Pag. 3, 9. 10. IT is a cunning sleight to beguile the simple with, in propounding to satisfy the world for any thing that hath bene sayd concerning the poynts and parties controuerted, wholy to omit the books cal­ledthe Triall, the Detection, the Narration of seuen possessed in Lan­cashire, contayning in them matters of fact, and onely to bend your forces against one Treatise called The Doctrine, &c. The reason of which omission, Christian Reader, is this. To disproue things done, so euidently knowne to so many eye-witnesses, were all one as to per­swade that white is blacke, that fire is Ice, that it is dark night in the cleare sunshine, which whoso should endeuor would rather be estee­med of all a mad mā, thē gaine any credit to his cause. But in points and controuersies of doctrine there was more hope to deceiue. For here through multitude of words, ambiguous tearmes, fraudulent courses of reasoning, false coloured sentences, wrested and mistcon­strued scriptures, abused authorities of famous men, and such other deuises, not onely the ignorant & vnable to search the truth should be blinded, but also many learned, which before had not welghed these thinges, neither perhaps would take the paines to sift and try them to the proofe, might be striken with some amase & doubt. Only they whose iudgments are seasoned with sound vnderstan­ding, which at first sight are able to discerne the cro oked writings of peenish and foolish sophisters, and know without book the scope of most mens writings in account amongst the learned, woulde giue true sentence of the cause, and condemne the se opinions of ig­norance and errour. But the number of such is smal, and therfore by these Answerers was lesse regarded. This, whatsoeuer they pre­tend, was the true ground of their choise, yet though they will not Pag. 3. meddle with the Triall, and Detection, they must bicker a blow or two with the Epistles of both. To let passe the disgraces, wherewith they lade them: for the Triall I may say (for therof am not I author) I doubt not but iudiciall men wil acknowledge more sound lear­ning in some fewe lines of it, then is in the whole bundle of your foolish Discourses. To come to that which is material, you charge the Triall but with two things, & in this charge make four lies, such is your compendious facultie. First, say you, it matcheth your pre­tended [Page] miracle, with the true miracles of Christ. The words of the Epistle speaking to the L. Popham, bee these, And concer­ning Epist. pag. 4. as highly the glory of Christ our Sauiour, as it doth the credit of a faithfull minister▪ Is here any comparison of miracles? Is here any mētion of miracles at all? Doth it say any more, but this cause being about a worke done in the name of Christ, doth as highly concerne Pag. 4. Da [...]r [...]ls trial in the Epist. pa. 8his glory, as my credit? Again, say you, the prelats are charged with the sin against the Holy Ghost. Thus speaketh the Epistle, that the prelates (which now set themselues against dispossession) be guiltie of this vnpardo nable sin, I wil not say. If I wil not say, be I do say, thē the prelats are charged with this sin. Out of this branch spring two other, That you report the Epistle to labour the L. Chiefe Iustice to recouer himself with speed frō that fearefull sin, wherunto it seemes he is fearefully falling: and that he would reuerse iudgement passed against me. He which writ the Epistle did not dote, as you do, to entitle his Honour, an vpright, and worthy, and a righteous iudge, to desire and vrge his Lordship, to releeu [...] the oppressed innocent, specially, to take to heart the slanders giuen out of the works of God: and within a few lines after to place him in the verie brinke of reprobation. Neither doth he perswade to a Re­uersing of iudgment (for there was none passed, as the Authour knew well enough) but to a second hearing, as Felix heard Paul the second time. Now then let the Reader tell me, if you bee not pithie lyars, that can comprehend so many in so little roome.

For my Detection you charge the Title as vndutifull against her Maiesties iudiciall proceedings, for that it is so sharpe against M. Hars­nets booke. It is more then I knowe, or can beleeue, that her Ma­iestie commanded M. Harsnet to write: or that her Right Hono. Counsell inioined him so much, or that the high Cōmission laid this vpon him. It may be, if his owne vainglorious humor, which euer tooke pleasure to be biting of others, did not prick him forward to this busines, yet that the B. his maister, of his priuat authoritie, did set him his taske, tosalue this owne credit, and of such as had ioined in disgracing the truth. But I hope one may reprehēd some priuat actions of the B. without any vndtifulnes to her maiesties procee­dings. You then are malicious pikthanks, which haue nothing in your mouthes, but Ad leones, ad leones, He is not Cesars friend.

Pag. 5. For the Epistle, you charge me with reviling the B. I answere, It was not anie contempt or malice towards his person, or forgetful­nesse of any dutie to authoritie, that moued me to such seueritie, as I vsed, but onely feare least otherwise I should haue failed in dutie [Page 3] towards God. Those which sinne, saith the Apostle, reproue openly: And 1. Tim. 5. 20 Tit. 2. 15. Matth. 3. Matth. 23. reproue with all authoritie. And when I heare Iobn Baptist calling the Phari [...]ees Deceiuers, and Generations of vipers: when I heare our Sauiour most sharply reprouing them by the names of Persecutors, serpents, generation of vipers, the children of hell, painted sepulchers, and such like: And S. Paul speaking to Elymas, O full of all subtilty, and Act. 13. 9. 10. Philip. 3. 2. Tit. 1, 12. 1. King. 18 Act. 23. 2. Tim. 4. 17 all mischiefe, the child of the diuell, and enemy of all righteousnesse: cal­ling also false prophets Dogges, and the Cretians beasts: yea when I heare Eliiah call Ahab, the troubler of Israel: our Sauiour tearme He­rod a foxe, Paul entituling Ananias a painted wall, and Nero by the name of a Lyon: I hese and manie such other places of practise, giue me some light for vnderstanding the precept, and teach me, that al­beit in my priuate cause I am to vse all mildenesse and gentlenesse, yet when the Lords truth is interessed and slaundered, his greate mercie obscured, and that of purpose and wilfully, neither one Ser­gius by Elymas hindered, but manie thousands turned backe from beleeuing his works, from praising him for them, and profiting by them, in this case the man of authority is no lesse to be stricken with the edge of reproofe, then he that is in inferiour place. Nay, rather the publike person, then the priuate man, by how much his example is more dangerous, either forcing or alluring great multi­tudes to imbrace his errour. And this doth not hinder but with Da­uid, pag. 6.& Stephen, and our Sauiour himselfe, and all the holy martyrs of God, wee should pray for our persecuters, and blesse them which curse vs: for reproofe and hatred be not necessarily linked together, but Reproofe is a notable remedie to preserue from hatred, according to that the Lord saith, Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thy beart, but Louit. 19. 1 thou shalt plainly rebuke thy neighbour, and suffer him not to sinne. But this is your maner, to huddle vp all things in a confused heape to­gether, and that which is spoken with certaine prouisoes and limi­tations, to alleage it as a bare and simple commaund. Thus much for the Epistles.

pag. 7. Yet before you come to the Treatise, you will admonish the Rea­der of two cunning sleights of legerdemainc, practised by me, throughout that my Pamphlet: whereof the first is, That I haue slily ou [...]rslipped what is materiall in M. Harsnets Discouery, as, to make good that distinction of Mirandum & Miraculum, which he hath dashed to nothing. I answere, that as becommeth true natural Leopards, you cannot change your skinne, but you must needs be lying heere, as almost euerie where else: for I haue replied to M. Harsnet out of Augustine and Danaeus, [Page 4]Detection, pag. 6.shewing an apparant difference betweene a Wonder, and a Miracle. And further haue I answered in suruey of your tenth Dialogue: from whence I pray you tell M. Harsnet, that if he remember the diffe­rence betweene Genus and Species, he may feele with his finger that a Wonder and a Miracle be not all one. And if this will not suffice him, demaund of him, whether Antichrist by the power of Satan worketh not wonders: and whether he esteeme all those wonders to be true miracles. And as touching your selues who accord with M. Harsnet herein, what say you to these words of your owne? The Dialog. pag. 209. & 310. diuell may worke wonders, as Simon Magus hath done: but hee can ef­fect no miracles. And in another place. A thing effected by essentiall meanes, howsoeuer it may be a wonder, yet no miracle in any respect. How can you possibly free your selues here from a contradiction? And this is my reply to your first instance. Againe, say you, M. Harsnet accusing verie orderly by Sommers testimony, mine owne an­swers, and seuerall depositions: this his materiall proceeding is pretermit­ted with silence. What? haue I written a Detection of his lying Disco­uerie, and haue touched nothing concerning Sommers testimonic, mine owne answers, and the seuerall depositions? Then haue I written nothing at all: For there be scarce anie lines in it, which concerne not one of these three. But thereof let the world Iudge. I can say no more. I hope I haue shewed how indirect a course it is, that Som­mers by threats, flatterings, and promises of maintenance shoulde first he brought to accuse himselfe, after me, and then to witnesse a­gainst me: that mine owne answers should be curtalled, and stret­ched after the Discouerers pleasures: that the depositions which were against their likings should be suppressed, and others publi­shed, so far forth, as might giue occasion of doubt to the Reader. What dare not you auouch, which are so bold to affrme that, wher­of the contrary appeares in euery mans hand? If your meaning were that in some particular I haue pretermitted this, which your words will not beare, then you should haue done well to haue na­med that Particular, as the nature of an Instance requireth, which seeing you haue not done, it is thereby plaine, your selues be rather guiltie of legerdemaine, then L Those pages which you quote in the margine, I grant I passed ouer, for that they concerne others, and S. Hars. Disc. 28. 29.not my selfe, as also because the matter was friuolous and vnwor­thy answere, as may there appeare, vrging the being of a thing by no other reason, but because such a thing might be. But marke what a faire threed these men haue spun, and how seeking to discredite [Page 5] my Detection, they haue brought not a little credite vnto it. For I will hence proue, that in my Detection I haue not let passe one mate­riall point of M. Harsnets Discouery vnanswered: and namely thus. If Darrell haue in his Detection let goe anie materiall point of the Discouery vnanswered, then would the Discoursers haue giuen some instances of such omission, where they endeuor to proue the same by instances: But the Discoursers instancing to that end, haue giuen not so much as one instance of such omission: Ergo Darrell in his Detection hath not let goe any one materiall point in the Discouery vnanswered.

pag. 8. 9. My second cunning sleight by your saying is, that I disgrace by all meanes Sommers testimonie, produced against me but extoll it for me, vpholding by it the signes of Possession & Dispossession. That no credit is to be giuē to his lying testimony, I auouch it indeed in the place by you cited: but where do I vphold the signes of possession & dispos­session by Sommers his testimonie, wherewith you charge me? why do not you also cite some place for this? You thought if one part of your assertion were true, the Reader would pardon you for the rest. It is such nouelty for you to speake truth, that any litle is to be accepted at your hands.

From the Epistle of the Detection you come to the Narration, the proofe wherof you will not haue to depend vpon report of the fact pag. 10. 11.but vpon continuance of Essentiall Possessions and Dispossessions in these times. A ridiculous thing, and to be hissed at. The reason why you eschew to deale against matter of fact, I haue sufficently declared in the beginning. Wel I wil follow you in your course, & come to your Answere to the Doctrine. Which treatise, to admit such an hotchpotch as you say, (though sober men will iudge it, set downe in such order as is conuenient) it is not for euery one to cooke his matters so ar­tificially as your Discoursing gallimaufrey is: but the more skil it wantes, the more credit for truth it ought to haue, seeing it rasteth simply as bare nature giues, without commendation of any slibber­sauce. First for Essentiall possession you reproue me or at least Ex­orcistes, for arguing from the word Possession out of the Geneuah tran­slation, pag. 12. 13.whereas I no where, nor any man else, inferre essentiall inhe­rencie from the word Possession, as I haue shewed in the Suruey of your Dialog. Discourse: yet is the same confuted by the Originall, by Erasmus, Beza, Castalio, and Montanus. But this was your volun­tarie perhaps, before you came to your musicke, now let vs beare your set and meditated song. Wheras I argue a possession thus: The [Page 6]pag. 13. 14.actions or pasrions which the parties endured were supernaturall, and therefore proceeded from supernaturall causes. You deny the actions were supernaturall, and that for three reasons. First, Naturall causes haue had more wonderful effects: which I think I haue sufficiently an­swered in the beginning of your seuenth Dialogue. Now therefore in one word, Is nothing supernaturall in any creature, which is ex­ceeded by anie other worke in nature? Then the foming, wallow­ing, the breaking of chaines asunder, reported of Demoniakes in the Gospel were not supernaturall, because something more won­derful Dialog. Dis. 204.may come from a naturall cause: as that mentioned by you of the little fish Echneis, which (being but halfe a foote long) if shee but once cleaue to the side of a ship, wil compel it perforce to stand still, notwithstanding the violence of the wind or oare. I am ashamed to heare men thus absurd. You might haue considered, had your wits beene your owne, that these actions or passions are not therefore supernaturall, and so called, because they are more wonderfull then anie thing issuing from nature, which a naturall would scarce affirme▪ but partly because they are (for the most part) aboue that, and more wonderfull then the nature of man can send forth: and partly in respect of the supernatural cause from which they did proceed, namely, the diuel. Secondly, say you, One cause may bring forth sundry effects, and one effect may proceed: from sundry causes. Doubtlesse happy might that man be, that could apply either this One cause, or these sundry causes, to this cause we haue in hand. Is this your proposition, If one cause may bring forth sundry effects, and one effect proceede from sundrie causes, then the Actions or Passions reported by me in the Demoniakes were not supernatu­rall? It is wonderfull what a man shal gaine by disputing with you. For now haue I learned by your priuiledged proposition▪ Not only these actions of our Demoniakes not to bee supernatural, but also neither any action of any Demoniake that either the Apostles, or Christ himselfe deliuered. Thirdly, The like effects issue from diuers diseases. I answere, If your skill in physicke be so great, tell vs, I be­seech you, from what disease so many & strange effects might arise, as are witnessed to haue bene in these parties: & what disease it was they had? Whether had they the Lunacie, or the phrensie, or the Epi­lepsie, or the Mother, or it was some Convulsions, or Crampe that they had? Name the disease. And if so manie effects doe not proceede from one disease, as it is very likely, declare how manie diseases they had, and what they were. And whether they had all the diseases you [Page 7] mention: their swelling arising from the Mother: their foming from the Epilepsie, their extraordinarie strength from mania, &c. and so had a compounded disease, percase of as manie seueral diseases, as they had seueral effects. Tel vs also whether you haue seene one partie afflicted at the same time with Melancholy, Lunacie, Phrensy, Epilepsy, Mother, Convulsion, and the Crampe? Besides, whether you haue known such an one, diseased with all these grieuous maladies, restored againe naturally to his health in one day? When you haue resolued these doubts, we wil hold our selues satisfied for this argu­ment. In the meane season it remaines for all your answere, in as ful force as euer it did. And here we may obserue, how all that they prattle both here and else where of diseases (whereby they woulde perswade, that the passions of the Demoniaks were not supernatu­tural, but might wel proceed from some natural disease) themselues do ouerthrow, in affirming they are Counterseits.

