The first Aduertisement; Against a false Proposition of the Romanists, who make the vse of Miracles to be a perpetuall and ne­cessarie note of the Catholike Church.

THe Proposition much insisted vpon and pres­sed by Bellarmine, Coster, Valentian, and other Iesuites, is, that the vse of Miracles is a necessarie, per­petuall, and prositable Character and Note of the true Church of Christ, aswell in these Times as it was in the Dayes of the Apostles. This we are warranted to call a false Proposition. First, because that Gift cannot bee called perpetuall, which ceased by little and little; Chrysost. Aug. insomuch that Saint Chrysostome and Saint Augustine, could say of their owne times (which bordered neare vpon the Dayes of the Pri­mitiue Church) that diuers kind of Apostolicall Miracles were then ceased. How much lesse there­fore can this Power bee expected in these latter Times, of which the Romanists owne Bishop (who Rued in the dayes of King Henry the eight, and whom they haue magnified with the Title of a Martyr, that is, a Witnesse of the Truth) did auouch, saying, Ich. Roffens. E­piscop. cor. Luth. de Capt. Bab. c. 10. The promise of God touching Miracles, God would not haue to be perpetuall in his Church.

Secondly, if they were necessarie (especially) for the confirmation of the Doctrines of Faith, as the Romish Priests doe in their Exorcismes professe; then would not S. Gregorie, the first and grea­test Pope of that name, haue held them necessarie onely for the first begetting, breeding, and nour­cing [Page 3]of the Church: Greg. hom. 49. in Euang. Euen as (saith he) the watering of plants is necessary, when they are first planted, which, after they be come to growth, will be of no vse. Which sentence of S. Gregorie, did peraduenture draw the like Assertion from the quill of the Iesuit Del­rio, Delrio Ics. Disq. Mag. Tem. 2. l. 4. saying (although somewhat mincing it) For the establishing of the Faith, there is now little necessitie of Miracles, or none at all. But more thorrowly their said Bishop, who holdeth them not necessarie, but for the time of the birth and breeding of the Church. Roffens. sup. Whereunto (to forbeare any further search after Witnesses) their Iesuit Acosta accordeth; Acosta Ies. de sa­lut. Iudor. l. 2. c. [...] There being a difference (saith he) betweene the primitiue Times and these Dayes wherein we liue, for what need we any confirmation by Miracles? So he.

Thirdly, touching the profitablenesse of Miratles in the latter Ages of the World, Saint Chrysostome durst say, that it is more profitable to want them; Chrysost. as hee is alleaged by Acosta. ibid. c. 2. it being a matter of greater worthinesse to beleeue with­out them. Yea, their owne Preacher, entring into this contemplation, taught publikely, Stella in Lue. 11 that Miracles now would be rather an hindrance vnto Faith. And I cannot beleeue he spake without booke, seeing that our Sauiour Christ (as Saint Augustine obser­ueth) hath giuen vs a caution, Aug. Tract. 13. in loh. 3. against these Miracle­mongers, Mar. 13.5. willing vs to take heede that we be not decei­ued. Whereof their Iesuit will giue vs some reason, euen, Acosta Ies. de temp. nouiss. l. 2. c. 19. Because that in the time of Antichrist it will bee hard to discerne true Miracles from false. Where then shall a Christian cast Anchor in so great dan­ger of seducement by Antichristian Miracles? the true answere to this will giue vs full satisfaction; [Page 4]and this wee haue confessed by the mouth of the same Iesuit, as absolutely as any Protestant can professe. Acosla ibid. l. 1. cap. 10. Our strongest hold (saith he) must be the holy Scriptures, which are of more strength than any Miracles: nor can the Seruant of Christ haue a stron­ger Fort against the power of Antichrist. Which Tenet, concerning the securitie of Christians by Scriptures, was anciently held before the dayes of Antichrist, as we reade in the ancient Authour of the worke, passing vnder the name of S. Chryso­stome: Hom. 49. in Matth. True Christians (saith hee) were discerned in former times by Miracles, but now by Scriptures. This is the Fort which will defend vs, and therefore we aboue all things ought to defend it.

