man thou consults withall or rather the Diuell by him hit on right at the first and satisfie thy desires in some vnlawfull and curious enquiry Well 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from that day forward thou doest resolue with thy selfe to beleeue whatsoeuer he shall tell thee heereafter And though his Magicall Skill and Diabolicall Art fayle him many times as indeede it must for defuturis contingentibus non datur Scientia yet the opinion of Man and the Illusion of Sathan hath so besotted thee that sure the fault is in thy selfe when things prooue not true it is eyther by reason of thy heedlesnesse in mis-vnderstanding some words or mis-applying some meanes the blame must be layde on any thing rather then on the Diuell Is it not a shame that Christians who liue vnder such a bright Sunne-shine of the Gospell should suffer themselues to be led away with such superstitious Vanities Men forget that they haue Learned Christ when they will needes be beholden to the Diuell for his counsell in any matter If they would but remember that solemne Vow and protestation they once made before the face of the Church in holy Baptisme wherein they promised to forsake the Diuell and all his Workes it would readily prompt them to their dutie and what is that Not to regard them that haue Familiar Spirits neyther to seeke after Wizardes to be defiled with them as the Lord commandeth Leuit 19. 31. Where marke this by the way that you cannot seeke after these things but you must needes be defiled with them In which respect Saint Austine excellently cals this running after Wizards genus quoddam fornicationis A spirituall kinde of Fornication And the reason is euident because the vncleane Spirites are desirous to illude the Soule of man and to make a shew of Obedience to catch the Soule in their snares requiring a strong Credulitie and excessiue desire to learne So drawing the heart from Gods feare and bringing it by little and little in their Slauerie as is plaine by the following Discourse which is the grossest kinde of Spirituall Whoredome that can be deuised when the Soule goes a whoring from GOD after the Diuell But I feare I haue out of a zeale to the Church exceeded the bounders of an Epistle I will not trespasse further vppon you by keeping you any longer as it were at the Threshold from entering the Discourse it selfe Wherein you haue these things and the whole matter with sound iudgement and varieie of Learning perfectly hanled and the Aduersarie driuen from his starting holes by maine force of Argument And so ceasing to be further troublesome vnto you I humbly take my leaue Your assured Louing Cousin THO VICARS In Authorem eius Opera 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Non ego te meis Chartis inornatum sileri Totue tuos patiar labores Impunè Praesul carpere liuidas Obliuiones Maiorum titulis magnus sed maior haberi Vis magè Musarum titulis dignissime Praesul Dordrechtum tua fama capit quòd missus ab oris Angliacis doctus Synodo consederis ampla Qui Characteres heroum legerit ipsum Vergilium versú ve parenâ—… legat ille Poetam Sacrilegos tuadocta manus prostrauit inde Laus tibi nec minor hinc quod ineptos Astrologastros Fuderis in terram docto conanime surgit Nempe condignos norunt tibi pendere honores Sceptra tuo calamo firmata referre molestum Non erit Et pleno meritas Ecclesia laudes Concinet ore tuas Consensum si bene seruat T. V. posuit S. T. B. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 OR RECAPITVLATION of the Chiefe Passages in this Treatise CHAP. I. TO the Confusion of Astrologie one witnesse more is added by the writing of this Booke Iudiciarie Astrologie is no part of Naturall Philosophie nor of the Mathematickes neyther is it Media Scientia betwixt them CHAP. II. The meanes of knowing aforehand particular Euents is not Naturall but Diabolicall Those that haue beene most blockish in other Learning haue beene quick and sharpe-witted in Astrologie CHAP. III. Astrologie and Augurie in the iudgement of the learned are alike The trueth in a Prediction doth not make an Art warrantable CHAP. IV. The Astrologer foretelleth that is true by the helpe of Sathan Henry the second King of Fraunce and Ahab King of Israels death compared together Astrologicall Predictions depend not vpon Natural Causes Natural Effects are not Contigent but Necessary Of future Contingent Euents there is no certaine knowledge Astrologicall Predictions stand not by learning but by some instinct CHAP. V. Astrologie considereth the Fortunes onely of Fooles and the wicked The Knights inuincible Syllogisme dasht to peeces Naturall Effects must be distinguished from Contingent Euents CHAP. VI. No place for a definition in the beginning of