Againe, I shewing that The toyes and fooleries, and blasphemous speeches vttered by the parties in their supernaturall passions, could not come immediately from God, and good Angels, and therefore no doubt from the diuell: You answer first, They were not supernaturall effects: but this is your Cuckow song, oft auouched, neuer proued with a­nie reason that might so much as beseeme William Sommers, one too renowmed in his time. Secondly, that this supposed impossibilitie pag. 15. for either God, or good Angels to effect any such fantasticall, vaine, and filthy effects, is too grosse and absurd. Indeed you are the Maisters of absurdities, you may bestow one where you wil, as this is a notable one and not to be named, that one should imagine the most Holy Lord, and his holy Angels should immediately by themselues worke fil­thy effects. The blasphemies which arise from hence are not to bee remembred. There is neuer any filthinesse committed, but either by the filthinesse of our corrupt flesh, or by the working of vn­cleane spirits: farre be it from vs, we should once let it enter into our thoughts, that it did first issue, either from the fountaine, or frō the streames of puritie. The Lord his iudgements are tied to a seemely maner of effecting, rightly vnderstood, which you denie: that is, that all his iudgements should bee effected by meanes best beseeming their nature: as iudgements of committing sinne are wrought by sinfull meanes, the Diuel, and wicked men, and such like, and not immediately by holy meanes: for this was to confound light and darkenesse, holinesse and sinne together. It is lamentable that anie carrying the name of Ministers amongst vs, should be so impiously [Page 8] blind: and yet more lamentable, that they which will sit at the helme, wil suffer such impieties to be offered with their authoritie, to the world. Thirdly you answere, That these vncleane effectes do no more argue an vncleane spirit, then those holy effects, as Confessing of Cor. 11. 4. Christ, and Expounding the Creed argue an holy spirit. As if you had cleane forgotten, The diuell can transforme himselfe into an Angell of light. If you had remembred this, and your old crosse-row, That there is no reasoning from contraries in common attributes, you would neuer haue bewrayed such intolerable babishnesse. Lastly, say you, All this inferres noreall inherency, because the diuel can worke greater matters then these remaining without: concerning which, wee Pag. 15. 16.wil see (God willing) in that which followeth.

Againe, wheras is vrged, the Diuels entring in, & going out of the partie possessed, you answere, All these speeches, and whatsoeuer text can possibly be alleaged throughout the whole Scriptures, concerning ei­ther Angels, or Spirits, or Diuels are to be taken metaphorically: and for [...]ob. 1. 7. Matt. 12. 43 P [...]t. 5. 8.this purpose you bring the diuels compassing the earth: his walking through drie places: and his roaring like a Lyon. As if because in these places there is some Metaphor, therefore all other must bee meta­phorical too. Nay then let vs conclude, because these texts of Scri­pture be metaphorical, therefore all the Scripture is metaphoricall, and not onely those mentioning Angels and Diuels. And so we shal reuiue the wickednesse of the Libertines, of the Family of loue, and of the Suenckefeldians, acknowledging no literal sence of the Scripture, but a figuratiue meaning inspired into themselues, which only with them is the word of God. VVhen you disputed of the Serpent in Euahs tentation, you contended indeed The Serpent was onely meant figuratiuely, yet seemed after to reiect this opinion, and I liked well of it. But I crie you mercie: now I vnderstand you more fully. Wel then, the Angel Gabriel came to Marie, and brought tidings of her Luc. 1. 30. Luc. 1. 12. &c. Luc. 21. 43.conceiuing the Sonne of God, was this done Metaphorically? Was there also no such thing literally done, as is reported the same An­gel spake to Zachary, concerning Iohn the Baptist, whom hee should beget? Was that in figure too, that the Angels comforted our Sa­uiour Mar. 9. 22.before his passion? Belike when the Diuel cast the child some time into the fire, sometimes into the water, there was no such mat­ter Mar. 5. 7.indeed, but onely by way of Metapher. And when the Diuel cri­ed, VVhat haue I to do with thee O Iesus the Sonne of the most high God, this voice was Metaphoricall. Howsoeuer these and many like Scri­ptures are canonized by you to bee Metaphoricall, yet your selues [Page 9] Metaphor, are most properly a couple of the absurdest Dunses that euer put pen to paper. You goe on, and labour to ouerthrow the literall entring of the Diuel, because in Marke it is said, There was a pag. 17. 1 19. Mar. 1. 23. man in the Synagogue in an vncleane spirit. If the words (say you bee taken literally, then the man was essentially inherent within the diuell. I answere, Neither are these wordes taken literally, neither for this cause is the entring of Satan, mentioned else where, to be vnder­stood figuratiuely. The same thing may bee, and is vttered some­times by figure, and sometimes by proper speech. One while our Sauiour Christ cals himselfe The way, and a Doore: In another place he saith, That they which beleeue in him shall not perish, expounding in plaine tearmes that which is spoken by similitude else where. As for this Scripture, To be in an vnclean spirit, is not, as a thing cōtained in a thing containing, as water in a vessell, and such like, but to be in the power of an vncleane spirit, as our vulgar tongue expresseth fit­ly, when we say, Such an one is in a Feuer. M. Beza, in opening the meaning of this speech, vseth this selfe same example: and you your selues call it, A very apt resemblance. Seing therefore it fit­teth so wel, let me demaund of you, when we say, A man is in a Fe­uer, whether you thinke the feuer is within, or without him? You had thought to haue played you with this feuer, but it shaketh you a little better then you were aware of. For it plainely declareth, that the natural meaning of the wordes, notwithstanding they bee figu­ratiue, doth note vnto vs an inbeing of the spirit. But you adde out pag. 20. Luc. 4. 33.of Saint Luke: There was a man in the Synagogues which had a spirit of an vncleane diuell. This translations say you, is tolerable, if by the word Spirit we vnderstand not the simple essence, but onely the impulsion, motion, or inspiration of the spirit. I answer, we may, I graunt vnder­stand by the word spirits an impulsions motion, or inspiration, so wee doe not separate this Impulsion and motion from the reall presence of the Spirit. As when we talke of the vnderstanding of a man, wee know that vnderstanding is one thing, and the Man another, yet do not separate betweene the reall presence of these two, but ioyne them together. And to this effect Caluin writeth on this place: This speech (saith he) is as much as if Luke had said, This man was moued by the inspiration of the diuell: for by God his permission Satan had pos­sessed the powers of his soule, that he might enforce him at his pleasure, as wel to speake, as to other motions. And therfore when Demomakes speak, those very diuels, to whose rule they are permitted, both speake in them, & by them. Caluin then graunts an Inspiration, but ioyned with the di­uels [Page 10] presence: These men make a diuorce betweene Inspiration and presence, as if these two could not abide within sight one of another. The inspiration of the diuell is within, therefore his Essence is not: which is as much to say, Because a mans braines be in his head, therefore his wit is in his heeles. But to let this passe, this onely I say to you, which by Spirit here vnderstand only the motion, inspiration, or insti­gation of the spirit, and affirme, it is grosse to vnderstand spirit Essential­ly, that by this your goodly exposition, this man must bee dispossest of a motion, and not of a diuell.

pag. 21. Further I alleadging, The Diuell cannot possibly so moue the mem bers of a man as he doth cōmonly of demoniaks being only without him, you oppose the captiuating of the wicked, his transporting of Christ, his disposing of the tongues of Shimei & Rabshakeh, his filling of Ananias his heart, and such like. None of al which makes to any purpose. The members of demoniakes are in their supernaturall motions moued by the nerues, by the muscles, by the Tendons, the vsuall mouers of the body: and yet without commaund either of Will, or Imagi­nation, these faculties at that instant being disabled to make choice of things according to their nature: yea somtimes there is a moo­uing in the body, without the seruice of the mouing instruments at all. But in the motions by you alleaged, there is no such matter. For in Suggestions the d [...]uell by deceiuing the phantasie, and blin­ding the vnderstanding, preuaileth against the will, and this sedu­ced commanundeth all the inferiour parts, which he may performe outwardly▪ And as for transporting of bodies, here the whole body is caried violently, not by ordinarie stirring of those inward moo­uers appointed to this dutie, but at the pleasure of an outwarde causes as when a man is caried in a ship, in a charret▪ on horsebacke, or after such other manner. By which it is apparant, the motions which be vsually in Demoniakes, cannot be by outward suggesti­on, but only by inward operation, as disposing of the seuerall mem­bers of the body without the Imagination and VVill, sometimes by the instruments of motion, and sometimes (which is more pag. 22. Matth. 8. 3 & 12. 43. Mar. 5. 12.strange) without. Moreouer, I shewing some argument for his inherencie, from his earnest desire to enter into the bodies of men, and to dwell there: which appeareth by this, that he is vnwilling to be cast out: and being throwne out; findeth no rest till he recouer his lost habitation: yea he rather desireth to enter into swine then to want a dwelling. You answere, It is an idle conceit to dreame of such a desire: because, The Lord neuer graunted him, nor hee euer desired any such [Page 11] thing against Iob, & yet no doubt he craued as much against him, & had as much yeelded, as euer against any. I reply: Whilest we are disputing of the qualitie of the Diuels vexation, you tel vs a tale of the quāti­tie. We are not now weighing whether Iob or Demoniaks are more grieuously afflicted, but whether they bee molested after the same maner. Albeit this is great ignorance in you, to think the torments of the body to proceed frō greater tyranny, then his malice that he powreth vpō the soule. Was not his power greater in Iudas, though no Demoniake, thē in the man, whom he had possessed a long time? Mar. 5. 3. &c.But to returne to Iob: we neuer heard till this day that hee was a Demoniake: and by your rule, if Iob was not one (as his booke shewes he was not) there was neuer anie: because as much power was graunted against him, as against any▪ and so all those Demoniakes mentioned in the Gospel▪ by your reckening shall proue but tales. Let the same answere suffice you for Ahabs prophets, vntill wee may heare you are either of a better minde, or of more learning. That which you dispute of Saul being possessed, is an idle excursion Pag. 29. 30.of your owne▪ I no where maintaine it. [...]et where you contend that there were no possessions at all in Israel▪ till a little before the comming of Christ, one might [...]ustly demaund of you, which professe so greate insight in this matter, how the Iewes became so cunning to iudge of their possessed? And why Eleazarus in the dayes of Vespasian & Iosephus, boasted of Salomons Exorcismes? I doubt not but it was most false to attribute any such wickednes to that wise king: yet these men being but a little after our Sauiour Christ, might haue beene conuicted by the testimonie of many liuing, but especially by their owne histories, if they should haue fathered such practises vp­on Salomon, which had beene euident did begin but yesterday. It seemeth then by opinion of those ancient Iewes, that Possessions & Dispossessions were before Salomons time, otherwise they would not haue made him an author of a thing that sprung vp after him. But you will proue by argument, that none were possest till a little be­fore the comming of Christ. The first of your reasons are contained in these words▪ Thus then it is euident that Saul was neuer possest, and so consequently, that (till a little before the comming of Christ) there were no possessions at all in Israel. This argument I answere by the like. It is euident that Saul had not the whiles [...]ee was king.leprosie, Ergo, there were no Le­pers in Israel, till a little before the comming of Christ. The other reason you render hereof is, because this iudgement is not foretold & threatened the Iewes by some of the Prophets at least. As though euerie [Page 12] iudgement of God were specified by some of the Prophets. But I ag. 31.wil leaue you to sport a while with Saul, as also with that of the bra­sen-Serpent, which is a deuise of your owne in this matter, nothing pertaining to me.

Concerning supernaturall effects in Sommers, as that hauing pins ag. 34. &c. thrust very deepe into his legs and other parts of his body without sense, or feeling thereof Physialogus answers, that Sommers hath since deposed, he felt the [...]imes, but dissembled the pa [...]es. I answere, his deposition no doubt is a thing much to be regarded, which hath sold himselfe to be at the Bishops pleasure, whereby there was nothing so apparant­ly false, which he would not dare to affirme, or deny, as hee percei­ued his liking. But Physialogus tels vs further out of Gal [...]n, that the common sence being earnestly emploied in some matter, the outward sen­ses per [...]i [...] not their owne obiect whereby Sommers in like manner might be senslesse then, as Physialogus is now. But to waken him a little, I would he would trie the pinnes himselfe. No doubt his own meditations being farre more serious and waightie, then could bee in that paltrie boy, he should receive no paine at al: of which if we were once assured by his experience then were we through for this point. For his foming, Physialogus answers, that parties affected with pag. 36. the Epile [...]sie, foame, and that Scoulds do frame: vnto which adde these two Answerers: That foame out also their owne shame. Concerning their violent motions and stirrings, extraordinary strength, & knowledge, you obiect nothing, but what M. Harsnet hath done before: vnto whom I haue answered. It had beene more be [...]eeming to haue re­plied to that, then thus to roll ouer the same stone againe. You call for Knapping of yron chaines asunder, and then you would beleeue: as if the Lord must giue power to Satan to feede our vaine humours. But you remember who promised to beleeue too, if their curious desires might haue beene satisfied, who euer scorned the present workes they saw, and still desired greater, but obtained not. If there had beene chaines broken, M. Harsne [...] woulde haue charged the Smith with confederacie, and would haue required they had beene Discouery pag. 29.so fastened, as the Keeper of Nemgate could haue fastened them. And yet suppose he had fastened them▪ it would haue beene said hee had combined, with vs. If this could be cleared, then Darrell should haue bewitched him, or Sommers himselfe shoulde bee a witch. If this would not serue yet some by argument would maintaine, that none can be possessed in these dayes: nay, that there were neuer any pos­sessed. So be the matter neuer so true and impossible to be counter­feited [Page 13] some thing would euer be excepted, as long as wee haue to deale with men Lords ouer their owne tongues, and haue no Lord on earth to controll them. Considering then I haue to med­dle with men of this kind, who, so they bee saying something, spare not to say any thing bee it neuer so false▪ vncredible, and absurd▪ it shall be folly in me to spend words about them.

pag. 41. You affirme: The Deponents themselues haue since more adu [...]sedly re­formed their oaths and d [...]posed the contrary. I answer: They haue done nothing lesse. Nay their reexaminations make more for the con­firming, then weakening of that they formerly deposed. And this I haue made euident in my former answere to the Chapter of Reex­aminations: Detect lib. 3 cap. 8.where M. Harsnet obiecteth the very same you do here. VVhereunto you should haue returned a reply, or else for shame neuer mentioned that, which is already answered. But you may bee ashamed (if you be not past all shame) to say▪ that they reexamined deposed thus: namely, that now by their better enlightened iudgemēts, they plainly perceiue all those the former supposed supernaturall actions or passions, to be but meere counterfeit toyes, and plaine cosoning practi­ses. O palpable flaunder! What wil you sticke to affirme, who spare not to publish this for truth? I refer thee good Reader, to my De­tection, pag. 4 [...].the place before quoted, where thou shalt see this to be most vntrue Whereas, I say, they would haue punished the witnesses, if these things had beene found counterfeit: you answere, as if they were dis­missed vpon compassion, being silly poore persons: and yet of about thirtie that haue testified the things vnpossible to be counterfeited, vpon their corporali oathes, seuen of them be preachers.

