A Brief ANSWER To Six Syllogistical ARGUMENTS.

IT is a Proverb as true as antient, That the Tale of one side may seem good, till the Truth of the other side appear. But it is but reason in a man to forbear his Censure, until he seriously have considered the Pleas that both produce. For according to that of the Tragoedian of old:

Now for the better information of the Reader, I shall insert the Argu­ments of Mr. Clark at large, and then respond to them; that thereby he may understand the occasion and nature of the Difference, and the Reasons thereof the readier.

• 1 Argum. That which the Word of God condemns as a grand Offence, is not to be practised, countenanced or to­lerated.
• But Divining by the Stars is condemn­ed by Gods Word.
• Ergo.

Answ. I answer, by denying the Minor: My Reason hereof, is, (by ad­ding a Negative to the Assumption) Divining by the Stars is not condemned by Gods word.

• If Divining by the Stars (to use the Phrase of our Antagonist) were condemned by Gods Word, we should find it therein condemned.
• But therein it is not to be found con­demned.
• Ergo, it is not condemned by it at all.

That it is not condemned by it all, will most clearly appear, upon the Exa­mination of the Catalogue of Scriptures Mr. Clark citeth in favour of his Minor Proposition, viz.

1. He urgeth Deut. 18.10, 11. But in this Text is not Astrology so much as once concerned; as the learned Adye hath largely and learnedly proved, in his Candle in the dark; a Book of singular worth, and worthy the perusal of all sorts of persons. Suppose some persons out of their hatred to Astrologers and Astrologie, have turned Megnonen, (the Hebrew word there used) Planetarius; yet persons thereby signifi'd are not such that lawfully study or use the Science of Astrologie, but such as abuse it. And were I now disposed, it were an easie matter to bring Mr. Cl. within the com­pass of the word in that Text; yet he would be very loath to be termed a Pla­netarian; although he hath abused A­strologie and Astrologers, not a little.

But, Abusus non tollit usum. The a­buse of a thing doth not abrogate or im­peach the lawful use thereof.

If some persons under pretence of Divining by the Stars, abuse not onely themselves, but others, shall the honest and laudable use thereof be therefore re­jected? If an impudent ignorant fel­low shall profanely pretend to Pulpit it, and boast a gift therein above Mr. Cl. would Mr. Cl. (I wonder) judge me rea­sonable, if I thereby should take occasi­on to blast the credit of (what my Soul rejoyces in) Divinity? If Mr. Cl. prove his Argument no better by his other Texts in the Catologue, then he hath by this, we shall easily conclude him inca­pable of doing it at all.

To trip at the Threshold, is (by old Sawes) pronounced to be a bad signe, and to bode but small good. Principiis omen inesse—solet. Beginnings are deemed ominous. Isidore affirms, Pel. l. 2. Epist. [Page 87]229. [...]. (i.) He that in the be­ginning swerveth from the truth, will in his proceedings, roll further from it, and end at last with some shameful Catastro­phe or other. Mr. Cl. therefore failing thus in the first Scripture he citeth, pre­sages or predicts (though he be no A­strologer) how much of substantial proof we may expect to find in the rest, that he musters up for his purpose.

The second Text he hits at the poor Astrologers head, is Lev. 20.6. which (in truth) favours him no more then the for­mer, unless he can prove an Astrologer and a Witch to be all one. The Word in the Text (which he most insisteth on) is Ariolos, which implies the impostu­risme of an hollow feigned voice (and not any thing of Astrolgie, as Mr. Clark would bear the world in hand) that Witches and Deceivers used in their Oracling Divinations, by harring in their Throats. Vide Adyes Candle, &c. pag. 77. and Plut. de Def. Orac. I hope Mr. Cl. will not say, That any man practising Astrology, Quatenus an Astrologer, u­seth [Page 88]any such practice: the which un­less he do, this Scripture favoureth him no more then the first he brought.

The third-Text he cites is Isa. 2.6. But this no more proveth the truth of his Argument, then the worth of the Turks Alcoran. I admit that he findes Praesti­giatores in the Text, which he corruptly translates Soothsayers; forgetting (the mean while) that the word properly in­terpreted, signifies Juglers, viz. such as deceive by cunning or sleight of hand. But doth not Mr. C. adde rather to the honour of Astrologers, then any way de-detract therefrom, when he stiles them Soothsayers? or doth he believe that Soothsaying imports any other thing then the speaking of truth? You see here how officious M. C. is, to make that speak against Astrologers, which hath neither tongue, nor will, to do so.