The second Aduertisement; Shewing the false Assumption of the Romanists, in challenging to themselues the power of Miracles, as a perpetuall gift peculiarly belonging to their Ro­mane Church.

ALthough the Iesuit Turselline talketh and boa­steth of many maruelous Miracles, daily done in Italy, Hist. Domus Lauret. Which (as he saith) are no lesse glorious than those miracles in the dayes of old: yet doubt we not to call this Assumption a meerely vaine presumpti­on. For if wee require them to shew vs in their Church the power of Prophecie, they might take (I thinke) a Lanterne to seeke thorowout all Italy, and not find any one whom they can point out to [Page 5]bee professedly a Prophet. If we inquire after the gift of Tongues, to speake strange languages, where can they shew this? Miracles (saith the Apostle) are for vnbeleeuers, or Infidels: 1. Cor. 14.22. and no Miracle more necessarie for the conuersion of Infidels in the Indies than to be able to speak the languages of those Na­tions, because Faith commeth by hearing, Rom. 10.17. 1. Cor. 14. and hea­ring of a knowne language. Yet wee know that the Priests, who daily labour for the conuersion of those Infidels, confesse that they are glad to labour and studie Moneths and Yeares, to learne the lan­guages of those Countries.

But, to speake more generally, How can this be said to be a perpetuall Badge of the Roman Church, whereof a famous Bishop (liuing but about foure­score yeares since) being posed by Luther, to shew in all Europe where there was any that could pro­fesse himself endowed with that Gift; answered plainly, Roffens. in Luth. de Capt. Babyl. cap. 11. and without any Parable (speaking of the power of Miracles) Cuius (saith he) effectum nunc nullum cernimus: Whereof wee see no effect in our dayes.

When wee further insist, and aske, concerning this great signe of the ordinarie worke of Miracles, where this Starre doth appeare? surely, not at their Ierusalem, the Citie of Rome; nor yet in Europe, their Iurie, for they send vs to seeke it in the new­found World, in the conuersion of Pagans; pro­fessing (as it may seeme) and that iustly with their Espencaeus, Espen. in 2. Tim. 3 that Miracles are no where necessarie, but among Infidels. Here then, if any where, we are to seeke it, to wit, in the Indies; where behold Bel­larmine, [Page 6]and their other Magi doe see it rising (as it were) in the East-Indies, and setting in the West-Indies. No question therefore, but wee are like to find it in those Indies; that which is their ordinarie Assumption.

For confutation whereof we need not to trauell so farre, to trie this; two famous Iesuites, who haue beene most conuersant there, and taken (as is said) most paines for the conuerting of Infidels to the Faith of Christ, come vnto vs by their Bookes, and tell vs, the one, that this Assumption is false, the o­ther, though auouched by them, yet not saying that it is true. For of the East Indies, their Iesuit Acosta saith asseuerantly; Acosta Ics. de salute Indor. l. 4. Prodigia nulla facimus, signa nulla edimus: We worke no Wonders, we shew no Miracles. In the West Indies, who more resident than their Iesuite Xauier, whom they report to haue beene their Thaumaturgus, Ballar. l. 4. de Not is Eccles. c. 14. and to haue bealed lame, dumbe, deafe, blind, yea and to haue raised the dead to life. Notwithstanding, when wee consult with Francis Xauier himselfe, in his Volume of E­pislles, directed vnto the Fathers of his owne Socie­tie, vnto Cardinals, and others of best esteeme; hee maketh no mention there of these miraculous works. Which wee doubt not but hee would haue done, if any such Acts had beene wrought. For we may not thinke that Iesuites would professe more modestie, in this kind, than the holy Apostles of Christ, who, to the glorie of God, and comfort of his Church, did professe to reueale and report (speaking of their Miracles) Magnalia Dei; The wondrous works of God. Act. 2.11. Therefore we take this his [Page 7]not verifying the report of his Miracles, so com­monly suggested, and so greedily intertayned by o­thers, to amount to no lesse than the deniall of them to be true.