pag. 43. &c. After you come to the signes of Possessions which you denie to bee▪ set downe as rules to discerne Essentiall Possessions by. They be rules of such possessions as were in the Scriptures and wee haue shewed them to be Essentiall, whatsoeuer yet you either haue, or can prate to the contrarie. How foolish and beggarly the words be, you fur­ther multiply to this end, I haue manifested in your Discourses, I need not repeate them. For the number of signes I stand not strict­ly vpon them. Where they are all▪ I say there is a Possession: I doe not say, where there be fewer, or diuers others, there is no Posses­sion. For this is free to the Lord to afflict in what measure it plea­seth him. Neither do I crosse my selfe, as you vntruly charge me, ma­king pag 45. the Scripture signes the onely meanes to discerne of Possessions: and then in the 16. & 17. pag. euery way equal my experimented signes with any of them. I onely in the pages mentioned name some [...]ewe super [Page 14] naturall effects, which in experience I haue obserued in Domoni­akes. But in what place I set them, and how I account of them, is e­uident in the 37. page, where speaking of experimented signes, I vse these words: But the Scripture making no mention of these signes, they are to be regarded accordingly. And [...]o likewise in the 22. page. In the applicaion of the signes, you impute vnto me diuers contrarie­ties [...]g 46.after your lying and slaunderous manner. As if I should say: Sometimes they haue supernatural strength and knowledge, yet sometimes [...]ctr. pag. 6. 17. againe, they onely seeme to haue. Sometime Satan hurtes, but hurtes not indeed, &c. Touching the first of these, I hauing spoken of the super­naturall strength and knowledge of the parties controuerted, in the conclusion thereof shew, that I am not so to be vnderstood, as though I meant that they had supernaturall strength and knowledge: but there­fore is this ascribed vnto them by mee, because they seeme to haue such knowledge and strength. And thus oft in scripture is that attributed to Demoniakes, which was indeed perfourmed by the diuell, and done onely by them in a seeming shew. So the Demoniake, Mark 5. is said to breake chaines and fetters asunder, whereas not he, but the diuell brake them. And this is one of your worthy contradictions. Concerning the latter, I say thus, that Howsoever they are so miserably vexed by Satan, as the behold [...]s would iudge them in most extreme and intollerable paines, yet they feele no paines at all. Yet I doubt not but that Satan can jo order the matter, as that the Possessed shall haue paine, when he shall see it serue for his purpose, &c. By which I shewe there is [...]ag. 48.not one vniforme order to be expected in these cases: which varie­tie of affliction, these men would draw to inconstancie of opinion. You condemne me also for thinking, The Scripture signes are not recorded onely as matter of fact, but partly to helpe vs in discorning of possessions. Mar. 9. 21.I ground my reason on the question of our Sauiour: How long time is it he hath beene thus? You answere, Christ respecteth in this question onely the first time of that accident. And I reply, you respect in this answer how to trifle off any thing ob [...]ected against you, with foolish words without any substance at all. Doth not our Sauiour loyne together with the time, the maner and forme of his handling? Doth he not enquire as well of the one, as of the other? We must haue a question of time without any subiect matter, or reference to any thing. Miraculous Answerers, which can measure time without any standard laid vnto it! You charge me with foisting in words into the text for aduantage: but it is your owne mouthes which runne pag. 49.ouer with the word Essentially, and not any addition of mine. I con­tent [Page] my selfe with the phrase of the holy Ghost, reiecting these tearmes as needlesse and superfluous. Though wheresoeuer the diuel is, this speech properly vnderstood (as it is vsually in the mat­ter of Possession) there must also his spiritual essence be. That which you thinke is more then the text, is onely added to paraphrase it: and though these words In him, be not in this Scripture, yet are they else where vsed in like case: you are very hungry, which would leap Act. 19, 1at so small a morsell.

Whether there be a medicine or no for curing Essentiall possession, you yay, we shall see after in handl ng that joint. and I am content to refer pag 50. 51 52.it thither. As for speedie deliuer a [...]ee of the afflicted, I acknowledge it is no argument of possession: and I thanke you for reprouing it, though of my selfe I would be ready to retract anie thing dissonant from the truth. It is not my desire, any my stubble should bee layd vpon the foundation, but I am cōtent the fire of Gods word should consume it.

I alleaging those words of the law, That the Lord will bring vpon Deut. 28. 6 pag. 53. R [...]uel. 22. 1 transgr [...]ss [...] eu [...]ry [...]ckn [...]sse, and euery plague which is not written in the booke of the Law, vntill they be destroyed. And also that of Saint Iohn: He that shall adde vnto these things, God shall adde vnto him the plagues that are written in this booke, to proue that men may now be posses­sed: you answere, I abuse the Scripture, making Possession sametimes written, sometimes vnwritten. But you abuse your selues, and your Reader to iangle about that, which euerie childe might teach you. For who knowes not that some thinges might bee vnwrit­ten in the Law, that be very frequent in the Gospel, as indeed Pos­session is? But to answer my argument out of these places, you de­nie pag. 53. Essentiall possession to be decrced in God his eternall counsell for a iudgement. That Possession is essentiall, we haue sufficiently proued in suruey of your Discourses. That it is decreed for a iudgement, may appeare to any not wilfully blind, by those manifolde examples of men possessed in the Scriptures: Except those things hapned beside the decree of God, or else those possessions were rewards and be­nefits, not iudgements and afflictions It may be your impudent vaine will not sticke to admit either▪ though none can avouch the first but Atheists, nor the second but only men that are mad. I haue shewed in your Discourses, how the Lords iudgements are perpetu­all, though not inflicted euerie moment, but after such intermission as pleaseth him. Is it not then excellent stuffe you bring, That the iudgements of this life (for we speake only of them) cannot perpetually pag. 54.[Page 16] bee inflicted, but salvation must needs be barred from all in Christ? In like maner, because I say, Possession is but a conditionall and temporall iudgement, you therefore interre, It is not perpetuall. W [...]ere you play with the word [...] meaning perpetuall, a continued connexion, such as nothing may be put betweene, when as that is vsually said to bee perpetuall, which is common to all ages, though it appeare but now [...]ag. 55.and then. You charge me with disputing from May be, to a being in deed. May not I wel dispute, It may be, whē you would euerie where maintaine It cannot bee? How can a being indeede bee concluded, before it be manifest the same thing May be? If the heauens there­fore fall, we shall not onely catch Larks, as you say, but by catching also of you two, we shall catch something that wants braines.

I affirming, There is as great cause of this iudgmēt now, as at any time heretofore: you answere, It is v [...]t [...]rly vntrue: The manifestation of Christs Deitie, and the confirmation of his glorious Gospel being the maine causes of possessiō in Christs time. My meaning is as appeareth by my words, there is as great cause in respect of sin, as much abounding now as euer. For I do not compare this cause of punishment, with the ma­nifestation of Christ his Deitie. And therfore besides the ceasing of the two maine causes, you should also haue shewed that sin was cea­sed, or else sinne to be no cause: which you purpose to doe in the pag. 56.pages following. But in the meane season, how doe you flourish it, as if I should proudly limit the Lord his times and seasons for inflicting his iudgements? I limit no times, but leaue it free to the Lord: yet knowing the reward of sinne, and the ample kingdom it now hath, according to the maner of all the Prophets, I can do no lesse then expect his fearefull iudgements of what kind so euer. But you will pag. 57. 58.proue Possession is no punishment for sinne, and that out of the Depth of Divinity. Your reason is, Afflictions of this life, laid vpon the Elect, be not properly punishments. It is true▪ but what do you lay to this? possession of Diuels is an affliction of this life. We graunt this too: yet so, that not onely Possession is an affliction of this life, but that there be infinite other miseries and calamities besides. What then? Shall we now conclude, That no miserie or calamitie whatsoeuer, as well as this of Possession, is any punishment for sinne? O deepe Diui­nitie, and such as hath not beene raised from the bottomlesse pit till now! I denie not but the Lord may impose it vpon a man for trial, and for other ends, as he knowes best, but may he not also therfore inflict it as a chastisement for sinne, or castigatorie punishment? But your assumption containeth more in it, vz. that Possession is an affli­ction [Page 17] of this life laid vpon the elect. This also I consesse is true: but it will not aduantage you, except ye adde, that it is laid onely vpon the elect, and then shall we haue Possession a note of our election, and so a blessed thing to be possest with diuels, which is such diuinitie, as neuer Diuine, deepe or shallow, once dreamed of. It is a shame to rehearse your fooleries. Then you will vrge it more strongly, for that our Sauiour curing the possessed hath giuen them no watchword of Ioh. 5. 14. sinning no more. I his watchw [...]d was giuen but in one cure, as I re­member Was all other diseases therefore no chastisements for sin? Whether our Sauior speake, or whether be silent, you are men that can take occasion for your absurdities vpon either. I will not waste paper with rehearsing more of this stuffe. Consider with your selues Leuit. 26. 1▪ 18. Deut. 28. 2 [...]. Rom. 6. 23 Ephes. 2, 12 1. Cor. 5. 5.that lesser affli [...]tions be punishments for sinne, as we speake vulgar­ly, if your profunditie will giue vs leaue: That all death is the sti­pend of sinne, and that Possession is a kind of death. Besides, Of­fenders are deliuered to Satan by the Church, not for reward, but for Chastisement. And if to bee in the power of Satan howsoe­uer, bee a chastisement, what is it to be in his possession? Is not he the Executioner appointed ouer the wicked? Hath not hee the Heb. 2. 14 1. 2. 44power of death? How can any one be in his hands, and bee not in death? Or how in death, and not in punishment? Our Sauiour teacheth that Repossession hapneth vpon negligence and securitie, whereby it may bee apparant, that the first possession is not for a mans vertues. It it needlesse to vse many prooffes in a plaine case, if I had not to deale with men to whom Sunshine is darkenesse.

The testimonies of the Doctors, which I alleage in the Margine, you pag. 59.blame, for that they be not [...]ully set downe. You haue examined them in your Discourses, and confesse they speake as I report them. I o­mitted Dialog. Disc. pag. 171.in this place to put downe their wordes, being after to vse them in proofe of Dispossession by prayer and fasting since mira­cles ceased. Which position you see includes the former, and to what purpose should I clogge the Reader with vnnecessarie repetition? Nay what should I be burdensome to you? For in that place where they do speake, they speake so plainely, as you could wish their tongues were out, as we shal see in the next dialogue. If you would discredite VVierus, reporting seuentie damsels in Rome possessed with spirits in one night, it had beene meet you should haue done it with some probabilitie: It is not ynough, for that it was at Rome. VVill you credit nothing done in that kingdome? No maruell, you will not credit things done at home, though neuer so substantially cer­taine, [Page 18] It is likely, if it had bene but a practise of Romane Ex [...]rcists, they would haue dispatched it in lesse then two yeares. None of thē was recouered within this time. To haue so many possessed, and for so long time, and not one of them to be dispossessed, made little for the credit of the Exorcists, and of the Popish Church, if Disposses­sion be a marke of the true Church, as the Papists teach. And so of Anno 1566the thirtie children possessed at Amsterdam, the same yeare they broke downe their images, and reformed the Religion, as if the Diuell thē more raged, considering his short time there, as he vsually doth at his farewell. Thyreus his report may be allowed at least, in thinges ag. 60.that are witnessed by others. Neither did D. Fulke not inveigh against Possessi n, because it had no [...]intainers to his time, but because it was gainsaid by none. M. F [...]x [...], M La [...]e, M. Robinson, with sundry other Diuines liuing in D. Fulk [...] his time were of opinion there were pos­sessions, as appeared by their pra tise, and some of their writings. But what needed any should with earnestnes defend that, which no man of any reckening oppagned? This controuersie is new sprung vp, first hatched, and brought into light by enuie, and still nouri­shed by flatterie and Ambition, and expertation to get something from his good Lordship. For your argument from Micacles, I hope I haue quashed it in your tenth Dialogue. Is it not wonderfull that you acknowledging Pass [...]ssion to be asure naturall dis [...]as [...]an l a thing pag. 62. hidden in the secret counsel of G [...], to execute and effect when and where he will, and therefore may neu r by any man liuing be auouched for cer­taine, that you dare so presumptuously conclude, that now there can be nop ss ssion? If it be so secret as you say, it is no lesse daunger for you to denie it▪ then for me to affirme it. But you are like the prudent topper of trees, that strikes in sunder the verie bough hee stands on.