The fourth Text is, Isa. 47.13, 14. where, in the Original, that, which Mr. Cl. turns Astrologers, is, Viewers of the Heavens. But we know, that there are others that view the Heavens beside Astrologers, viz. Astronomers, Naviga­tors, Natural Philosophers, Shepherds, &c. But there is in this Text another Bug-bear, that affrights Mr. Clark, viz. Monthly Prognosticators. The Hebrew saith,—That give knowledge concern­ing the Months. But I would demand of Mr. Cl. whether it be unlawful to make a Prognostication, to set down therein, according to the common course of Nature, what is most considerable in the whole yeer? It is clearly evident by this Text, that the Prophet blameth not those that view the Heavens, or study the Stars, and thence give knowledge concerning the months; but reprehen­ded such as were abusers of these Studies, & those that used to exalt the Stars, &c. above, or at least endeavoured to make them equal Causes with Him, whom Divines call Causa Causarum, (and all good Christians acknowledge Him so to be) the Cause of all Causes, even GOD [Page 90]Himself. But I have before shewed, that the abuse of a thing is no good Ar­gument to abrogate the use thereof. Is it good or reasonable to say, That the profession of Physick is unlawful, because some Quacks, by an impudent practising it, do abuse and dishonour that commen­dable Science?

His fifth Text in Order, for the sup­port of this halting Minor, is, Jer. 10.2. But the learned Dr. Mayer, in his Com­mentary upon that Text, professeth that Astrologie or Astrologers are not so much as once meant by the Prophet. It had been therefore requisite for Mr. Cl. to have refuted that learned Divine, be­fore he had obtruded his own Gloss thereon, upon the world, for currant and authentick. But lest Mr. Cl. should cavil at Dr. Mayers authority (being but a single Person) I shall instance to him in some others, who seal the same Opini­on with this learned Doctor, viz. St. Hie­rom, Lyra, &c. as is at large to be seen by their Commentaries on the place it self: and for further satisfaction of such as have not the opportunity of rea­ding such Volumes, I refer them to the [Page 91]excellent Work of that incomparably learned Knight, Sir Christopher Heydon, viz. His Defence of Astrologie, fol. 25, 26.

The sixth Text he brings to keep his Minor from falling, is, Isa. 44.25. which friends it no more then any of the other five. For unless Mr. Cl. can prove, that true Astrologie hath in it any lying To­kens, that any lying Tokens are grounds in the said Art or Science, it serves his purpose no more then if he had brought in the room of it, that Text in Eccl. 22.12. Seven dayes do men mourn for him that is dead; but the Lamentation for the fool and ungodly should endure all the days of their life. It was a saying of Anti­philus, — [...], That Confidence was a good Sea-Captain. I am sure 'tis an ill Logician in Mr. Cl. un­less he had more probable truth on his side.

The seventh Scripture-Text Mr. C. undersets his Minor with, is, Dan. 2.2. which is of the same stamp for his pur­pose, with all the rest before cited. For the Hebrew word, which is there ren­dered Astrologers, (if we may credit the [Page 92]learned Shindler) signifies a Philosopher, an Astronomer and Physitian. Rabbi Abraham (as saith the learned Mr. Reeve) expounds it so likewise. And A­venarius observeth, that [...], wise, a­greeth to the same. Now then if to be a Philosopher, &c. be an evil, Mr. Cl. may make the more of this Text: but surely he cannot be so weak as to offer at such a monstrous conclusion.

The eighth and last Text he hales in, to the assistance of his Position, is Act. 19.18, 19, 20. which Scripture is as lit­tle beholding to him as any of the rest, for their being brought to so little pur­pose. If Mr. Cl. cannot prove, that a­mong the curious Arts there mentioned, —True Astrologie was one (and that I am sure he will never be able to do) then is his citing of this text vain and frivolous.