Let me adde vnto Francis Xauier their Francis de Victoria, Professor of Diuinitie in Spaine, Fra. de Vict. Re­lect. 5. sect. 2. who dis­cussing this great point, whether that the Doctrine of Christ were so sufficiently reuealed vnto the Infi­dels of these times, by Word, or Miracles, that they, which would not bee conuerted, mightiustly bee condemned of so vnpardonable obstinacie, as to deserue to bee persecuted by Sword; after his deli­berate and earnest search to satisfie himselfe and o­thers in this, answereth (concerning Miracles) Signa nulla audio: I heare of no Miracles.

The third Aduertisement; Shewing that it hath beene a custome among Romish Priests, willingly to deceiue the people by counterfeit Acts and Reports.

HOw shall this bee newes to Any, who hath beene acquainted with some of their owne Au­thors? One confessing, Lyrain Dam. that People are deceiued by false miracles, deuised by Priests, and such as adhere vnto them. A second, Melchior Canus loc. Theol. remembring (as hee himselfe saith) with griefe some Historians, abusing the credu­litie of the people, by relating the miracles of Saints. A third inueighing against the prodigalitie of some vaine Reports of false miracles. A fourth, Eras. ante lib. Consess. Aug. and also a [Page 8]fift partly scorning, Agrippa de Ʋa­nit. scient. Ʋiucs in Aug. de Ciuit. Dei, l. 22. c. 8. and partly abborring their fa­bulous relations, and vaine forgeries of Miracles. These confessions may setue for the present.

We need not be inquisitiue into Examples fetcth from other Countries, concerning the iuggling tricks of the Friars of former times, which haue beene detected to their shame; nor yet of a late Histoire admi­rable de la pos­session & con­uersion d'vne Penitente, se­duite par vn Magicien, &c. conduite a la S. Baume poury estre exorcizee, l'An 1610. soubz l'autorite du R.P. F. Seba­slien Michaelis, Prieur de couent Royal de la S. Magdaleine a S. Maximin, &c. A la Reyne Re­gente, Paris 1613. auec pri­uilege du Roy. It was transla­ted into En­glish, accor­ding to the o­riginall Copie, by W.B. and printed, Anno 1613. which Edition is here after obserued. Printed, Anno Domini 1603. Ad­mirable Historie (as they call it) of notable Exor­cismes, performed at Saint Baume in France, which will hereafter bewray it selfe by its owne contradi­ctions: because our owne halfe Isle, euen little En­gland, will be found to abound as much with varie­tie of false Miracles, as Africke with Monsters. For here hath beene seene a Maid with a miraculous A­pron, casting little flashes of lightning in the darke (for this also was a worke of darknesse) and easily done by an artificiall tincture of Sulphure. Not long after (which the World gazed at) they pro­duced the Image of Garnet the Iesuite in a straw: wherein there was nothing more wonderfull, than that any should account it miraculous, it being (by the confession, vpon oath, of such Recusants as had kept it) no more like Garnets face than any other mans; and so little exceeding the power of man (therefore no Miracle,) as that a young youth ad­dicted to the arte of limbing did then draw (and that more perfectly) a number of such like, in the huskes of eares of Wheat, in one day.

The Booke intituled, A Declaration of egregious Impostures practized by Romish Priests, setteth forth whole Pageants of counterfeit Exorcismes; one vpon Sara Williams, another vpon her sister, Fris­wood [Page 9]Williams, a third vpon Anne Smith, a fourth vpon Richard Mayne Gentleman, a fift vpon one Marwood, the seruant of that Babington, who was executed for treason. The Priests, who are recko­ned as Agents in these feats, are named to haue beene Master Dibdaile, Master Sherwood, Master Cornelius, Master Stampe, Master Edmonds, alias Weston, Master Dryland, Master Terrill, Master Tal­lice, Master Ballard, with others; and in conclusi­on, all miraculous Exorcists, by the confessions (vpon oath) of foure of the parties themselues that were exoreized: albeit it was proued to be nothing but deceitfull cunning, and plaine cosenage.