For prayer and fasting how it is a meanes to expell Sa [...]an, wee shall pag. 62. 63.see more, God willing in the next Dialogue, if any thing bee need­full to be added to that already spoken. VVhereas I put a difference between the curing of possessiōs now, & those done by the Apostles for that now it is done by an intreating word▪ then by a base cōman­ding word. you answere as beseemeth your ab [...]urd fashion, that Mi­raculous curing of possessions in Christs time was at n [...] hand effected by a bare c mmaunding word, but by a supernaturall power concurring therewith. O deepe Clerks, and men that haue diued to the verie bottome of Diuinitie! VVhen we make comparison of meanes v▪ sed by men, what haue we to doe with supernaturall power? Doth [Page 19] eyther the intreating word or Commaunding word exclude that? Would any men in their wits denie the work of the instrument, be­cause it is moued by the principall cause? Meate doth not nourish, because the Lord giueth strength, & the staffe to bread: Faith is not by hearing, because it is the giftof God. Such are the demonstra­tions wherewith these Discoursers think they haue put all the world to silence: which happily they haue done, except it be for laughing. I do no where affirme that Possession is a naturall disease, and ther­fore pag. 64. Matt. 8. 16. 17. Luc. 8. 21.do not goe about by Matth. 4. 24. and Luke 8. 21. to proue it, because in those places it is iointly recorded with naturall diseases, wherewith you charge me, and by diuerse arguments verie soberly confute me: but saying that Possession with Diuels is in the Gospel oft brought in among other plagues of God, for proofe thereof, I doe pro­duce the aforesaid Scriptures. Indeed I say, that Possossion is a disease, but adde, to wit, supernaturall: and a little after call it an vnnaturall discase: VVhereby I make it plaine, what manner of disease I ac­count it to be. If you would nowe haue confuted me, you should haue bent your force against these things I say, and not against that I no where do affirme. But this is with you an vsuall thing. You adde, that I deeming possession to be but a meere naturall maladie, doe directly crosse my former speech, where I make it a supernaturall mala­die. And this forsooth is one of your Contradictions. But you must first proue better then you haue done yet, that I doe not onely deeme, but say, that Possession is a naturall maladie, before it be so in­deed that I crosse mine owne speech. If I were giuen as much to crosse my body▪ as you say I am to crosse my selfe in my speech, I were a ve­ry fit man to make a Papist, who loue of life to crosse themselues. To make vp your summe, you foist vs in a counterfeit, That all super­naturall pag. 65. works are miracles, as if faith, hope, and charitie, peace of con­science and such like were all miracles: which if it be true, we must needs stil haue miracles, or els haue no Church. The Papists would be glad to heare of these tidings, but no body else, except such as would reio [...]ce at your folly. For your second, third, fourth, and fist Dialogues, wherein, you thinke, you haue ouerthrowne Essentiall posses­sion, by that time you haue weighed in a iust ballance, what hath beene answered thereunto, you shall perceiue to haue preuailed as much, as if you had laboured to ouerthrow your Peake hils. You pag. 66. 67.say, You haue shewed Passession is not inflicted for sinne, but I say, you must shew it better, before any man of wisdome can beleeue you. I haue branded your absurditie in your Discourses, for that you con­clude, [Page 20] Iob. 12. 31. a finall end of possession from the casting forth of the prince of this world. Here you increase it a thousand folde in making your owne singular, foolish, and impious wresting of this Scripture, to contain a matter of no lesse certaintie, then is the expresse word of God, Genes. 9. 14. 15.for an vtter end of any the like floud to that, which was in Noabs time. I do not tie the Lord to the punishment of Gomorrah, or of the children deriding the prophet, or of Cehazi, and such others: but where the like sinnes raigne, there may be the like punishment, which you will not grant in actuall Possession, hauing put a necessarie end vnto it▪ But you wil not be pressed with May be. Much a do you keep with this pag▪ 68.Sophisme, a posse ad esse. Wherfoeuer you meet with may or can in the conclusion, then eftsoones you tell vs of this fallacie. [...]s in your Discourses your skil in Rhetorike, & in discerning of Tropes did faile you: so here it doth in Logicke, & in discerning Elenchs. To auouch Poss ssion of d uels to b [...]e inflicted also for sinne is Cu [...]kolike melodie in your eares, but you haue sung vs a Iacke Dawes song in limitting it with pag. 67. two onely ends, that is, of confirmation of Chaists Deity, and of the Gospell, as I haue abundantly proued.

Whereas I affirme the iudgement of our senses for the truth of Sommers vexation by Satan, you reply, Our senses could not compre­hend pag. 69. such supernaturall matters: besides, they might be deluded, and di­uels can do things in shew. For comprehension, seeing you depriue vs of all iudgement of sense, blame vs not if we be something dull in conce [...]uing this, How that seeing, we do not see: feeling, we do not feele: smelling, we do not smell: and hearing, wee doe not heare: and that we require you would make it plaine vnto vs. Which when you haue once done, and beaten into our heads, I will neuer trust mine eyes againe, though I should see M. Deacon in forme of an Angel of light. But if our senses were deluded, & things done in shew, that were not in deed, surely it was Satan that deluded vs and no counterfei­ting in Sommers, as you would faine haue it. This is the summe of your first dialogue against me, to which Lycanthropus subscribeth as able to suffice any reasonable man: but this, is but a small thing, saith Pueumatomachus, and therfore he stretcheth the matter to an high­er pitch, That neither any vnreasonable man (which is much more) shall be euer able to answer it. So that now we are much beholding to M. Deacon, and M. Walker, that haue put all fooles and mad men to a perpetuall non plus, whose tongues would otherwise continually bee tampring.

Concerning the straunge and present affliction of the boy of [Page 21] Northwitch, I will say nothing: I neuer sawe him: howsoeuer you descant on the matter after your lying & pal [...]ry maner. Yet I think pag. 71.it not amisse to offer to thy view (good Reader) the iudgement of the Bishop of Chester in his direction to his parents, and of three other Commissioners for causes Ecclesiaflicall, according with him therein.

Hereunto I will adde a fewe lines, which M. Haruey aforesaid, a man of great learning and godlines, writ in his life time to a friend of his.

Wee see what the Bishop and Preachers of Chesse-shire their iudgement is touching this child. What say nowe the Discoursers concerning him? They after they haue for three leaues together scofted at his grieuous affliction (for so the Bishop before tearmeth it) in most prophane, childish, and scurrulous maner, doe in the end pag. 76.affirme, that he counterfeiteth, and that this would soone apeare, if be were well coni [...]ed a while with a three corded whip. Is this the fruit of your visiting the child? you had better haue kept you at home. VVas this all the comfort the distressed boy and parents receiued from you? Miserable comforters then are you. Is this the mercy, and all the bowels of compassion that is in you, towards him that is Rom. 12. 15.in miserie? O mercilesse men, and voyd of all pi [...]ie! It appeareth you haue not learned to weepe, with them that weepe. VVell, I can tell you of a couple of such merrie or mercilesse companions as your selfes, that comming of late to one M. tames Charles of Wolroych in Kent, to see his daughter Clemens Charles, who is reputed to be possest with the diuell, & not without cause, they scarce went so merri­ly home, as they were at M. Charles, and yet but a small thing befell them by the way. Returning home, they went by one M. Hooke his house of Darlton, maister not long before to this maid, at whose house she began to bee afflicted. Now as they were on horsebacke before M. Hooke his doore, and sporting themselues with him about the counterfeiting of this new vpstart counterfeit. behold, one of their horses staled bloud, and as they were talking thereof, loe. the other did the like: whereat they were somewhat appaulled. How it fared with their horses after I know not, but the day following they caried themselues at M. Charles more soberly, whether they went on other horses. But hereof ynough: I will nowe proceede to your second Dialogue.

THe second part of my Doctrine treateth, That those eight before mentioned were verily dispossessed, & that by fasting and prayer, the meanes appointed by God. For confirmation wherof, I knew no better rule then the example of men dispossessed in holy Scripture, which is the onely true and vnsallible touchstone to examine both this, and all other actions by. These Answerers scorne these notes, calling pag. 8 [...] ▪them falsly pretended signes of dispossession from sacred Scripture, and therefore pretermitting them, require my argumentes, as if the Signes from Scripture were no arguments at all. It seemeth you haue found a veine of better mettal then the Scriptures, frō whence your whole booke is so full stuffed with your owne shining drosse, and is so vtterly destitute of this purified gold. Yet you cannot beat me from them, but I vrge them thus: There were in our Demoniakes the selfe same signes or notes of dispossession, precedent and subsequent, which wee rea [...]e of in the Scripture Demoniakes, and therefore the same dispossession▪ you answere, There were not the same signes in our de­moniakes: and first, because they were meere cosonages, as is confessed freely by the parties themselues vpon their owne oathes. I reply, the parties we speake of, bee eight in number, whereof onely Sommers hath made this cursed confession: which was not free and volun­taries, Detect. pag. 127.as you vntruly affirme, but extorted by Satan, and his instru­ments, as in my Detection I haue made manifest. But what say you to the seuen in Lancashire? It may be Sommers hath sworne for thē all: for they as yet, were neuer examined: yet because we doubt of Somers general oath, I pray you proue vnto vs, who taught the chil­dren to counterfeit? when, and where, and by what meanes they were taught? what end might induce them to imbrace such tea­ching? whether the parents were priuy to it? and what they pro­pounded in practising such wickednesse? Yea, put Sommers too in­to the roll, & shew vs what man is able by practise to do the things that either Sommers or they did? And one woulde thinke a man of meane agility might quickly performe that, which cofoning yong boyes and girles could. Shew vs, I beseech you, these and such like things, or otherwise if you cannot shew thē, & yet tel vs of cos [...]nage, you shew vs nothing but your long eares, & brasen faces. Secondly, [Page 24] [...]g. 83. say you, The signes in the Scripture Demoniakes were sensibly perc [...]i­ued by the beholders: but these in your pretended Demoniakes were not so, by your own confession. Belike all we that were spectators of our Demoniakes, being (at sundrie times) a great multitude, were all stricken with blindnesse, with deafnesse, and with a benummednes, and yet we all thought we vsed our senses, and I am sure, wee were no sooner out of the place, but we were able, the Lord bee thanked, to see, heare and feele. But you confirme this by mine own confession, [...]ct. pag. 37which saith, that the spirit could not possibly be felt or seene. I said so, & say so againe, that Spirits cannot be felt or seene in their owne bare essence, but as they make themselues knowne vnto vs by their ef­fects. I angling Sophisters will dispute, That the nose of a mans face cannot be seene, because that which we see is but colour or forme, and the nose it selfe is neither of both. Your eares ring it may bee with their noise, which hath made you borrow an argument from them. Thirdly, you say, The Signes we report are false: which I would graunt you if your selues had learned to speake truth. We must re­member there are aboue two hundred witnesses hereof liuing at this day, of which some haue deposed the same wee report of Som­mers. Fourthly, say you, Scripture Signes can argue no Dispossession now, because like effects may arise frō naturall causes, and coporall disea­ses. By this your good helpe Atheists might ouerthrow all Posses­sions and Dispossessions in the scripture. But howsoeuer you may be friendly to such vile wretches, yet haue they no foothold from hence. For neither those effects in those ancient Demoniakes, nor in these of our time iointly & wholy considered can proceed from naturall disease. Naturall causes can bring forth no supernaturall ef­fects, as we haue demōstrated these to be in spight of your seuenth Dialogue, and what other treaty so euer you oppose against it. Lastly, say you, A dispossession may bee without such apparant signes, and therefore your signes precedent and subsequent do not necessarily conclude a dispossession. What? Because it is sometimes without these signes, therefore where these signes are, shall it not be? It is sometime day light without the cleare sunshine, therefore when the Sunne shines cleare shall it not be day? Sometimes the murderer slayes a man and is not taken with the manner, therefore if he be taken with the manner, shall he not necessarily bee concluded a murtherer? These are good rules to make a man impudent in sinne: for by them the bold offender shall speede better, then hee that doth it minchingly▪ You haue spoken then pretily against these signes, but without any [Page 25] signe of truth or wit.

From Scripture signes I descend to some experimented by my selfe in dealing with Demoniakes, which haue reported certaine vi­sible shapes, in which the diuels seemed to depart from them. But here I am taken vp for halting, in that I call it My experience, which was proued in the persons of other. I confesse I spake rudely, as all other men do, which call a physition a man of good experience, though he hath not proued all the diseases, he hath dealt with, in his owne bo­dy. pag. 84.As for visible shapes, you vtterly deny, that Spirits could procure thē: yet they did before Pharaoh, and infinite others since, as wee haue shewed by better arguments in my suruey of your fourth and fift Dialogues, then you euer haue, or can for the contrarie. Some also I shew did vomit, or straine to vomit when the diuel departed. With pag. 85.this you make good sport, perhaps ticled with remembrance, that you haue returned to your owne vomit.

Further, I concluding a dispossession, from the present effect of our prayers (wherof the like is not in naturall diseases.) You charge me with proper tearmes, as with certaine charming words to coniure the Lord with, for so it pleaseth your prophane mouthes to speake. And yet I do not vse the word proper. Onely I say, And God heard our prayer vit [...]red in such tearmes▪ that is, made to that effect, as before I haue shewed in briefe. I neuer dreamed that such▪ Argooses would come after mee with so manie eyes, to finde an hole in my coate for these words more thē in all other mens. But to let words passe, you would disproue the effect of our prayers, for that we could not pag. 86.make the parties the Temples of the holy Ghost, as we had prayed. Wee challenge no such power, but we might well hope of the mercy of the Lord to sanctifie them, which did plainly behold his great good nesse in deliuering them from Satans great rage. Howsoeuer mee thinks you should not be offended with vs for putting vp this re­quest to God. And what if the Lord doth not alwayes yeelde pre­sent successe to the prayers of his seruants? Could we not therfore be assured he had now heard vs, when we saw the thing performed before our eyes▪ It is true the Diuel sometime seemeth to depart, when he doth not but when it is at the requests of Gods people▪ when it is after such grieuous vexation as was in the Demoniakes in the Gospell, when it is with the health of the parties, and present freedome from all former vexations dy Satan, wee need not doubt of it in any sort. For the visible departure of Satan, I answered you euen very now.

[Page 26] [...]ag. 87. 88▪ [...]9. Matt. 12. 43 Besides, I alleage for Dispossession, Satans desire of repossession, which is neuer but after he is throwne out. You returne a double an­swere, first, that these wordes, I will returne to the house from whence I came, &c. be metaphoricall. Wee remember indeede your monstrous absurditie in making all things whatsouer, spoken of Angels, and diuels in the scripture▪ to be Meaphoricall. But as I haue shewed you, manie are not Metaphoricall, so neither is this repecting the sentence of Matt. 12. 45it. The words be part of a similitude, as is plaine by the reddition, So shall it be to this wicked generation. The whole standeth thus. As when an vncleane spirit goeth forth of a man, passeth through drie places seeking rest, and findeth none: then faith, I will returne to my house, &c. entring againe in, the last estate of that man is worse thē the first▪ so shal it be to this wicked generatiō. Now to find what past of this sentence is Metaphoricall, we are to know that a simili­tude is twofold. One which is contracted & shut vp in one word, properly called a Metaphor▪ the other displaid & spread open, consisting of all the parts at large, and is tearmed by the name of the generall, a Similitude. For the figuratiue part in either, the reason is one in both. Therfore as in a contracted similitude, the Metaphor lyeth in the word that is borrowed, and not in that from▪ whence it is borrowed, so in the larger similitude, the metaphoricall part of it resteth in the Reddition, not in the Proposition. For example▪ Ho­nour nourisheth Artes: the word Nourisheth being borrowed frō meats nourishing the bodie, is a Metaphor as it is applyed to Ho­nour, and Artes, but attributed to his proper termes, it is no Meta­phor, as to say thus, Meat nourisheth the body. In like manner (to make a full Similitude of it, in this sort) As meat nourisheth the bo­dy, so Honour nourisheth Artes, the Metaphoricall part of the whole, lyeth in the latter member, not in the first. So likewise when our Sauiour saith, As a man deliuered from the possession of Satan, and receiuing him in againe, is in worse case after, then before: So the nation of the Iewes, once deliuered from the kingdome of Sa­tan, so long as the church of God was amongst them, and comming into his subiection againe by refusing Christ, should bee in more miserable condition then in any former time: the Metaphoricall sentence of this Similitude, is in the last branch of it, not in the first. Not because there be no Metaphoricall words in the first, as Drie places, house emptie, swept, garnished. &c. but for that wee now speake of Metaphoricall sentences, not of words. I frame my argu­ment from the Proposition of the Similitude, the sentence where­of [Page 27] is literall and historicall, not from the Reddition, whose sense is allegoricall. Now then i [...] a man should reason thus: The Reddition of the Similitude is Metaphoricall, therefore the whole is metapho­call, it is all one as if one should say, The blacke Moore bath white teeth, therefore he is all white. Which kinde of argument euerie chimney-sweeper would deride: and yet thus you reason from this place, and make it one of your chiefest props to vpholde your ab­surd conclusions with. But vnto this place I added another, where our Sauiour saith to the vncleane spirit, Come out of him, and enter Mat. 9. 25. no more into him. Was our Sauiours prohibition here in vaine? was this caution altogether needlesse and supers [...]uo us? How chaunce you pass ouer this place, withoutanswerīg one word vnto it▪ It was too plaine: and you two could not agree where the Metaphor should lie, & therefore thought better to slip it ouer, then by hand­ling it, and bewraying your owne absurdities to marre all. The re­entrie therfore of Satan is plaine by the Scriptures: so that we need not the testimonie of any experience: yet I haue adioyned in the Doctrine the report of the children dispossessed, and the euidence of many godly then present, which perceiued by their agonie, and the words of their resistance, what Satan attempted. You trifle ouer this with greater childishnesse then appeared in the childrē, though but nine or tenne yeares old, and therefore I disdaine to answere it▪ Againe for proofe of dispossession, I alleage thē continuance of the parties health since: you answere: Their former fittes were but counter­terfeit, pag. 90. a [...] themselues haue confessed. A stale proofe of their counterfei­ting, and answered before. The seuen in Lancashire neuer confessed any counterfeiting.