Thus you see the Mountain of Scrip­ture-proofs (which he had mustered up in a catologue, presuming Astrology there­in to be condemned) vanished in a mo­ment: and Divining by the Stars, we have plainly shewn, is not condemned by Gods word, (which his Minor Propo­sition [Page 93]insinuates) neither is it in it self unlawful, notwithstanding all the pains he hath taken to prove it so.

If this will not yet put him out of doubt, let him but peruse the Church-Bible, printed Ann. 1540. where he may see (if he be not blinded with partiality and prejudice) that there is not any the least mention made of either the words Astrologer or Astrologie; so far was the Holy Ghost from condemning either! nay, the very words rendered Astrolo­gers, and Astrologie, are in sundry other Translations otherwise interpreted. And so I pass from M. Clark's first Argument. I shall be briefer in the rest, having an­swered his Scriptures here already.

• 2 Argum. That Art whereby men as­sume to themselves what is peculiar unto God, must needs be sinful, nei­ther to be practised, countenanced nor tolerated.
• But this is done by such as take upon them to Divine of Events to Persons and Nations by the Stars.
• Therefore.

Resp. I respond, by denying the Mi­nor.

• For, those that predict from the Stars, as remote and second Causes, in­termeddle not with Gods Pecu­liar.
• But Astrologers do so, and Astrolo­gie teacheth them not otherwise.
• Therefore.

The Major needs no proof, as carry­ing so full a Demonstration of Truth in the face of it. The Minor is sufficient­ly proved by the writings of all Astrolo­gers: but in particular, I shall refer you to the learned Sir Christopher Heydon, fol. 400. He (saith this learned Knight) which seeketh God in his Glory, shall be oppressed with his Majesty. There is no­thing past or to come, with him, but all things are present unto him, as they depend upon his divine fore-ordinance, and pre­science of all things that happen in the world, out of their causes. But as it hath pleased him to govern the ordinary course of Nature, by His SECOND CAUSES, and in THEM to reveal what he hath from Eternity appointed to effect by them; to know this, is not to enter into his secret [Page 95]Judgement, (or peculiar) but more ef­fectually to judge, admire and contemplate the incomprehensible providence of the Al­mighty; that hath thus coupled the Or­der of Causes with his own most free and Omnipotent Will, &c. 2. Take the Au­thority of Hermes, who in the beginning of his Centiloqui, affirms,—Sol & Luna, post Deum, Omnium viventium vita sunt. That the Sun and Moon, next unto GOD, are the Life of all Things li­ving. Thus you see that Astrologers meddle not with Gods secrets; nor with the Luminaries or Stars at all, but by giving place to the Majesty of the Al­mighty God in the first, and then they consider their Natural significations as second Causes, as they are endued with Energie from God.

• 3 Argum. That which draws the heart from God the Father, and Christ the Son, from considering the Works of the One, and heeding the Words of the Other, is an Evil not to be peacti­sed, countenanced or tolerated.
• But Astrological Predictions draw from God and Christ.
• Therefore, &c.

Answ. I answer, —

Astrological Predictions are so far from drawing from God and Christ, that they adde very much to the honour of Both: The Heavens declare the Glory of God, (saith Holy David) Psal. 19.1. The invisible power of the Deity is clearly seen by the things that are made, saith the ho­ly Apostle, Rom. 1.20. The Learned Ptolomy in the beginning of his Alma­gest, affirms—Hanc unam Scientiam esse viam ac semitam, ad sciendum Deum Al­tissimum. This one Science is the one­ly Way, and Path, to know the most HIGH GOD.

Whence I argue:

If Astrologie leads to the knowledge of the most High God, or declares the power of the Deity, it certain­ly cannot be thought (by any but Mr. Cl.) to draw from GOD and Christ.

That Astrologie doth so, is conspicu­ously proved, both by the Prophet, Apostle, and Ptolomy.

The learned Mr. Caryl, is so far from branding Astrologie for drawing from God or Christ, that in Vol. 3. fol. 221. he avers, It is our Duty to study the Hea­vens, and to be acquainted with the Stars. I will leave Mr. C. therefore to repent of this Minor, and proceed.

• 4 Argum. That which is false, delusive and uncertain, is not to be practised, countenanced or tolerated.
• But such is fore-telling things by the Stars.
• Therefore, &c.