a Controuersie Ars is not the Genus for Astrology and Astronomy CHAP. VII The first Inuenter of Astrologie was the Diuell The first spreader of it Zoroastes Eudoxus an Astronomer against Astrological predictioÌ„s Panaetius and Cicero Varro Pliny against Astrology Pythagoras Democritus and Plato studious of Magicke silent in Astrology A briefe rehearsal of the points deliuered in the Booke hitherto CHAP. VIII Those things which haue supernaturall Causes cannot be foretold by the Starres Diuers things depending on Naturall Causes cannot certainly be foretold by the Astrologer as Raine Weather Dearth Sicknesse Those things which depend partly on Naturall Causes on Mans Will cannot be foretold by Astrologers Those things which are meerely Contingent cannot bee foretold by the Starres CHAP. IX Magicke no part of Naturall Philosophy The Astrologer hideth his sleights vnder the name of Celestiall Influences The Influences conferre nothing to a Prediction without a strong Credulity and excessiue desire of learning in the heart of the Enquirer Astrologie and Magicke in practise inseparable The Astrologer attaineth not to his intended end in a prediction without the helpe of Magicke The learned Fathers of the Church namely Origen Augustine Cyril Theodoret against Astrologicall Predictions CHAP. X. That place Esay 47 12. cited by M. Chambers against Astrologers cleared where the destruction of Babylon there threatned is shewne not to haue beene myraculous against the Knights cauill Cicero denieth fatum Stoicum granteth fatum Physicum That place Iob. 38. 33. soundly interpreted That place Iudg. 5 20. opened and expounded That place Gen. 1 14. Catholically expounded and vindicated from abuse That place of Chrysost. in Math. 2. interpreted God worketh in some things against his reuealed will Blasphemy is not onely against God but against his truth and against the Saints that maintaine the truth Ignorance of Astrologie is tollerable in a Christian Knight but ignorance in Theologie cannot bee excused An irreligious speech of an Astrologer who thought by Numbers to attaine the Mystery of Saluation sifted punctually A place in Cicero Lib. 2. de Diuinat commended to the Knights reading The Kings Maiestie as Iudge of
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
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
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
rising of the Sunne should not know when it would bee day Either this instance is nothing worth or else hee holdeth that as the day followeth the Sunne-rising by such a naturall course which cannot bee broken without Miracle so the particular Euents in mens actions foretold by the Astrologer follow the Positions of the Starres in such a naturall course as cannot be broken without Miracle The operation of the Sunne and Moone that are naturall are confessed The Husbandman can tell when it will bee day as well as the Astrologer The Husbandmen and Fishers by marking the course of the Moone can foretell the full Sea and Eâ—…be more exactly then any Astrologer what then Are thâ—…se Astrologicall Predictions No verily no more then the foretelling of an Ecclipse For of these things that naturally follow and without a Miracle are not broken our question is not This M. Chambers granteth But what affinity hath this with your Astrologicall Predictions Or how will you conclude from this grant a particular contingent Euent in a mans life or state as that Henry 2. shall bee at such a time wounded in the head or that Ioh Medices shall bee Pope or any such like For M. Chambers by Astrologicall Predictions meant onely particular contingent Effects as your selfe say they are such Pag. 210. Now when as your selfe confesse that Astrologicall Predictions are in things contingent not necessary you grant directly with M. Chambers that the day following the rising of the Sunne naturally that is necessarily not contingently the ebbing and flowing following the Positions of the Moone necessarily not contingently the Eclipse following the interposition necessarily not contingently You must needs grant that these naturall and necessary Consequents haue no affinity with Predictions which are not naturall and necessary Consequences but contingent as your selfe doe acknowledge And yet you aske with what face can M. Chambers say this With an honest face and a learned head Wee will not vrge with what face you may looke vpon your ouer-sights Learne what it is wee grant and what wee deny Wee grant that the operations of the Sunne and Moone are euident that their Effects are naturall and therefore bound to naturall necessity no way subiect to Contingence Wee deny that the particular Euents foretold by Astrologers are