pag. 91. 92. 93. Thus hauing confirmed Dispossession, I remoue that vsuall ob­iection, shewing it is now no miracle, for that it is not done by ab­solute power of Christ in bodily presence, as he sometimes did it when he was here conuersant on earth▪ nor by any committed ex­traordinary power to men but by [...]asting an [...] pra [...]er as the means▪ you answere first: as if I affirmed Christs absolute power to be ceas [...]d: which I affirme not, but account such affirmation blasphemie▪ He is not now present in bodie on earth, but worketh by his absolute authoritie still. Secondly, If Christs absolute author [...]ty be th [...]o [...]ly [...]ffi­cient▪ then the worke is a [...] miraculous, as euer. Which is a flat vntruth, as I ha [...]e proued at large in [...]our tenth Dialogue. For works done by men as instruments are distinguished by the maner of working, and not by the principall cause. you say my Similitude from the [Page 28] Queene, and Lord Chauncelour is too absurd: for first, it is a case which neuer shall be, and so cannot illustrate. I had thought that fictasimili­tudo might haue had some force. But surely as you are full of newe Diuinitie, so I thinke you haue swallowed Margaritam Philosophiae, you breake out on euerie occasion with such wonderfull new axi­omes of Logicke. I intended that Similitude to the manner onely of Christs working, and you would extend it to the like glory of his works now, cleane beyond my purpose, and any good probabilitie. For are not Christs workes more glorious, when together with him selfe his seruants worke extraordinarily, as they did in the time of miracles, then now, when his seruants working is only ordina­rie. But you will make the same similitude ouerthrow all miracles now, which I will yeeld for any, but for your selues: for you haue a priuiledge to do miracles, as is apparant in your tenth Dialogue.

[...]ag. 94. Hitherto for Dispossession, now for the meanes: which I affirme with many godly and learned of auncient and our owne times, Matt. 17. 21to be fasting and prayer, out of the words of our Sauiour, This kinde go [...]th not out but by fasting and prayer. Where I calling it a Secret ordi­nance, oppose it to more euident places: you catch at the word, and Deut. 29, 29come vpon me with Secret things belong onely to God. He that should deale with you had neede, as the Lawyers in writing their instru­ments, rather haue twentie words to spare, then to want one. You would proue, these words did onely belong to the Disciples, because the [...]ag. 95. 96. question was made by them, and the answere to them. The Iayler in the 16. of the Acts sayd to Paul and Silas, What must I do to be saued? They answere him: Beleeue in the Lord Iesus Christ and thou shalt be saued, &c. Doth this Scripture now only belong to the Iaylor, because this question was made by him, & the answer vnto him? Of Matt. 17. 21this kind be infinite other places. For interpretation of these words of Saint Matthew, I haue shewed you how I conceiue of them in your ninth Dialogue. Which exposition varieth somwhat from my former, not because I cannot maintaine it against any thing you ob­iect, but because I seeke after truth, and not after vaine iangling. If you can shew me any better, I will be readie also to change this. In meane season vnderstand how I reason from hence for the perpetu­al meanes of Fasting and prayer, which are mentioned by our Saui­our in this place, either as helpes to the extraordinarie and miracu­lous faith of the Apostles, or else of the ordinarie. But they are not Math. 7. 17.mentioned as helpes to the extraordinarie: for miraculous faith in the least quantity, though no more then a graine of mustard seede [Page 29] was able without these helpes to expell any diuell. Besides they could not be helpes to that, which in it selfe had no being. For the Disciples had vtterly lost their miraculous faith, else they had ele­cted the spirit. This also the word Apistia, incrdulity doth note vn to vs. And an helpe is a conioyned force, which coniunction cannot be, where there is nothing to ioyne withall▪ and therefore they bee propo unded in this place as helpes to the ordinary faith, and so to haue a perpetuall ordinarie vse, when like occasion is ministred to vs. Againe, euery Exception is a compendious speech, comprehending in it two propositions, as, Except a man be borne againe, he can­not Ioh. 33. Ioh. 6. 44. Act. [...]7. 31 see the kingdome of God▪ wherein is concluded also this, If f a man be borne againe he can se the kingdome of God. So, None can come vnto me except the Father draw him. Euery one can come vnto mee, whom my Father draweth. Againe, Except these abide in the ship, you cannot be saued. If these abide in the ship, you can be saued. And so in all other. In like manner, This kind doth not go forth, but by prayer and fasting. This kind doth go forth by prayer and fasting. Now thē let men o [...] iudgement determine whether here be not an euident confirmation of the ordinarie course of the Church in dealing after this maner▪ and whether it be not exceeding boldnesse, our Sauiour affirming in such sort as is declared▪ That this kind doth goe forth by prayer and fasting, for any to open his mouth licenciously agaīst it, and to disgrace it by al opprobrious tearmes he can. From hence too you may see, the similitude drawne from the Physition saying to his patient, daungerously sicke of the Pleurisy, You cannot liue, except you bleed, was to good purpose, if you could iudge what is to purpose.

It is too tedious to repeat all your vntruthes, your absurd Non sequiturs, and idle profes. As if I thought it vnreasonable for Christ to pag. 99 reproue his Disciples negligence: if Christs answere were not proper to the Disciples, it was no answere: if he directed not his speech to the Disciples onely, he spake to no body present. This mettal craues no touchstonne, it shewes it selfe by the eye what it is: therefore a knocke with an hammer is sufficient So, If this answere of Christ propounded an ordi­nance for al ages to come, there is an ordinance without an appointed sub­iect to vnde [...]go the same. Indeed this would be straunge for Accidents to walke alone without subiects. It is a difficult matter to finde who should be the subiect of fasting and praver: so likewise too of the Matt. 6.kingdom of God, which our Sauiour ordaineth to be sought in the first place, and food and rayment in the second, if we could tell who [Page 30] g. 100. [...] do it▪ [...]esides succeeding ages that could expell this cumbersom [...] [...] sh [...]uld haue more power the eu [...]r the A [...]stles bad, which is false: for the Apostles, their▪saith not fayling, could expell any diuell. Further, The Apo [...]les should [...]aile in not d [...]cla [...]ing this ordinance vnto vs: concerning which ynough hath beene sai [...]e in the ninth Dialogue. I ast [...]y, it [...] establ [...]shed ordi [...]ance in this place, because M Darr [...]ll af­ [...]th it hath b [...]ene a [...] ordinance fr [...]m the beginning. I answere, I doe not refe [...]e the originall to this place, but onely the Confirmation, Iath. 19 99 [...] 12. 27 Act. 16. 13.no otherwise then I make Matrimony an established ordinance by our Sauiour Christ, he rene [...]ing the institution of it.

Againe▪ I argue the meanes of fasting and prayer from the example of the Iewes Church in our Sauiours time: wherin some did cast forth diuels▪ and yet were not in the number of our Sauiours Disciples, neither did it in his name. You answere, I contrarie my sel [...]e, affirming [...]l [...]e where, they did it by the [...]inger of God: I reply, [...]ou [...]do not contrary your selfe▪ but are euer li [...]e your selues, most absur [...]ly concluding the selfe same working of the instrument, from the same maner of the principall agent: whereas the chiefe doer being the same, may and doth worke by the instrument diuersly. Againe, say you by mine [...]wne consession, this ordinance as then was not established▪ I answere, is was not so plainely, as when our [...]auiour confirmed it by these words, yet in generall it was, and practised in the Church before. Moreouer, say you, Those in our Sauiours time besides [...]th. 7▪ 22 his Disciples▪ cast out diuels by miraculous faith only, for which you al­leage the seuenth of Matth [...]w I reply, this scripture speaketh onely of the e [...]ection of Satan but sheweth not in what manner the same was performed, nor when▪ We do not leane vpon any doubtfull vn­certainties, as you would Rhetorically declare, if ye knew how▪ nei­ther do we take the Lords holy name in vain [...], nor pray with [...]ut faith▪ as you prate both without wit and conscience. I passe ouer your foo­leries concerning K. Wright, & your sixe lies at one clap▪ contained [...] 103. [...] 104.in seuen lines, as I can proue to your shame. But what speake I of sixe, when I dare say there be sixe hundred leasings in [...]our two volumes? VVe neede not take things of whole sal [...] men by retale: it [...]s [...]n ea [...]y matter to know b [...] [...]our l [...]ing whose children ve are

That Christs speech ought not t [...] be a [...]propriated to the Disciples, hath bee [...]e declared. Neither [...]o I say and unsay as [...]ou falsly charge me. pag. 105. 106.The communication was betweene our Sauiour and his Disciples, b [...]t the ordinance there mentioned is common to all▪ [...]et Phys [...]alo­gus sit these variable answers, as hee miscals them, doth tell vs a [Page 31] tale of an H [...]rmit▪ which comming to a Farmers house, and blowing his fingers to warme them, and his [...]ottage to coole them, was s [...]nt packing by the Farmer▪ as a diss [...]mbling c [...]mpanion. But, to requite you tale, what if the like Hermit had come to some good mans house, and ha­uing on his face a faire shining visarce with A. W. written vpon it, should vpon occasion haue his visard shaken off, and vnder it shewe another face, signed with I. De. Might not the good man iustly abhorre this double fa [...]ed guest, [...]nd a [...]monish all honest companie to beware of him? I will pard [...]n you your sport at fast and pag. 107. loose for a shilling, though I might iustly make it s [...]t [...]aster vnto you, then you would vnloose againe in haste. Put where is the contrarie­tie, I pray you, in making th [...]se words to [...]ee spoken to the Disciples, and yet not onely to be vnderstood of them? You would collect it after this manner, Because that weaknesse of faith, and the kind of [...] w [...]re the two in [...] wherefore the child was not deliuered. And that which is an impediment to anie, is also proper to the same partie, if we will beleeue your Metaphysi [...]kes. For you must needs deriue your As­sumption H [...]b 3. 1 [...] & 4. 1. 2.f [...]m hence. As if the Is [...]aelites being shut [...]ut of the land of promise for their v [...]beleefe, this impediment should bee so pro­per to them, that n [...]re but themselues should be excluded for the same: which absurditie is of that nature, that if your sticke of fast and loose were [...] good sound cudgell, you deserue to be well labou­red about the shoulders with it▪ [...]ut what should I pursue your se­uerall absurdities? To [...]ake after such scatterers were to fill a cart, rather then ones lap. In briefe for your whole dispute, to pr [...]ue these words only to belong to the Disciples: I [...] incredulitie and [...]mission of Matt. 17.prayer and fasting were impediments onely to the nine Disciples, (for Peter, Iames and Iohn were not of this number) then they can be impediments to no body else. And so Peter, Iames & Iohn should cast out any kind of spirit notwithstanding the like incredulity, and omission of [...]asting and prayer. Yea all other Christians whatsoeuer should also in like manner. For what should hinder them, if they haue no impediment? And what impediment can they haue, these two being onely proper to the nine Disciples? See now how pro­uidently you tie these words to the Disciples onely, permitting larger power to all other Christians then to them. The contradiction you here charge me with is lame. It is palpably false, that 1 pag. 49. of the Doctrine au [...]u [...]h, there are some kind of spirits, which the Apostles (with all their power) could not possibly expell, but by prayer and fasting. Of this very errour I do by sundrie reasons from pag. 44. of the Doc­trine▪ [Page 32] vnto page 48. confute Stapleton and Thyrcus, which notwith­standing you charge vpon me, & againe sticke not to say, that Sta­pleton, Thyrcus, and my selfe agree herein, so shamelesse are you. But specially you make your selues merie with a cōtradiction, pag. 111. 112. I answere, The Disciples their not expelling the diuell out of the Lunatike, when they were destitute of miraculous faith, letteth not but that by miraculous faith they could expell any diuel. These I trust may agree together, without cutting the throat one of ano­ther.