Resp. I deny the Minor, (for it is no kin to the truth at all) and argue against it, thus:

• If fore-telling by the Stars were false, delusive and uncertain, the Fates of particular Persons, the variety of Seasons, great Droughts, Sick­nesses, Peace, Wars, Plenty or Scar­city, were not to be certainly pre­dicted.
• [Page 98]But these things are certainly to be foretold by the Aspects and Positi­ons of the Stars.
• Ergo, foretelling by the Stars is not false, delusive, and uncertain; but certain, real and true.

Lucius Bellantius foretold the Death of Picus Mirandula, that great Anta­gonist to Astrologie; who while he was writing against that Art, his own Death concurring, evinced it to be true, with­out further Argument. Zonarus re­ports that Julians death was foreseen to a day. Gauricus forewarned Henry the Second, of France, of the 41 year of his age; and in the same year that Fa­mous King died. Spurina forewarns Caesar of the Ides of March, and Caesar was then slain in the Senate-House: upon which the Ingenious Poet, Tho. Pecke, Esq; thus Elegantly versifies. Viz.

The Emperor Vitellius assign'd a day for Astrologers to depart Rome; they assigned him another, for his pasport out of the world; as is recorded by Sir Christ. Heydon: and he then dyed.

Then for general Things, or acci­dents, let it be remembred, that Thales foretold a plenty of Olives, and enrich­ed himself thereby. Democritus and Se­stius presaged a dearth of Olives, as is witnessed by Pliny. Regiomantanus predicted the great Changes that hap­pened in 1588. long before the year came. Hippocrates foretold a Plague, by Astrologie. Mr. Booker predicted the fate of the Irish exactly in 1646. and the Bellum Episcopale that happened in England also in 1639. and 1640. which Episcopal War, was the [...] to all our English Miseries. Nay, I could make it appear, that not only acci­dents on earth may (by Astrologie) be presaged, but in Heaven also; As was [Page 100]the Comet, or Stella Crinita in December. 1652. by my learned and loving Friend Mr. Joshua Childrey; and this three Moneths before it happened. See his Sygiast, Instaur. 1653.

This therfore may serve for a suffici­ent Refutation of the Error and Preju­dice (I was about to say, Ignorance) in Mt. Clarks fourth Argument.

• 5. Argum. That which nourisheth vain, and forbidden hopes and fears, is not to be practised, countenanced, or to­lerated.
• But so do Astrological Predictions.
• Therefore, &c.

Answ. I answer, by denying the Mi­nor: For Astrological Predictions do not nourish (or cherish) vain and for­bidden hopes and fears, but rather forti­sies mens minds against them. The Text, viz. Jer. 10. which Mr. C. cites to sup­port his Minor, I have before proved, hath nothing at all to do with, either Astrologie, or Astrological Predictions; so that you see it proves nothing of the Minor in question. However, I Anti-Argue.

• The Art which draws men to a Con­sideration of the wonderful works of God, doth not nourish vain or forbidden fears.
• But Astrologie, and Astrological Pre­dictions, do so.
• Ergo, &c.

That Astrologie draws men to the Consideration of the wonderful works of God, is proved in the answer to the third Argument, both from Scripture-Authority, and Reason. Thus much therefore may serve for a Refutation of his fifth Argument.

• 6 Argum. That which most godly and learned men upon experience have re­nounced, and repented of, that is nei­ther to be practised, countenanced or tolerated.
• But godly men have renounced and re­pented of their studie of Astrologie.
• Therefore, &c.

Resp. I answer by denying the Major.

• If General Councils may erre, then surely particular persons, though never so godly or holy.
• [Page 102]Sed verum prius.
• Engo & posterius.

There is no man dare assume the E­pithet of infallibility on earth; neither do I believe that any of those whom Mr. Clark stiles most godly and learned, would have so done, had they been with him at the framing of his Argument.

The word most, in his Argument, must be understood, either as a note of num­ber, or of excellency, and transcendency of knowledge and ability, to discern and distinguish. If of Number, I shall be able to out-vote him; for he hath na­med but three, viz. St. Augustine, Per­kins, and Mr. Briggs. If of Excellency, &c. I presume he hath made as ill a choyce as could be. For St. Augustine (although a learned man) was to seek in many things, and consequently was subject to errour; witness his stiff opi­nion against Antipodes, (which clearly declares him ignorant of Astrologie, and his censure therefore the less to be re­garded) and (2.) his approbative relati­on of a Monstrous great Tooth, proves him to be a person very credulous; and therefore the less to be heeded in his Judicial Censures.