Although these and the like pranks haue beene often hissed of the Stage, for stale and grosse forge­ries, yet notwithstanding haue they aduentured to publish that, which they call A faithfull Relation of their proceedings, in exorcizing the Boy of Bilson, See this Rela­tion whole, in the end of this Treatise. as possessed of the Deuill. Which Relation who so readeth, shall thinke that hee hath seene a Comedie, wherein the Actors, which present themselues, are these; A craftie old man, teaching the feats and pranks of counterfeiting a person Demoniacall and possessed of the Deuill; the next, a most docible, subtle, and expert young Boy, farre more dextrous in the Practique part, than his Master was in the Theorie; after him appeare three Romish Priests, the Authors of seducement, conjuring their onely imaginarie Deuils, which they brought with them; and lastly, a Chorus of credulous people easily sedu­ced, not so much by the fubtletie of those Priests, as by their owne sottishnesse; which will hereaf­ter be better manifested.

The fourth Aduertisement; Shewing, that Romish Priests baue thought it lawfull for them, to delude men by forged Miracles, and feined Relations or Reports, vnder some religious pretences.

IF in practise of vnlawfull things they were not perswaded that they may doe them lawfully, there might bee some hope that they would at length bee brought to detest their dissimulations: but now that they varnish their godlesse forgeries with the colour of Godly intentions, how can we euer expect that they will renounce their custome of lying? And that it is so, in some Romish Priests, their owne Canus wil witnesse, where he inueigheth against some, eanus loc. Theol. l. 11. c. 6. Qui pietatis loco duxerunt mendacia pro religione fingere, that is; Who hold it a point of godlinesse to lye for the aduantage of Religion. As also Erasmus, complayning of others who indeauour to excite men to their Religion, Eras in censura ante lib. Confess. Aug. Fabulisvanis, & fi­ctis miraculis, that is, By vaine fables, and feigned miracles. Yea, and their Agrippa putteth this in the Catalogue of vaine sciences, and not without indignation; Qui piè nonnihil admentientes sup­ponunt reliquias, fabricant miracula, confingunt ter­ribiles fabulas, Agripsa de van. scient. c. 97. that is, Who by the mixture of some godly lyes deuise supposititious reliques, forge mira­cles, and faine fearefull fables. The like complaint made their Viues against their deuout lyes. Viues in Aug. de Ciuit. Dei l. 22.

We may iustly recount among these the Romish Doctrine of Indulgences, which (since the Coun­cell [Page 11]of Trent) is by Pope Pius Quartus added vnto the Romane Creede; Pius Quarlus in forma Inramene. albeit, at the time of their first inuention, they were iudged by men learned and professed in the Romane Religion, to be no better than piae fraudes, that is, Godly deceits. As Greg. de Ʋa­lent. reports. Tract de Indu'g. cap. 2. And what shall wee say of their Historie called the Legend, graced with no lesse a Title than Aurea, Golden; which it was lawfull to translate into any language, that it might lie open vnto all people, for their in­struction in the fundamentall points of Poperie, when as yet the written Word of God, and the sa­uing Gospell of Iesus Christ, was purposely shut and locked vp in a strange tongue? Notwithstanding, it cannot be denied, if we beleeue their owne Do­ctors, that there is not a more absurd booke than it: Espen. in Tim. Digress. 1. Or thus, Royard praef. ante, Hom. de festo Sanct. By the fables and fooleries whereof the Truth it selfe is ouerthrowne: Or thus, Wherein there are more Monsters than Miracles. Canus loc. Theol. l. 11. c. 6.

And the counterfeit Miracles, by Exorcismes, wrought by Priests in France and England, haue (as their owne Relations doe manifest) a double inten­tion, to wit, of gayning estimation vnto the Priests, and beliefe vnto that which they call their Catho­lique Cause. Nor may any obiect, that such forge­ries are wrought by some obscure men, of small iudgement, or lesse conscience; for these are Priests who haue their mission, and cōmission from Rome, being sent (as they say) to suffer persecution for the Romane Cause: for the which some of them are in the Catalogue of their Martyrs, as namely, Dibday, Ballard, Harrington; who, with the other Priests, in acting these parts, were of the same Faith with [Page 12]their fellow Priest Thomson, Declar. of Impost. who held those their practizes to be good, and the credulitie thereunto Godly.