That which you talke of helping their weake miraculous faith by pa. 113, &c. fasting and prayer, is already answered. Further, I shewing that fasting and prayer were not required as helpes in this place to miraculous fa [...]th, say, that Miraculous faith is of that kind, which is giuen without means to certaine men: whereupon it must needs follow, that there being an Apistia, an vtter defect of miraculous faith in these Disciples, it was not to be recouered by fasting and prayer. You answere, It was not 1. Cor. 12, 9. begotton without meanes, because it was giuen by inspiration of God. By which you make the holy Spirit to bee a meanes: whereas a meanes is but an instrument: And the holye Ghost toge­ther with the other two persons of holie Trinity is alwayes a prin­cipall efficient. Thus you confound heauen and earth together, & make nothing in the world to be done without means: neither any thing in the world to bee more then ordinary: for whatsoeuer is done by the same vsuall and neuer ceasing meanes, must needs bee reputed ordinarie. There be few places in the fielde more repleni­shed in the spring with stincking nettles and weedes, then your whole booke with such poyson full Hemlockes as these. But with all we haue a Discourse of an Habituall & Actuall miraculous faith: pag. 114.whereof the habitual is begotten by the Spirit and the word. Seeing therefore these causes cannot alwayes be effectlesse, and that they be euer working in the Church till the end of the world, it cannot be auoided but that Miraculous faith should be in the Church for euer: And the rather if we consider, what by your saying miraculous faith is: which you define to be nothing els, but an vnd [...]uted perswasion, by which we firmly beleeue, that there is nothing impossible to God: But all the faithfull do vndoubtly beleeue this, and therefore we haue still Miraculous faith remaining amongst vs, and shal haue so long as the Church soiornes on earth: yea the very diuels beleeue this and so hauing miraculous faith, by your leaden rule shall bee workers of true miracles▪ I adde, they which were endued with the [Page 33] miraculous faith, had besides the perswasion of Gods omnipotencie, an vndoubted perswasion of the will of God, for the effecting of the wonderful matters, which besides or contrarie to nature they attēp­ted for the good of the Church. Now for as much as the know­ledge and assurance of the said will of God is not to bee had from the word, therefore the written word is not the onely ground▪worke of miraculous faith, neither doth it come by the hearing thereof, as you affirme. For Actuall faith, you will haue it a speciall motion from the spirit of God, raised vp extraordinarily, whereby the action of faith shall not proceed from the Habit as from the next cause, as the action of iustice cometh from the habit of iustice, and so in all other qualities of that kind, but there shall be something in Actuall faith extraordinarily more then was in the Habituall. If a man had your sharpnes he might quickly go beyond Actius▪ Nauius, that cut the whetstone in peeces with his rasor. For the increase of miraculous faith by means, it is but needles to stand vpō it, cōsidering we affirm an vtter defect therof at this time in the disciples, not some coue­red sparkes remaining in them, to be raised into flames by fasting and praier. For true miraculous faith how litle soeuer, is able with out these helps, to atchiue her desined worke. But then you will say, yea in effect do say, that the Apostles did superfluously ioine praier pag. 116. with it. I answer, no more superfluously, then the Church doth ioyne Sacraments with the word. Faith of it self is sufficient, to ap­prehend Christ vnto saluation, and this faith is begotten by the word: Yet Sacraments haue their necessary vse, not to inable faith to that, which it could not with out them, but to confirme and strengthen it to doe her worke more cherfully, and with fuller assurance. Praier is the general instrument to be vsed in all holy workes what soeuer: and therfore the Apostles had warrant for their praier, & were free from all will-worship therin. I omit here pag. 117. 118for breuitie fiue of your slanders, and two contradictions where­with you charge me, my selfe being not author of any one of the contradictory proposions.

I prouing that these wordes in S. Mathewe (this kind goeth not Matt. 17. 21 out, &c. belong not peculiarly to the Disciples, say, that if our Saui­our had rebuked them for not fasting & praying, they might haue excused pag. 119 120. 121. their want of time, you trifle exceedinglye about this: at last you affoord vs this worthy answere, that considering our Sauiours staying in the mount (which for all the circumstances you can alleadge can not be long) they had time ynough to pray. Antiquum obtinct Crito, [Page 34] you must run your old byas, & impudently flap vs in the mouth with time for prayer, whē the question is of time for fasting and prayer. Againe, you wil haue these words, This kind goeth not forth but by fa­sting and prayer, to be no sever all reason rendred by our Sauiour, why his Disciples failed in their purpose: whereas we haue shewed, it is a di­stinct thing from Miraculous faith, and not necessarily ioyned with it: and therefore not to concurre in making one reason with the [...]ag. 122. [...]g. 123. 124same▪ Moreouer say I, [...]f the Apostles in each weaknes of this faith, must of necessity haue betaken themselues to fasting and prayer, they should haue bene a whole day about a miracles the exercise of fasting requiring this space, which would haue bene great hinderance to their speedy tra­vell ouer the whole earth. You answere, This is Iudaisme. Belike also it is Iudaisme for Christians to pray▪ because the Iewes did so. But vnderstand, good Reader, that the practise only of such cereremonies as the Lord appointed to be a difference betweene the Iewes, and other people, is Iudaisme, not the exercise of such duties, as be com­mon to both. That which you doubt what should become of the other part of the day, if the diuell should be cast forth before noone, beseemeth men which acknowledge no other seruice of God, but for their owne turnes. Is there no duty of thanksgiuing? no request for strength to the party dispossessed? no desire that the eye-witnesses might profit by it? you would haue Christians serue God, as the dog his maister for a bone. The rest is vnworthy to be repeated, & so was this, but that I would giue the Reader a taste. But what say you, that wil not haue a fast to continue for a day▪ to A Walker, alias [...]g. 5. Io. Deacon? who in a booke of his called the Footpath to fasting, saith▪ that in the day of our fast, we must be exercised in hearing, applying, and praying for the rem [...]uing of God his iudgements, euen from morning to night? Do I (you false tongues) in pag. 48. and 49. of the Doctrine pag. 125.say, that the Apostles should haue stirred vp their weake faith by fasting and prayer, when I spend those whole pages to proue the contrary▪ O palpable slaunder, and extreame impudencie! Likewise you say, I affirme else where, The Apostles faith was so strong as it needed no meanes to stirre vp the same. And I would tell you, you say vntruly, but that your skore is so full that now you be desperate. Of these two bastardly propositions, conceiued and brought forth by your selues, and not by me, you frame a Contradiction: saying therupon, that I will turne, [...]re I burne, yea with the turning of an hand, turne the cat in the pan: and then you tell my pupils, they may be pestilent proud [Page 35] of such a turne-about tutor. Here wee may beholde, as your honest dealing with me, so your eloquence and modestie.

Besides, I auouching the Apostles strong faith after Pentecost, able for miracles whatsoeuer, and therefore vnlikely the Lord should appoint a peculiar course for them, for so short a time as from his transfiguration till then: you collect from hence the weaknes of their faith till Penticost: which I graunt you, and more then that, namely, that their miracu­lous faith was vtterly extinct at this time▪ And therfore no vse of fa­sting and prayer for the extraordinarie work, but onely as it serued to the vsual maner of the Church in this case. But you wil proue the apostles miraculous faith might faile a [...]ter Pentecost, because their faith failed sometimes in doctrine and [...] That we may vnderstand your meaning, what do y [...] [...] by Doctrine? what by iudge­ment? Doctrine vsuall▪ is publike teaching and instruction▪ Iudg­ment priuate thinking and opinion. Did the Apostles erre in pub­like teaching? You saye, The Apostles and bretheren which were in Iud [...]a, thought the word of God was not to be preached to the Gentils. Act. 11. 2.You ground this ou [...] of these wordes▪ And when Peter was asc [...]n­ded to H [...]erusalem, they of the circumcision contended against him. VVho contended with him? The Apostles, say you, but without any warrant from the text. It seemeth S. Luke hauing mentioned the Apostles in the first verse, doth of purpose in the second vse these generall termes, They of the circumcision, to distinguish these contenders with Peter, frō the Apostles. It may be the Apostles did not yet [...]o clearly vnderstand this mistery, yet it is not likelie they were in this ca [...]e no more but equall to the weake brethren, whereby the [...] should ioyne in contention with them. Grant we al­so an errour here, it was only in iudgement, not in doctrine. And as for Peters not going rightly to the truth of the Gospell, it was not error Gat. 2. 13. 14either in doctrine or iudgement, but a timorous dissimulation for the time. Iohn his falling downe before an Angell, was errour through R [...]ue. 19. 10sodaine passion, not proceeding from setled iudgement, much lesse auouched in publike teaching. Considering therefore these places proue not that the Apostles erred in doctrine and iudgement, and that the Lord doth principall [...] promise that the Spirit of truth should l [...]ad Ioh. 16. 13 & 14. 26. 1. Cor. 3. 10. Ephes. 2. [...]0. them into all truth: and bring all things to their remembrance which Christ had told them, whereupon they be called Skilfull Maister-buil­ders, and the Church is said to be built vpon the foundation of the pro­phets and apostles. It is admirable you dare so considently auouch such an assertion, vpon so little or rather no warrant▪ and of so dan­gerous [Page 36] consequence. You childishly cauill at my speech, where I say, Their faith did not faile them, after they receiued the holy Ghost in [...]ag. 127. &c That f [...]nesse: as if I had attributed such a fulnesse to thē, as is not incident to a creature: and yet I expresly distinguish it by note of re­straint Act. 7. 55. & 13. 9. Luc. 1. 41. Act. 2. 2. 4 That fulnesse, that is, such a plentifull measure as I had spo­ken of before. Such an one, as was said of Stephen, [...]hat hee was ful of the holy Ghost: and of Paul: and of Elizabeth, when shee brake forth into that heauenly salutation of the blessed virgin, that she was filled with the holy ghost. The same is said of Zacha [...]y when he prophecied, and of the Apostles, that they were filled▪ with the holy ghost. And all these in the Concret▪ but in the Abstract without all limitation to haue the fulnesse [...]f the Spirit, belongeth onely to a diuine person, the Father▪ the Sonne, and the holy Ghost▪ So that whatsoeuer person hath the simple fulnesse of the Spirit, the same is God, as well as hee who hath the fulnesse of the Godhead. Of Christ his fulnesse (to whom the Father hath not giuen his Spirit by measure) do all the elect receiue, not the fulnes it selfe, but grace for grace, that is, graces or gifts of the Spirit heaped vpon graces: euery one according to the measure of the gift of Christ, some euē vntil their cup runne ouer. All which discourse when at last you pag. 133.conclude, that howsoeuer the Apostles were subiect to errour, yet they could not pos [...]iblie erre s [...] long as they heard the voice of Christ▪ and but followed the onely directions of the spirit of truth: And that they did neuer vniuersally erre: Moreouer, that they did neuer [...]cline from the foundation it selfe: & lastly, that they w [...]re recalled from their e [...]r [...]urs [...] what singular thing do you ascribe to the Apostles, that is not common to all beleeuers? Are not the Apostles to be preferred aboue all other Ministers of the Gospell, and beleeuers since theire dayes? Yet you seeme to put them in the very same ra [...]ke▪ Nay, you say in the top of the same page, that there [...]e some F [...]st [...]noni [...]s of the Apostles, which onely but slipped from humane infirmities, and that these ( [...]ow glorious soeuer in shew) are not the testimony of Iesus, & ther­fore not the spirit of proph [...]cie. you speake here very daungerously, that I say no worse.

You argue the defect of the Apostles miraculous [...]aith, from their pag. 135. Act. 4. 29 30. & 9. 40 & [...] 8. 8 praying in working miracles, which rather is an argument for the continuance of it. For if it had [...]in vtterly extin [...] it had not bene to [...]e obtained by prayer▪ but if you say Prayer declareth the [...]eaknes of it, and that you meane such weaknesse, as without prayer ha [...] not beene able to effect the worke, it is false [...] hath beene oft [...]e­membred [Page 37] vnto you▪ but if you take weaknesse for some lesse measure of Matt. 17.cheerefulnesse, which had neede be stirred by inuocation of Gods holy name, I graunt you such a weaknesse, but this is too weake to strengthen any whit your cause. you charge mee falsly in saying, I denie that the apostles faith might & did faile before they were filled with Doct. pag. 46, 48 Doct. 49 pag. 136 the holy Spirit. I know not how oft I affirme this, which you say is the very point I denie▪ Neither do I say▪ it was but fortie dayes betweene Christ his transfigi [...]ation, and Pentecost. I do writtingly let passe ma­nie of your lies▪ it is a trouble to repeate them. you see no inconue­nience to approper these words, This kind goeth not forth but by fasting & prayer, to the Disciples themselues: whereas if fasting and prayer had beene necessarie as helpes to their weake faith, that could not stand which our Sauiour hath immediately before affirmed, that so much [...]aith as a graine of Mustard seede should be able to do the greatest miracles. Howe this distinction of diuels is to be vnderstoode, wee haue sufficiently declared in the Doctrine. you make a wonder­ful Doct. p. 51▪partition, when you interpret This kind, only to distinguish diuets from other creatures. The nature of a partition is, that the thing which is parted should be common to all the members. as in this place, creatures going out is the Generall agreeing to both the Specials, in this sort. Of creatures that go out of man some are diuels, and they go not out but by fasting and prayer: some are of other kinde, and these of what nature soeuer goe out of a man without fasting and prayer Wha [...] ▪ is man now become a cage for all creatures▪ Indeed the old Philosophers had woont to say, that Man is a little world: but [...]ou will giue vs a sensible vnderstanding o [...] it, if horses, be ar [...] and lyons, fowles, and creeping things of all kind, may haue an ha­bitation in him. You haue beene so carefull all this while to free man from possession of diuels, that in the meane season you haue made [...]im a fo [...]est to containe all sauage beasts in. I pray you what kind of creature doth lodge in your owne breastes? But you say▪ pag. 137. Th [...] kind cannot be referred to the diu [...]ls amongst themselues, because they be▪ all of one kind as angels be▪ and also men. Profoundly sure▪ as if kind did onely note essence, an [...] not sometimes quality and condi­tion▪ you brought vs euen now an example of threwes, The best of this kind is sh [...]mish ynough wherby you said, wom [...]n were seuered from men by the [...] fore or kind▪ Is difference of sexe difference of Essen [...]d So [...] speake of doceitfull men, This kind of men is not to bee tru­sted▪ of fl [...]tterers and ambitious persons This kind of men speak [...] all to please those in authority▪ of such as haue made ship wracke o [...] [Page 38] a good conscience, This kind of men groweth worse & worse. Now tell me, you Answerers, whether Kind will carie no other sense but that, wherewith you cauill as beseemeth fresh Sophisters. Againe, it is admirable, you could find no other similitude to declare the di­stinction [...]ag. 138.of diuels by, but onely the whole state of this kingdom of En­gland, comparing our most gracious Soueraigne, Gods Lieutenant amongst vs (I tremble to speake it) to the Prince of darknesse, and all the inferiour honourable orders of Dukes, Earles, Lords, Iudges, Iustices, Knights, Gentlemen, yomen, &c. to the lower sort of diuels. Could any men forget themselues so much, as that against all good maners, against honesty, against Christianitie, yea, against nature it selfe, which hath printed in the minds of subiects all loyall and re­uerent respect towards their most worthy Soueraigne, and in the hearts of inferiours all dutifull regard of their honourable Superi­ours, that you shoulde vtter such blasphemie against Gods sacred Ministers, and so noble and so flourishing estate as this is? He that priuiledged this, deserues hee should priuiledge no more. You thought to lade your Exorcist with the enuy of so odious a compa­rison: but all wise men will see, your selues are the Exorcist, and all the rest of the persons in your books, whom ye make to speak what and how ye please: and therefore whatsoeuer they offende, they ought to be whipped on your backs. I take not vpon me to define of the seuerall orders of diuels farther then the sacred word of truth pag. 140. &cis my guide. You contrariwise, that you might oppose your selues against me, sticke not to bend your forces against the verie Scrip­tures. For you will haue nothing now amongst them, but a meere confusion, and a state without all order: notwithstanding our Sauiour Matt. 12. 25 &c. & 25 41.teacheth, that the power of darknesse is a kingdome: that there is a Prince of this kingdom called Beelzebub, and inferiour degrees cal­led his angels (which whether they be all of them equall, or no with out distinction or difference in any respect whatsoeuer, you should haue considered from these words, He taketh vnto him seuen other spirits worse then himselfe, & not vainly to haue trifled about the word Exusia) that there is a kind of policie of concord maintained amōgst them, whereby this kingdom is vpholden. These things are plainly taught, and are such as no Christian may gainsay, yet you would o­uerthrow all this, striuing for such a blended mingle amongst them, as is vtterly void of any the least distinction. But it is a true saying, Fooles whilest they labour one euill to shun, into the contrarie presently runne. VVhereas in these words, This kind goeth, not forth [Page 39] but by prayer & fasting, I haue obserued foure thinges: That there are two kinds of diuels: That one is more difficultly expelled then the o­ther: that the child was possessed with one of the worser kind: that thence partly it was wherefore the Disciples cast him not forth: you returne, pag. 154. They which want arte to analyze the Scriptures, may here learne to be­butcher a text, with Rhetorike ill beseeming vnmannerly clownes. But tell me, is there no difference between Analyzing, and making pag. 155collections from a text? Prate no more of the extraordinarie faith of the Disciples, except you can make it good by sound reason they were indued with such kind of faith at that time. Our Sauiour faith there was an Apistia in them, a thorough defect, wherby only they failed in that extraordinarie course they attempted. pag. 157. 158.