Mr. Perkius never understood Astro­logie; and is therefore no competent Judge thereof. I grant he studyed it, but never attained the excellency of it; and that was the reason of his quarrelling thereat. The Fox in Aesop blamed the Grapes for being too high; but the fault was in his dwarfish Stature.

Mr. Briggs was (indeed) an eminent Mathematician, and therefore the most comperent of the three to judge of the Controversie. But a man may be a good Mathematician, and yet no good Astro­loger. I illustrate it thus: Mr. Clarke may be a good Divine, yet no good Ca­suist. He may be a good Divine, yet nor grounded in the universal point. A te, & à Scientia. Every man is not born to one kind of inclination: if all were excellent in one thing, many things both useful and worthy, might by that means come to be neglected. It is in Philo­sophy and the Mathematicks, as in Di­vinity; there are several parts in them, fit for the several persons that study them. But, — ‘Unto our Story let us turn our Tide,’

And draw toward a Conclusion. I [Page 104]assert in opposition to Mr. Clarke, —

• That which most godly and learned men upon experience have commended to the world, as worthy, laudable, and useful, ought to be countenanced, pra­ctised, and tolerated.
• But most godly and learned men have so commended the Science of Astro­logie.
• Ergo, &c.

The Major no man (that is in his sen­ces) will offer once to deny. The Mi­nor I fortifie thus. The Patriarchs them­selves studyed Astrologie, and thereby commended the same to the world as worthy. Josephus tells us that Abraham did not onely study, but taught the Ae­gyptians this Art. Isaac is said to have studied the Heavens, when he went into the field to meditate. Upon which the learned Mr. Caryl saith, It is good to take field-room sometimes to contemplate the Works of GOD. Jacob (saith Ori­gen) read in the Tables of Heaven, what ever things should in futuro, befal his Generation. Ergo, godly and learned [Page 105]men have commended and studied this heavenly and praise-worthy Science.

What I here have done, I profess is out of no prejudice to Mr. Clark, either as he is a Man, or Minister; but for a proper and plain discovery of the truth; after which the souls of many thousands (besides his and mine) earnestly thirst: and in this I hope some satisfaction will appear, as well to him as others.

Gassendus's Arguments Against ASTROLOGIE, answered.

PAge 66. How many Apertiones Porta­rum, not onely in every year, but also in every week, nay, day? O foelicem Ar­tem si desa Soli judicarent artificus! But here Mounsieur Gassendus his Epianogass Caudo Charl. Translators shewed they were none; and not onely ignorant of the Nature, but of the time and terms of things. They knew neither what Apertiones Portarum were, nor when they happen: they do certainly appre­hend there are Flood-gates and Sluces in Heaven, from whence water is poured down by Buckets full. Thus those that say Astrologers Axiomes are Arbitrary and Imaginary, that there are no such things in Nature as Aspects, do imagine [Page 119]the vainest Phantosmes and Chimaera's in the world; for I would fain know of them, what Apertiones Portarum those are every day: but they cannot tell. In­deed, the Astrologers tell us, what A­pertiones Portarum are; the Geometer al Positions or Distances of those Planets whose Houses are opposite, which are not so frequent as they imagine: for be­sides those of the Moon and Saturn, sometimes there happen none six weeks or two moneths together; and then those of the prodigious or superiour Planets, are more powerful to operate on these Terrestrial Bodies; but those of the inferiour, less considerable, as ex­perience doth sufficiently testifie to any, but those that are not to be perswaded, though they are convinced; and though they see, will not understand.

