripsi Then they who will call Magicke Philosophy because a Magitian to colour his wickednesse so calleth it may vnderstand how weake their ground is and see themselues directly deceiued by him that professeth to deceiue The Ancients doe exactly distinguish Magitians from Philosophers as may bee seene aswell from the testimony of Plato last cited which witnesseth that the Magicke wherof he speaketh standeth only in the worship of the Gods therefore in no naturall knowledge by consequence no part of Philosophy As also by a testimony to the same purpose out of Herodotus for Herodotus speaking of the manner of sacrificing vsed amongst the Persians declareth that their Magi were their Priests Magus astans theogoniam accipit si quidem hanc illi dicunt esse incantationem efficacissimam citraque Magum nullum illis fit legitimum sacrificium And afterward declareth how the Magi differ from the Egyptian Priests that is how the Persian Priests differ from the Egyptian Priests By which it appeareth that Magi were Priests not Philosophers Iamblicus distinguishing these I meane Priests and Philosophers saith thus Non enim intelligentia coniungit sacrificatores Deo alioqui philosophi vnionem Deificam reportarent He calleth that vnionem Deificam whereby the Priests of Egypt and Magi of the Persians were so linked to their familiar Diuill that thereby they had meanes to foretell and worke certaine great workes that is illusions These things be of Magicke craft but not of Philosophy and they who doe such things are called Magi Chaldaei or sometimes Priests but neuer Philosophi of the Ancients To the same purpose Diodorus Siculus witnesseth that the Chaldeans were not as the Philosophers of Greece studying naturall knowledge but as the Priests of Egypt foretelling particular Euents Chaldaei Babiloniorum antiquissimi eum locum in sua repub quem in Egypto Sacerdotes obtinuere ad cultum enim Deorum deputati Diuinatione quadâ futura praedicunt This is their Philosophy not to seeke the naturall Causes of things but by their manner of worshipping their Gods that is Diuells to learne the knowledge of Predictions of particular Euents which cannot bee knowne in nature but are knowne by the helpe of such Diuels as the Chaldeans worshipped Heerein Diodorus consenteth with Plato and others and teacheth vs to know these Chaldeans True it is that Strabo calleth them Philosophers but not simply but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Philosophers of that Countrey Whereby hee distinguisheth them from such as otherwhere are knowne by the name of Philosophers and doth more exactly distinguish them by their Profession For speaking of Wizards by occasion of Moses such saith he was Amphiaraus Trophonius Orpheus Musaeus and amongst the Getae Zamolxis amongst the Indians Gimnosophistae amongst the Persians Magi who were called saith hee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 amongst the Assyrians Chaldei amongst the Romans Hetrusci Aruspices Thus farre Strabo who speaketh of these things with vnderstanding comparing the Chaldeans Magi and Aruspices together And this may shew how farre they are mistaken that without warrant without testimony of the Ancients call either the Chaldei or the Magi Philosophers they may as well call the Aruspices by that name Now these called by diuers names in diuers Countries Magi Gymnosophists Brachmanae Chaldaeans Astrologers Aruspices Druides all were Magitians of seuerall Nations Whereas all the rest are I cannot say vtterly abolished but if they bee practised it is in secret only the Chaldean Superstition resumeth life and courage in many places by an abusiue pretence of heauenly influences Whereas in truth this Superstition hath no more reason then the rest that are not now so boldly maintained These men would hide all their sleights vnder the heauenly influences we grant that the Heauens haue their force in these inferiours so farre as the naturall Philosopher can vnderstand If it be demanded whether they haue not greater force then the naturall man can vnderstand to that who can answere precisely For who knoweth all secrets of God but God But wee know that if there bee any no man is able to expresse it Now the Astrologer may learne naturall influences from Philosophy but if there bee aboue that which Philosophers know the Astrologer must giue a reason how hee commeth to the knowledge of such things which the naturall man knoweth not Giue me leaue good Reader for