But now you wil shew the impieties, absurdities and dangers which follow of this doctrine. I [...]st, it is impietie to a [...]ouch any thing for truth that is not. I acknowledge it is a greate impiety: but this doctrine doth not so. Secondly, Lying wonders are the marks of Antichrist. I answere, you ly falsly, when you make the casting forth of Satan by payer and fasting to be a l ying wonder. Thirdly, it is impiety to af­firme fasting and prayer (ex operato) may effect such a worke. It is impietie indeed, but you may as truly charge me with this affir­mation, as you might charge any▪ sound hearted Christian that knowes M▪ Deacon, with affirming▪ that he is an honest man. Fourthly, it is impiety to pr [...]phane prayer and fasting without warrant from the word. We graunt also this, but withall ioyne vnto it, That it is no lesse impietie to call that prophaning of prayer and fasting, which is warranted by the word, as in this case it is. [...]astly, it is impiety (say you) to make prayer and fasting which of God are apprinted to bee helpes vnto saith, a sole meanes without faith for expelling of diuels. I subscribe vnto it and wish with all my heart, that he which saith so▪ may receiue the reward of a deceiuer: but if such cogitation was e­uer farre from my breast, that such impudent slaunderers might be branded in their forehads with this marke: False accusers of their bre­thren. I doubt not but you haue read these words of the Discouerer▪ (who neuer speaketh vntruly for mee, whatsouer hee doth against Diseo. p [...]. 45.me) M. Darrell confess [...]th the necessitie [...]f faith in the ordinarie means. Your absurdities (for so they are indeed) with the daungers partly foolishly, & partly falsly imagined, what should I vouchsafe to re­peate them? I will leaue these and such like to the Reader, able now by that which ha [...] beene saide, for all your maske to discerne you.

[Page 40] 159, You vpbraide me with hiding my selfe for feare of perill. I haue learned by the commandement and example of Christ Iesus him­selfe, his Apostles, and of the Martyrs in all ages, that I may, nay, ought to giue place to the rage of man, especially not forsaking in the meane season any duty that concernes me. Yet that you may know I am not cleane runne away, by that time you haue read my Suruey and this Reply, tell me whether you haue not met with some bodie to cope with in the field. You will not allow Christians, if they [...]. 160 perceiue not their first endeuours to preuaile, to betake themselues to fur­ther humiliation. whereas this is the practise of the Saints, as to con­tinue their supplications till the Lord haue graunted, so to increase their exercise, the more difficult they proue the Lord to be. First, [...]am. 12. [...], 17. Dauid besought the Lord for his child, & as it may seeme without fasting: then not obtaining, he ioyned fasting and watching with­all: thirdly, he continued the like till the seuenth day. Did hee in [...]. 161. &c,intend a seuen dayes fa [...]t in the beginning? Concerning the effi [...]acie of prayer and fasting, we haue the same Coleworts sod againe. You talke, as if I made prayer and fasting for dispossession, an vnwritten or­dinance: whereas I onely suppose, that if it were not expresly set downe, yet for that it is to be collected out of the generall places of a. 22. 12.Scripture, as where the Lord doth summon vs, in the day of our af­fliction vnto weeping and mourning, to baldnesse and girding with sackcloth: and to call vpon him in the time of our ad [...]ersitie, and such like: and because also by experience we proue it to be effectu­all, this were sufficient warrant to vs for the ordinance of God in this behalfe. You might therefore haue spared your paines in proo­uing the sufficiencie of the worde of God, till you mette with some Papist, in which number I tkanke the Lord▪ I am not.

[...]ag. 167 For your demaunds, If dispossession be now ordinarie, what be the things ordinary in it. To satisfie you (though you litle deserue it) for the medicine, I answere it is fasting and prayer: the operation, is the mightie power and wil of God, apprehended instrumentally by our faith: the ministeriall hand to apply this medicine, is the assembly of Christians gathered for this purpose▪ The theorie or skill to directe this hand, is the knowledge that they bee warranted in so do­ing from the worde of God▪ the meanes to imprint this skill in those physitions breasts, are the▪ meanes of knowledge▪ hearing, reading, me­ditating,: the habit [...]f this skill is their faith, which is more confirmed by the often practise of the Church in all times. Nowe then, if you cannot see what is ordinary in this worke, bewayle your ordinarie [Page 41] blindēsse which will not suffer you to behold the truth. That which followeth is no lesse foolish then false, which you taike of faiths wor­king ex opere operato: as also that fasting and prayer cure by way of pag. 168 Matt. 6. miracle: that fasting and prayer is no supernaturall maner of cure: & that if it be supernaturall, then it is extraordinarie▪ Is it possible for men to dote in this manner? But if the light that is in men bee darknesse, how great is their [...]?

To the testimonies of ancient & later writers alleaged by me, you answer first, that I wrest open their mouths, and make them speak what I please. It is true, they speake what I please, because in this matter I speak nothing but what pleaseth thê▪ but you insinuat that I peruert them. If you could haue shewed one syllable this way, al the world should haue heard of it. Besides, you haue already testified in your former Discourses, that they spake, as I report thē. Secōdly, you say, they speake nothing at all to my purpose in hand. My purpose in allea­ging them was to shew, first, that men in these dayes may be dispos­sessed of diuels. Secondly, that fasting & prayer haue bene vsed by the most learned and godly in the Church from time to time, since miracles ceased, for expelling of Satan out of the possessed. Nowe whether they spake to these purposes or no, because your selues haue lost your eysight, let others that can iudge of colours say what they thinke. Your third answere is, that I haue not their owne examples or practse, but only their bare reports concerning the practise of some others cōuersing among them. This likewise is vntrue▪ Tertullian and Cyprian recken themselues in the number of them which did expell diuels. And Chrysostome was present in the congregation, and preached two seueral dayes at least, when publike prayers were made for expelling of Satan out of persons possessed, brought to that ende into the Church at the commandement of the Deacon. And thereforè wee haue these three mens practise. But admit that none of them had made mention of their owne practise, might not their iudgment & coun [...]el [...] that [...]eruent prayers a [...]e to be vsed for the healing of the p [...]ss [...]ssed su [...]ic [...]? specially seeing diuers of them adde, that they haue knowne D [...]ct. [...]8 some that haue beene healed by the prayers of the godly. Fourthly, say you, they giue their aduise for the ex [...]rcise of prayer alone. And this is your fourth l [...]e, for some of them mention prayer & fasting. Thus much for reply to [...]our generall answeres, let vs nowe heare those which be particula [...]. To Origen you answere, that [...]e insinuateth [...]mply pag. 169. the supposed [...]fficacie of fasting and prayer, but putteth downe no practise of it as of a perpetuall ordinance. Marke how false lyers saulter in their [Page 42] speech. Did Origen suppose such an efficacie of fasting and prayer & yet not thinke it was Christs ordinance, and to bee vsed? Whence could it haue efficacie, but from Christ? Or to what purpose was ef­ficacie, if to no vse? He therefore that acknowledgeth the lawfull efficacie of fasting and prayer, doth also acknowledge, that there is an ordinance of fasting & prayer to such an end. Tertullian you say, Speakes of manie pretended deliuerances from Satan, but shew [...]th not the maner how they were fried from them. What? doth Tertullian in his Apologie of Christianitie against the Gentils, to the whole state of Rome, alleage certaine counterfeit deliuerances from Satan, to countenance Christian religion with? Doth he vse such policie in writing to the Gouernour Scapula, to gaine credite to the professi­on of the Gospell? Surely you are either not well in your wits▪ or which is worse, you haue for filthy sucres sake conspired to make but meere fables of the great works of God. But he sheweth not, say you, the maner how they were deli [...]ered▪ Do you sticke at this matter? you will not haue it by miracle in any sort: [...]d therefore, say wee, by fasting and prayer. Nay but, will you say, if it were at all, it was by Miracle, and Miracles were ceased before his dayes. Therefore speake plainely, and tell Tertullian to his face that he lyes, that hee deluded the world with his pretended deliuerances. This is your mea­ning: and this answer would be short. How Cyprian is to be vnder­stoode, we shall know (say you) by Iames Pammelius, who telleth v [...], That the Fxorcists office was not then in an [...]e vse of the church, because that office being ioyned with the gift of Miracles, did continue but for a time. I do not alleage Cyprian for the office of Exorcists, but for the casting forth of diuels in those dayes, which he testifieth plainly, say­ing, And the diuels by torments of w [...]rds are cast out of▪bod es possessed. To this adde, if you will Pammelius his testimonie, that miracles were then ceased, and so we conclude, That there were casting forth of diuels in Cyprians time, & yet not miraculous. But yet for Iames Pammelius let me tell you thus much▪ wheras you alleage his words for the ceasing of Ex [...]rcists before that time, and also that a little after he should say, That the crafts and iugling sleights of counterfeit Exor­cists [...]yp. Epist, 55 & 76▪ edit. [...]ammel. Antuerp. [...]n ad. b. Petr [...] [...]elleri 1589& coniuring priests, they are long since apparantly [...]uident: yea euen to the very eyes of the blind: I maruelled greatly to heare these words of Iames Pammelius: I knew he affirmes the cleane contrary, main­taining strongly by testimony of Antiquitie that office of Exorci­sing both of Spirits possessing▪ and in Baptisme. I turned my Cy­brian, but I could find no such words of his. And therefore either [Page 43] you haue met with an edition later then the last, or els you are as notable in belying mens writinges as the most shamlesse Papist of them all. To the rest, as Chrysostome, Peter Marty [...], Kemnitius, Phil. Melancthon, Beza, Vogellius, Danaeu [...], Chassanius, all of them most plainly testifying dispossession, and that by meanes of fasting and prayer, you answere not one word, but for the lenght of their foo­tinges, referre vs to that which hath beene spoken of the for­mer. Indeed these treade in the steps of the former, and of all the godly [...]earned that went before them & therfore by them we may gesse their footings▪ and so likewise by your three wi [...]les answers to the three former we may easily gesse what would be your answere to these, namely all the absurd shiftes you could deuise to elude their testimonies, as not hauing in purpose to find out the truth, or to yeild to it beeing found, but by hook and by crook to maintaine your owne giddy fancies, whatsoeuer eyther Scripture, or any o­ther shall saye against it. What doe I therfore disputing with such companions, which make not truth their end, but some other per­uerse respect, I know not well, what? Surely Christian Reader, that which I do is for thy good, to laye open vnto thee their vnconscio­nable iuglings, least by any coloured pretences thou shouldst be be­guiled by them Did not I well to bind thē to their good behauior by a publike Instrument in their Discourses▪ Thou seest they haue not one worde of truth to say against the practise of the Church of God from the Apostles time till now. But you are weary of these authenticall witnesses and therefore betake your selues againe to your wōted reasonings, where you may haue more scope of words, and more hope to darken the truth.

pag. 170. If, say you, prayer and fasting bee an establ [...]shed ordinance, then it should be alwayes effectuall. I answere, you seldome bring an If but there is a lye in the end of it. The prophet complayneth, How 2. Sam. 12. 18 long Lord? wilt thou hide thy face for euer? Because Dauid obtained not by his sute his Sonnes life, he might by this rule haue bid prayer and fasting adue. Infinite are the instances: it is meruaile you could meet with none of them, to cause you to hold in so grosse an vntruth. But I crie you mercy, you meane effectuall in regard of pag, 171, 172, 173.vttermost issue, not of the present time. Now then frame your reason. The ordinance of god is alwayes effectuall, prayer & fasting is not allwayes effectuall, & so not god his ordinance in this case. I answere. if you take [...]ffectual for the last issue and such help as is expedient, you say vntruly of prayer and fasting: If you meane Effectuall for [Page 44] [...]ensible, imagined and present helpe, then is it as false, you say of gods ordinance. And this i [...] you mark it, will su [...]fice for all you prattle pa. 174. 175about this matter. So likewise, how Dispossession now is no miracle enough hath beene spoken, except you can bring vs something of more weight, then hitherto [...]ou haue done. Further ob [...]erue that here they spare not to denie (though in as couert tearmes as they can) the witnesse of Tertullian, Cyprian, Chrysostome, [...]nd of al the rest before alleaged, or that can be. Moreouer, it this will not serue, for compendiousnesse sake, and more securitie of their cause, they deny the conclusion. I he argument is, If dispossession by prayer and fasting pag. 176. be miraculou [...], then Tertullian, Cyprian, Chysostome, and others wrought miracles, when they expelled diuels after this sort: but this is false: and therefore the first. To this you answere [...] Secondly, if it be true that here tofore or nowe spirits bee expelled by sole prayer and [...]asting, th [...]n is the worke a mi [...]acle: which is the contrarie a [...]firmation to the conclusi­on. pag. 177When you ta [...]ke of sole prayer and fasting, you haue a secret meaning of your owne of sole prayer without faith. Concerning which I tell you again, that if M. Walker & you haue such a kind of prayer and such a kind of faith, as vsually are separated one from another, you may do well to dispute of such matters betweene your selues, for my part I allowe no such prayer, neither doth the Church of God.

You argue, that dispossession is not by historicall or temporary faith, pag. 179. because God hath appointed it to miracul [...]us faith: which thing if it had beene proued in the beginning, we had done long [...]ince. Further, you see not wherein i [...]sti [...]ying faith should be [...]ar b [...]tter then T [...]mporarie, if this doth [...]ast out diuels, as if to cast out diuels out of the bo­ [...]ies of men▪ were all in all Besides, if historicall [...]a [...]th be suff [...]c [...]ent, di­uels might cast out diuels. But what if they will not? you a [...]e neuer a whit the nearer. Such trumperie sha l haue no other answere▪ [...]or answere to your fourth reason I say, a reprobate may app [...]l end the mercies of God the Creator▪ but not of God the Redeemer, And such apprehensi [...]n for the e [...]ecting of Satan [...]ay [...] ffice.