I think no man can be so unreason­able, as to suppose that any one will be so irrational, as to justifie all the Pleas of Astrologers, that many times might accept (like Gassendus) of some things to be Causes, that are not so; and Gassendus himself, or his learned Translator and Transcriber, who desire that their Cock­brain'd [Page 120]Disciples should always Jurare in Verba Magistra, and justifie their ri­diculous impertinences in all the idle follies of this Book, and others of their Philosophy. — But to answer his Question by another: (Why Mars should not rather repress and abate, then extimu­late and highten Watry Influence of the Pleiades; and the Moon, Mercury and Ve­nus, rather excite and encrease it?) We demand why Water poured into Water, and Fire put into Fire, do not produce more dissentaneous effects, then each o­ther confronted with its Antagonists? or because Gassendus his Ape is perhaps a more famous Physitian then a Philoso­pher, having been Leech, as he professes, to the late King (which he may as law­fully pretend to, as any quacking Chirur­geon that followed any of his ragged Re­giments) we ask why twenty Grains of Diagredium does not restrain a Diar­rhaea, more then Milk, being hot and dry, the other cool and moist? So I see no reason why Mars may not cause Showres by Antipathy and Dissimilitude of Natures, being in Conjunction with the Pleiades, & yet not lose his own Ver­tue [Page 121]of heat; for we see, if he meet with any considerable Aspect at that time, he produces often Thunder, Lightning and Rain, an effect of both Natures: for great Mutations and Disturbances of the Air, may as well be caused by Antipathy as Sympathy; and Mars may as well cause Rain as Saturn, though not upon the same reason, as well as a Flux proceed from Choler as Flegme; or why his Worship hath given a Purge, that works more then his little prescience could foresee, or perhaps his prescription pre­vent.

But whereas he talks, That there is variety of weather upon the same Aspects in England and France: I answer, That the Stars operate in every Country ac­cording to the variety and Nature of the Clymate; for the same effect is not like to proceed from the Conjunction of Saturn and Sol in Aegypt, that does in England; for to predict Rain there, where is but little or seldom any, (from the Nature of the Solum as well as Coe­lum) were ridiculous: but where there is Conjunction of Saturn & Sol, and great store of Rain in England, I aver that it [Page 122]shall be colder in Egypt, much more then ordinary, at the same time; and so in e­very Country, according to its Nature, the Planets have their effects, accord­ing to that not more trite then true say­ing, The Sun hardens Clay, and softens Wax.

Pag. 126. But to shew more and more his skill, or rather his ignorance in Astro­logie, he goes on, and says, Nor are we to say such an Infant was born infected with a foul and contageous Disease, because the sixth house was his Horoscope, but because his Mothers lower house was impure and infectious.

Is this the famous Gassendus! the Scribbler of those Voluminous Atomes! how many impertinences are those Vo­lumns stuffed with, when these few Pages are nothing else but a Dunghil of those Vanities that he hath raked up to throw in the Faces of the Astrologers, and the wind blows back into his own. Is this that famous Astronomer, that pretends to have made so many Obser­vations? this very passage shews his ig­norance and impudence, and makes it apparent to all men, that he is but a [Page 123]meer Impostor, and goes about to delude the world with the opinion of his gene­ral learning, and great skill in Astrono­my; when as it is more clear then the light of those glorious bodies, (whose Vertue he would obscure) that he under­stands nothing in that Divine Study, but that by some chance he stumbled upon those Observations he hath published to the world as his own: for could any man that understands the Astronomy of the Primum Mobile, or indeed sence, say, That the sixth house was the Horo­scope? Where is the Sagacity of the Probastical Translator, that leaves out, and puts in what he pleases? VVas it possible that thou couldest be trap­pan'd by Gassendus, in these Fooleries? couldst thou be over-reached by one in thine own Trade? but the truth is, there was nothing (next to their ignorance) that brought in this gross conceit, but onely that witty quibbling (as they thought it) upon the Houses, The sixth House and the lower House; and it was a witty one indeed, and well became the mouth of a Church-man, and the Ob­scenity of such an Epicure, as the person [Page 124]of Quality. But to help the lame Dog over the stile, we will suppose they mean as they say, that the Stars are not causes of the Contagious Disease of a Child, nor of their ill or good Disposition; but the Complexion of their seed, their diet and course of life, &c. But if that were the cause, why are many Children pollu­ted and sickly, whose Parents are very sound; and many Children are very healthful and strong, whose Parents are sickly? And of this there are examples in every Family. If these things were true, that Children were like their Pa­rents, why was not Rehoboam as wise as Solomon; Hezekiah as wicked as Ahaz, or Manasseh as righteous as his Father? Was ever a more licentious Prince then K. Harry, or a more vertuous then his Son K. Edward? But it is consen­taneous with the Doctrine of Epicuro Gassendus, to ascribe more to good Chear, then to the Stars; and to the pleasing of his Palate, then unto the Heavens. Now I see whence persons of quality proceed, from a polluted lower house, which makes a corrupted upper house; and that vents all these rotten Reasons: but [Page 125]yet we deny not but that many times the Child is like the Parents: which pro­ceeds from the similitude and harmony of Genitures, and not from the dyet. Al­so, that the Mothers lower house adds much thereunto, provided it is like Ma­dam Youngs, alias Madissons, Sir Pauls Ladies, Madam Drunkards, all the Trans­lators Friends and Acquaintance.