the manifestation of the truth which onely God knoweth I seeke to disclose those secrets which Astrologers labour to hide holding vs with faire tales of naturall influences It greeueth me that any should be how much more a man of such place and parts so bewitched as once to open his mouth in defence of these workes of darkenesse in this great light of knowledge and of the truth If it were not against a cause that so much ouerthroweth Godlines I should neuer troble him but who can holde in this case wherein Gods glory and the truth is touched which wee doubt not will once holde his owne place like the Sunne in his strength dispelling these mistes not onely of Errors but of great impieties which now ouercast the light thereof That wee may know what these men meane by their Influences who can better teach vs then Corn. Agrippa that hath disclosed the secrets of this Art whose testimony is without exception because hee was better seen in Astrology then the Knight or any that taketh part with him Agrippa speaking of these Astrologicall influences first telleth vs a tale of the Platonicks Omnia inferiora esse idiata a superioribus idaeis et totidem sunt in anima mundi rationes rerum seminales quot idaeae sunt in mente deuina quibus ipsa rationibus aedificauit sibi in coelis vltra stellas etiam figuras impressitque his omnibus proprietates Ab hisce ergo stellis figuris ac proprietatibus omnes specierum inferiorum virtutes ac proprietates dependent Then the Astrologicall influence dependeth vpon that doctrine which Plato learned of Mercury Tresmegist concerning Anima mundi This influence say they may be hindered by the inability of the matter and is infused acording to the merits of the matter As they would draw out of Virgil who heerein expresseth the Platonicall conceipt Igneus est ollis vigor Coelestis origo Seminibus quantum non noxia corpora tardant Further hee explicateth this matter thus Prouenit virtus primo ab Idaeis deinde ab intelligentijs regentibus postea a coelorum aspectibus disponentibus porro ab elementorum dispositis complexionibus correspondentibus coelorum influxibus This is the doctrine of his Influences I will onely bring it to the light One thing I note throughout all his discourse of influences hee neuer citeth a Philosopher but
alwaies Trismegist Iarchas Brachmanus Hebraeorum mecubules He prooueth also out of Trismegist that by the right marking of Influence if an Image bee made of such things as properly agree to each Daemon that the image shall presently bee animated by a Daemon all this must wee take as from Astrologicall Influences Let vs proceed in these hid mysteries of Influences Hee saith further Nihil materiales numeri figures possunt in mysterijs rerum abditarum nisi representatiue per numeros figuras formales quatenus reguntur informantur ab intelligentijs quae nectunt extrema materiae atque spiritus at voluntatem animae eleuatae per magnum affectum operantis coelesti virtute potestatem accipiens a Deo per animam vniuersi coelestium constellationum obseruationes Thou must not require of mee good Reader the vnderstanding of these things For wee are now about the hidden secrets and mysteries of Influences which neither the Knight nor I vnderstand but their great Maister of the Art Agrippa calleth them hidden mysteries And hidden let them bee euer from me And hee telleth concerning these Astrologicall Influences that which I would haue the Astrologers to marke but they know it better then I can tell them And therefore I wish the Reader to marke these Deceiuers who in defence of Astrologie discreetly seeke to maintaine all the mysteries of Magicke For Agrippa one of the greatest Maisters in both the Professions or in one which includeth both further teacheth that no Diuination can bee perfited without Astrology and therefore hee calleth Astrogie Clauem ad omnium arcanorum noticiam pernecessariam Where hee saith further Omnia diuinationum genera sic in ipsa Astrologia suas radices fundamenta habent vt absque hanc parum aut nihil videantur adferre And againe Astrologica diuinatio quatenus coelestia sunt causae signa omnium eorum quae fiunt in inferioribus ex solo situ motu corporum coelestium quaecunque occulta aut futura sunt illorum certissimas largitur demonstrationes Here wee see from whence the Knight hath that learning which hee so often repeateth but neuer proueth that the Starres are Causes and Signes of those Euents which are seen in the actions of men