You slaunder me▪ when [...]ou say, that in disp [...]ss [...]ssion of Sommers pag. 182 we purposely prayed to teach the b [...]olders, that the w [...]rk [...]as [...]ff [...]cted by the onely [...]ower of him t [...] whome w [...] put vp ou [...] pray [...]r. [...]u [...] what is pag. 183. 184. 185it to say you sclander me? You make no more account to sc [...]ander me, then to fillip me. Againe I doe not say, that parties b [...]w [...] [...]hed haue no wa [...]rant from the Scripture t [...] fast & pray [...], (as is apparan [...] in the place by you quoted, where I counsell them to this hol [...] exercise) but only, that ther is not such expresse mention in the word [Page 45] for the curing o [...] the [...], as for parties possessed. And therefore all that is an idle dispute which you purpose for diuers pages together in this matter▪ [...]ou would [...]a [...] haue me a companion in this wicked pag. 186a [...]ertion, which your selues maintain as is apparant afterwards. But note (good reade [...]) fo [...] an egreg [...]ous blasphemy, that these Answerers make t [...]e Lor [...] guiltie of the horrible sins cōmitted by the wicked in s [...]king to the [...]ueil for help in their miseries. For how doe they proue it to be an absur [...]itie to cond [...]mn [...] p [...]oples going to the diuel for helpe? Surely thus, [...] [...]t be a sinne to s [...]eke help of the diuel, we shall make the Lord ginit [...] of this sin w [...]th u [...] whom it can [...]ot be done. Thou [...]eest what blasphemie this proposition cōtaineth▪ for it plainly affor deth that which before I [...]ay▪ And the Conclusion, to wit, it is no [...]nr e to [...]eke [...]elpe of the diuel, is a conclusion of monstrous impiet [...]e. [...]o where they would proue, There is no warrant from the worae for prayer and [...]asting to be vsed in behalfe of parties bewitched, pag. 188.there argument is of this [...]orte. [...]f there be no wa [...]rant [...]rom the word tha [...] sole prayer & [...]asting haue any power of themselues ex opere [...]perato, to r [...]o [...]e [...]upernaturall [...]udgem [...]ts of God, then there is no wa [...]rant for parties b [...] witch [...]d to vse fasting and prayer as h [...]l [...]efull in this [...]ase▪ But the first, say they, is true, & therfore the sec [...]nd. [...]ut what do you sticke at parties bewitched? You should haue inferred generally, there is no warrant nor vse o [...] fasting and prayer at al for any thing ex opere o [...]erato. O men str [...]ken with the blindnes of Sodo [...]e [...]ich before the d [...]re, seek the [...]e, and cannot [...]ind it. Is it your foolishnes, th [...]t you cannot tell what you auouch? Or your shamlesnes, that you [...]as [...]e not t [...]oug [...] you [...] names should be dese [...]uedly odi­ous to all? Or is it, t [...]at you do so far [...]e [...]pise all the learned of this land, that you thinke there [...]s not one man able to di [...]cearne such prod gious falshood [...]uch [...]retched persons would rat [...]er be c [...]n­futed with a three cor [...]ed w [...]ip, the [...] by the writinges, or wordes of any. An [...] if that will not serue, it were [...]eete such order mig [...]t be taken with you t [...]at the Church of God sustaine no damge by you.

pag. 19 [...] Whether I haue so fondly trauersed this question of [...]oss ss [...]o [...] as you sa [...], I lea [...] it to the g [...]dly learned to determine, to whose cen [...]ure I willingl [...] submit my sel [...]e bot [...] in this & in al other m [...] writings But as for your iudgments I passe [...]ot. First make it appea [...]e▪ you haue eyes in your owne heads▪ before [...]ou take vpon you to tel [...] what is straight, or croked in [...]e then [...]anctifie [...]our mouths b [...] c [...]nfessing, your lyes, your sclaunders▪ your blasphemies, before you giue sentence [Page 46] of any my doings. In the mean season, if you will needs be bar king, I will find such a bone for you to gnaw on, as shall bee fit for your chaps,

[...]. 191, 192 [...]93. Concerning the counsell I gaue for fasting and prayer, it was grounded from hence: that in all iudgements (of which kind posses­sion is) we are called to humiliation, for which I cite in the margine an induction of diuers examples. To which you answere first, that with out particular knowledge of the iudgement, prayers could not be made in faith to remoue it: which is one o [...] those Axioms that neuer fails you, such an one as Ahabs prophets were inspired with, whē they counsel led him to warre against Ramoth. Shall not the poore countrey sicke man pray to God for some comfort in his distresse, because he doth not know particularly the nature of his disease? Secondly, that the quoted Scriptures onely testifie the peoples [...]umiliation by pray [...]r and fa­sting, so oft as any strange iudgement was inflicted, but proue not essenti­all p [...]ssessions and disposs [...]ssions by those means. yet they proue the counsell I gaue was warrantable, and this I content my selfe with. It is e­nough if my poore premises afforde mee one naturall and orderly conclusion at one time. Euery mans Cow can not bring forth colts▪ as yours do.

ag. 194. 95, 196. To conclude, you tell vs your great confidence in the cause, which no man needs to doubt of, if he consider your former arrogant bold nesse: nor much maruell at as strange, if he call to minde your vn­credible blindnesse. But if your learning and consc [...]e [...]ce were more, your confidence would be a great deale lesse. Then you in [...]erre of the premises, That if there be no possession, nor dispossession nowe by fa­sting and prayer, how greatly they haue erred that haue auouched it, and how much they are to be blamed which cannot endure it should be impugned: But contrariwise say I, if all these things be true, which you de­nie, as hath beene prooued by stronger reason, then you possibly withstand, what doe [...]ou deserue which haue troubled the Church with newe and singular opinions in these points, and in broaching them, haue offered to the world to choke them withall other verie many grosse, fantasticall and impious absurdities? and yet you dare intitle your fooleries, The infallible truth, and such, as Glory & praise is to be giuen to toe Lord for these his lately reuealed counsels by you con­cerning these intricate questions. O intolerable proud ignorance! Haue you by late reuelation cleared these intricate questions? Indeed your assertions be late▪ for they were neuer heard of in the Church be­fore: but they were neuer reuealed vnto you by the Spirit of truth, [Page 47] but by that lying spirit, whose image doth liuely appeare almost in euery argument you handle. And yet that my selfe be not onely iudge, let any man of vnderstanding waigh with equal balance that litle that hath beene replyed, & compare it with yours, & then giue sentence: whether any since the time of our peace by our gratious Queene, professing the gospell, hath published any writing of diui­nitie that doth come neare these your treatises in number of vn­sound potions, in misconstructions & wrestings of Scriptures, in absured collections, in impudent reiecting the authoritie of the an­cient, in shamelesse pretending the names of good authours against their owne meanings, in childish stumbling in the first rudiments of Arts, in most frequent lying and slaundering, and which is grea­test of all, in dangerous and scandalous assertions mixed with some notorious blasphemies: and then it may be you shall carie the bell of al that haue written in our times. Great cause there is we should all make bonefires for the publishing of your bookes, or rather of your published bookes: but especially M. Bishop, who got the priuiledge ad imprimendum solum, I beleeue he beshrewes your fin­gers for it.

YOur Vses are sutable to your doctrine. For what other thing can proceede from a Cockatrices egge, then a serpent? Yet Ly­canthropus admires and applaudes them: and so perhaps may some 1. Ioh. 2. 27doe, that be not well in their wits. But they which haue receiued the annointing, that teacheth vs concerning all things, will abhorre your prodigious dotage, and the more when they consider your vses, which manifest plainly that your errours be not about strawes and rushes, such as without danger might be contemned and negle­cted, but which draw after them most perillous consequences, mightily shaking the verie foundation, and chiefest pillers of our faith. You pretend that this your doctrine of finall determination of possessi­ons & dispossessions of Spirits and Diuels, affordeth first, an holy medi­tation concerning the vndoubted faithfulnesse and truth of our eternall God, in that he promising four thousand years fully before, to send the seed of a woman, which should bruise the serpents head, hath in his owne de­termined [Page 48] time fulfilled the same, by sending his sonne. We beleeue and know it, that not one iote of the Lordes promise hath failed, but doth your doctrine yeeld any confirmation of it? Nay verily, but doth vtterly ouerthrow it, and make the Lord of truth to haue fal­sified his word. The Lord hath promised by sending his sonne fully to subdue and vanquish Satan: your doctrine doth teach vs, that Christ by his death hath onely made an end of possessions and dis­possessions of diuels, that is, that he hath only deliuered Demoniaks such as were actually tormented in their bodies by the Diuels. What? Are all the Elect Demoniakes? Haue you not taught vs. that Possessions were very rare before Christs time, and that it was verie probable there were none at all in Israel, till a little before his comming, and none after the Apostles? Are only then these men de­liuered by Christs death? You haue quit the Lord indeed wel of his promise. He promised the breaking of Satans head, you make that Christ hath scarce pulled one lock of haire frō his head. He promi­sed deliuerance for al his elect, you restrain this deliuerance only to m enactually possest with diuells. He promised vs a gift [...] as i [...] were of an hundreth thousand talents: you make him to haue satisfied his promise in bestowīg vpon vs an hūdreth pence. Do men satisfy bondes in such manner▪ Doth a Creditor▪ to whome is owing a thousand pound, hold himselfe contented in receauing two or thre shillinges. [...]ye vpon your comfort: you are miserable comforters: But this determination▪ you say, of Satans Actuall possession may confirme faith and hope for the vtter subuersion of the whole kingdom of darknes. I answer, you ly falsly, if your doctrine be true. For hope can expect no more then faith doth presently imbrace, but by your teaching, faith doth not imbrace a ful vanguishing of satans kingdome by Christs death▪ but onely an end of Actual possessions (which neither was accomplished, as hath bene shewed) and therfore hope cannot looke for any further subuersion of Satans kingdome then is alredie. Now let the godly iudge what lyeth hiden in your doctrine, whether they be things to be tolerated, and cooly dealt in or no: or rather of such nature, that if you will not reclaime them, all louers of the truth ought to spit in your faces in detestation of your errours. So likewise when you speak of God his al sufficiencie, of Christs triumph, and of the Diuels captiuitie, who so euer trusts to your doctrine in these poynts, shall perceaue he lea­nes vpon a staffe of reede, which when hee shall stand in neede of it will brea [...]e a sunder▪ and run through his body, as may sufficiently [Page 49] be seene by this little, that I haue nowe remembred, as also by that hath beene more fully declared, in Suruey of your Sixt Dia­logue. your vses then are wretched, and therefore I leaue them.

The proper vse that can be made of your doctrine is, that Christi­ans should now shew their wisedome in practising that rule our Sauiour Christ hath taught them, namely this, beware of salse prophets which come to you in sheepes clothing, but inwardly they are rauening Math. 7. 15 wolues. Thou hast seene in this book of theirs, good Reader, these men professing themselues, The Lord his vnworthiest on earth: In the sub­scription to three of thei [...] Epistles.when they beginne their disputations, to begin the same with pray­er, recreating themselues with singing of psalmes: to wish the Reue­rend brethren if they haue faulted either in matter or mannerto confute them and spare not, withall desiring the blessing of God to light on their hearts for their labour that way: to haue vsed many wordes of Dial. Discou pag. 7 [...]. 262. Epist. Dedi. Ans. goodly pretence, of great obedience to the magistrate, of great care of their brethrens good, of great synceritie in calling euery thing to the triall of the Scripture, and many such other faire shewes. On the other side thou may st see by▪ this Suruey and Reply what abundance of vile and grosse errors is packed vp in these their trea­tises, What litle conscience they make of god his truth▪ Of lying & slandering, how exceedingly they haue trifled in ech seuerall poy­nt, and now by these vses how all tendes to this, to descredit God his truth in fulfilling his promise, to impeach his sufficiency for van quishing of fatan, to restrain Christs triumph to a thing of nothing, to limit Satans captiuitie with loosing of a skonse, and such like: which thinges beeing thus, now it will shortly and easily more ap­peare, whither these men be false prophets, or no▪ Fo [...] if they shal recant themselues of their errours, and as they haue giuen publike scandall to the Church, in labouring to draw men after their fancies, so againe in submission to the truth, disclame all such opinio n dissonant from the sacred word, throwing the first s [...]one at themselues, to the end all other may beware of them, then they shall be manif ested to haue shipped but of infirmi [...]ie, and to be such indeed, as they would seeme. Otherwise if they will still maintaine & defend them, then thou [...]eest good reader, these mens sheepes clothing, and how for thy sake I haue pulled it ouer their eares, whe [...]by thou ma [...]est behold them to be inwardly rauening woules: if they be to be iudged wolues, not only which rent the mē bers of our bodies in sunder, but also & much more they, which by infecting men with pestiferous opinions, deliuer thē to saran to be [Page 50] torne in peeces both bodies and soules▪ In this case it will behooue the Christian Magistrate, both Ciuill & Ecclesiasticall▪ to take order, that such cruel deucuring beasts may be driuen from Christs fold: & that they would consider, that they make not dissensions & scandales contrary to the doctrine we haue learned, which stand for the truth, but they which oppugne the truth. It is the rebell that makes ciuil war: the faithful subiects wepons are not agaīst the peace but for the peace, neither is it the dog barkīg in the night, that disquiets the shepheardes, but the Wolues approching: the kepers stirring is to be commended, & the theues assaulting he is to be defended. This vse then the Magistrate is to make of your doctrine: ge­nerally all the Christians of this land, are to take it as a watchword to auoyd you as Scorpions, that they may know you to be men▪ [...]hil. 3. 19. [...]. Tim. 3. 5. [...]ud. 16.which haue made your bellies your god, & to glory in your shame: which haue a forme of godlynes & haue denied the power of it, whose mouthes speake proude things, hauing the persons of men in admiration for aduantage sake. These manner of men are fortold should come in these last dayes, & our Church doth already feele it by lamentable experience. If thou shalt make this vse, Christian reader [...]. Cor. 11. 19of their booke it shall not bee altogether vnprofitable for thee. For It must needes be that heresies should come, that they which are approued amongst vs may be knowne. The Lord therefore strengthen vs▪so many as be of this number, to stand for his truth, and giue, vs wise dome to discerne those which would craftily vndermine it, that all such wicked workers beeing defeated, wee may constantly walke in the puritie of it, till the day of our Lorde Iesus Christ, to whom, with the father and the holy Spirit be all honour and praise for euer.

Amen.