But that you may see the Reasons of the rottenness of Gassendus his upper house and lower house, I will adjoyn his Geniture, given from himself to Mori­nus.

Here you may see the Malignant Pla­nets Saturn and Mars, have the chief Dominion in his Scheme; Saturn is the Lord of his Horoscope, (considering his Latitude, falling into the sixth house, though the sixth house be not his Horo­scope) Peregrine, Retrograde, in his De­triment, and unfortunate in Cancer; which made his Lungs much oppressed with Phlegme rotten and corrupt, of an ill habit of body, very sickly, subject to Catarrhes, &c. That for manners, Saturn in Quartile with Mars, both in the same Aspect with the Ascendent, made [Page 126]him of an evil disposition; envious, sus­pitious, revengeful; angry, peevish, con­tentious, in jurious, frandulent; a Lyar, a Calumniator, an Impostor; covetous; a Robber of other Mens Honour; a false Friend; a pirfidious Traytor; a notorious Hypocrite; an Atheist; and to say no worse of him than he does of Mr. Des Cartes, though unjustly, a Toad swelled with Pride and mali­cious Venome, as you may see in that Book against de Cartes, and others of his Works.

As he had Mercury in Sextile to Mars, and the house of Saturn; so had he a wit apt enough for mischiefs, quarrels and contentions; sharp in disputations: as in Quartile to the Moon, so was it turbulent enough; and had Mercury not applyed to a Sextile of Jupiter also, he had been so ill natured, that he had not been sociable: but that good Aspect gave him so much wit, as hypocritically to dissemble it, and cloak it under Zeal to Religion, and make that seem the se­verity of his Devotion, that was the mo­roseness of his Nature.

But if we go further, we shall finde it [Page 127]agree with the Accidents of his life, as well as his Disposition.

About the time the Medium Coeli was directed to the Sextile of the Moon, we finde he had a Journey into Holland.

When the Sun was directed to the Trine of Jupiter, he was made Praepositus Diniensis; where for the most part he was non-Resident.

During the effects of the Sun to the Trine of Venus, and the Mid-heaven to Venus, he was made Mathematical Pro­fessor. Upon the Direction of the Moon to the Quartile of Mars, he had an In­flammation of the Lungs. Which also returned upon him again, when the Horo­scope was directed to the body of ♂, and after to the Quartile of ♄; which pro­duced a Consumption: in which Disease his Physitians (just such as his Transla­tor) being over-free of his blood, at threescore and three, brought him to that excessive weakness, that he never reco­vered, and dyed whining, that his too much obsequiousness to their prescripti­ons, had snatcht him out of the world in viridi senectute. Take his Friend Bo­rellus Relation, and his own words, Obs. [Page 128]xi. Cent. 3. Possem hic viri semper lugendi mortem dolorosam toti Europae, imo mun­do recensere, nimio illo remedio, sanguineo, & verba ab ejus ore deprompta referre quibus ante obitum fassus est se nimio ob­sequio periisse, & cum heroe suo ad inferos cum viridi adhuc & stante senectute descendisse: by which you may perceive, that though a Church-man, he was very unwilling to leave this Terrestrial Para­dise for one that was uncertain: And by his words indeed, I do not find he had much hopes of it.

Another thing I must desire you take notice of, that it is as possible to be kill'd as dead with a Launcet as a Poniard; and that he had some signification of vio­lence in his Nativity: for the Lord of his Ascendent is in Quartile to Mars, and both behold the Ascendent with e­vil Aspect: and whoever hath that Po­sition, I advise him to beware of such a Physitian as Mr. Doctor.