For in such standeth Astrologicall Predictions Thou seest much good Reader but yet thou seest not all There is yet another secret that belongeth to these Astrologicall Predictions For it is not enough to beleeue without reason that the Starres are Causes of such Euents which the Astrologer would foretell whatsoeuer they bee but hee must beleeue with a strong credulity and earnest affection nay with the excesse of a desire otherwise they cannot come to their purpose So that it is not in the nature of the thing but in the vehement desire of him that seeketh to know these things This is plaine witchcraft and Idolatry in abusing men to place their highest desires their faith and aff◅ctions vpon these things And therefore hee teacheth farther thus Omnes res habent naturalem obedientiam ad animam humanam de necessitate habent motum et efficaciam ad id quod defiderat anima forti desiderio And again Quando fertur in excessum desiderij And speaking of the same thing he saith Et hac eadem ratio est etiam radix omnium Astrologicarum quaestionum quoniam anima eleuata in al◅cuius desiderij excessum arrepit ex se horam opportunitatem magis conuenientem efficacem super qua fabricata coeli figura potest tunc Astrologico in ea iudicare plane cognoscere de eo quod quaerens ipse scire cupit atque desiderat All this goeth currant amongst Astrologers for good naturall Philosophy But let vs turne a little to the Knight to whom from the heart we with sound heartpray that God wil deliuer him out of these snares hehath giuen vs cause to hope that he may be drawne to see all these vanities forasmuch as himselfe doth ingeniously confesse that that part of Astrologie which is about questions Elections hath in it apparant sortilegy p. 3. He giueth there some reasons of that opinion but I am perswaded that the greatest reason that moued him was because hee saw it so impiously taught in Agrippa that without apparant sortilegy it could not bee admitted Hee that doth confesse that which is true that as it is taught by these Maisters there is apparant sortilegy in this part may be drawn to see and confesse that in the whole there is the like to be found For this Astrologicall Influence without the which ground the Astrologer can do nothing is foūded vpon the Platonical conceit of anima mundi And this cōmeth not by a naturall Course of the light motions of the Stars but from the conceiued Idaea to the intelligence from the intelligence to the Sphere it commeth so to the Aspects of Heauen and to the Elementary Complexions reducing the Heathenish superstitions And yet all this will not serue vnlesse the Astrologer come to desire this secret knowledge of things to come with strong credulity and excesse of desire placing his faith and affections vpon those inuentions of Sathan which wee owe only to God his holy Scriptures truth This is that which being against all natural reason hath driuē away the most honest among naturall Philosophers frō this profession And hath driuen away all the holy Fathers of the Church and is able to driue all true Christians from it For when we finde by their owne confession that that these Predictions are not founded in the nature of things sought nor in the nature of the Starres but in an excesse of desire credulity in him that seeketh who will not be terrified from this search And where hee saith all things haue a naturall obedience to the soule of man his meaning is not that all things which they thus seeke haue a desire to bee knowne which is Witchcraft but that all vncleane Spirits are desirous to illude the soule of man and make shew of obedience to catch the soule of man in these snares requiring a strong Credulity and excessiue desire of the Soule and so drawing the seruice of the Soule to themselues from God and from godlinesse These be the trappes and snares that vncleane Spirites haue spred for Astrologers Our desire is to giue them warning hereof that they may auoyde them Let vs returne to Agrippa and marke his proceedings Non ab alia causa quam a Coelestiterenni orbis virtutes proueniunt Hinc Magus per illas operaturus vtitur incantatione astuta superiorum verbis Mysteriosis in locutione quadam ingeniosa trahens vnum ad aliud vitamen naturals per quandam conuenientiam inter illas mutuam Sir do you heare him When he hath laide downe a great secret of the Diuels craft yet he saith all is done Vi Naturali These bee the things that wee haue renounced in our Baptisme we renounce not Nature