naturall Effects or necessary but only contingent You confesse thus much How then can you refute these things If I grant the operations of the Sunne and Moone in things necessary by the ordinary Course of Nature must I needs grant the power of Starres in things contingent Yet this you thought to bee such a Syllogisme which all the Aduersaries of Astrology should neuer bee able to answere You deceiue your selfe and would deceiue others But who is not able to distinguish betweene naturall Effects and contingent Euents which poore distinction cutteth off all your hopes of this inuincible Syllogisme and sheweth the Cause to bee weake that cannot bee better supported And whereas you take pleasure to compare the influence of Starres towards a contingent Euent to the operation of Simples it is not worth the refuting your selfe granting the one contingent and the other naturall Now call you this a begging of the question the question being of Predictions in particular Euents What doe wee begge in distinguishing betweene naturall Effects and contingent Euents Doth not hee thinke you famously begge the question who answereth in euery passage of his Booke that the Astrologer containeth him within the bounds of naturall Philosophy that the Starres are naturall Causes of particular contingent Effects which neither you proue nor your selfe or any man liuing is able to proue Where you tell vs that M. Chambers is conuinced by the testimony of Moses who expressly witnesseth that the Stars bee created for Signes which words are often repeated in your Booke whereby you inferre that Moses doth warrant your Predictions Wee answere that you must not giue interpretations of Scripture to the Church but take them from the Church The Church hath interpreted these Signes to bee such as pertaine to naturall and politicall Orders and Seasons You draw the words to hidden secrets beyond the Course of Nature without warrant Further wee distinguish betweene generall Effects in nature and particuler contingent Euents Now if M. Chambers admit with Clem Alexandrinus and others that by the rising and setting of certaine Starres men may foretell the change of the Ayre plenty dearth plagues drought and that in this respect Mariners and Husbandmen haue vse of that knowledge Must hee that granteth this needs yeeld to your Predictions of particular contingent Euents No Sir wee admit the one and deny the other without any repugnance But whereas wee vrge your particular Euents you would gladly shift off the matter with a distinction of particulars The conceit good Reader if it bee worth the hearing is this Particulars saith the Knight are of two sorts either indiuiduall particulars or specificall For species specialissima and species subalterna are particulars saith hee First it is newes if wee speake properly that species and genera should bee particularia particulare in the proper acception thereof being alwayes opposed to vniuersale Secondly if a man should admit this goodly distinction yet will it doe the Knight no seruice For if any were so absurd to say that Astrologicall Predictions are in particulars that is in generals yet this speech differring altogether from the sense of the Learned cannot helpe them who set their Predictions in such particulars as that Henry 2. should bee wounded in his head in such a yeare of his age that such a man should bee Pope that Don Fredericke should bee King of Naples and such like which are all of those which hee calleth indiuiduall particulars And thus you see to what faire end you haue brought your Syllogisme which you told vs none could auoyd CHAP. VI. The Examination of the Knights Definition of Astrologie whereby as by a Rule hee would rule the question THe Knight fearing belike something before hee came to the Answeres of the Scriptures alleadged by M. Chambers setteth downe as hee calleth it a Rule whereby the Reader may leuell and direct his Iudgement as he saith This Rule is to compare all authorities that are brought against him with the definition of Astrologie by himselfe set downe This proceeding seemeth to vs strange First hee will make a Definition as it pleaseth him best Then hee will haue not onely Philosophicall truths which were absurd enough to bee leuelled according to his Definition and not his Definition to those truthes but he would also perswade vs to leuell and direct the authorities of holy Scripture to this Definition and to vnderstand the Scriptures by this Definition and not his Definition by them For these are his words Pag. 23. I haue thought good to forewarne the Reader not to bee discouraged with the shew of testimonies which he M. Chambers mustered out of the Scriptures Councells Fathers but still to compare his