The fift Aduertisement; Shewing the falsehood of their former Presumption: and prouing, that no pretext of good intention, or purpose whatsoeuer, can iustifie any lying wonder, or yet any false Report thereaf.

VVE haue seene what masks these deceiuable Miraculists doe put on, not onely for co­uering, but euen also countenancing their owne de­ceitfulnesse, to wit, their pretence of Deuotion, Re­ligion, Godlinesse: in all which there is a good in­tent, which is to them the soule of such actions. Surely, if this kind of dealing were lawfull, then might it be vsed, especially for the gayning of mens soules, for the credit of the Messengers of God, and his Christ, or for the supreme end of all, which is the glorie of God.

But none of these so gracious and glorious pre­tences can excuse them. First, not the gayning of mens soules, Wisd. 1.11. because it is written, The mouth that lyeth slayeth the soule. Now Charitie, by Gods Law, beginneth at a mans selfe; and can it then consort with Charitie, that, for the sauing of another, any man may murther himselfe? And secondly, neither will it suffer to intend the credit of Gods Ministers, and the establishing of their message of Faith, be­cause [Page 13]this must needs be not onely damnable in it selfe, but also damageable to the Faith both of the Preachers and Hearers. The first the Apostle pro­ueth, by reprouing them that should say of the A­postles, that they taught men to doe euill, Rom. 3.8. that good might come thereof: of which Calumniators hee concludeth, saying, Whose damnation is iust. And if it be damnable to say that of any vniustly, then is it twice damnable for any to doe euill that good may come thereof. Concerning the second, the same A­postle is as direct. 1. Cor. 15.14. If we (saith he) preaching Christ to be risen from the dead, Christ be proued not to be ri­sen, then is our preaching in vaine, as being false wit­nesses; and then is also your faith in vaine. Noting, that the preaching, and consequently writing of falsehood doth gayne nothing but losse of credit to the Preacher, and engender infidelitie in him that was a beleeuer: which are due wages, the one of wilfull lying, the other of light credulitie. Nor yet will it preuaile, that for the honour of Christ, whose attribute is Truth, Ioh. 14.6. I [...]. 8.44. they practize to deceiue by a Lie, the right cognizance of the Deuill, who is a Lier from the beginning: for what societie then can there be betwixt Christ and Satan?

Lastly, the end of all goods ends, the glorie of God, cannot priuilege any mans lie. The friends of Iob disputed against him, though ignorantly, thin­king him to be an Hypocrite; and their whole scope was to magnifie the iustice of God vpon him: but Iob, holding nothing to bee more dishonourable to God than to pleade for him by a lie, stands at de­fiance with them that sought to pleade after that [Page 14]manner; answering, with detestation of that Er­rour, Iob 13.7. Will you spwickedly for God, and talke deceitful­ly for him? will you accept his person? will you yet con­tend for God? do you so mocke him? shall not his excel­lencie make you affraid? What refutation can bee more emphaticall, or yet more iust? for it is writ­ten, Heb. 6.18. It is impossible for God to lye; and as impossible must we thinke it for God to approue or iustifie any lie, how much lesse wilfull lying? What then are they to forfeit, who stampe a fained pretence, as it were a false face vpon a Miracle, the act of Gods om­nipotencie, which should therefore haue engrauen on it Truth, the first attribute of the God-head, the perfect Image of the God of Caesar (that is) that it be a true Miracle?

The sixt Aduertisement; Discouering their doctrine of Mentall Reseruation, which we may iustly suspect to be the art of concea­ling their deceits, whensoeuer they abuse men by their false reports,

THeir Mentall Reseruation is (as they define it) a mixt Proposition, part in speech, and part in minde: as when a Priest, being in any danger to be discouered, is examined whether hee be a Ro­mish Priest? who notwithstanding doth answere; I am no Romish Priest, (retayning in his minde this clause) To tell it vnto you; (or) that you may know, or the like: and the latter clause of the minde (say [Page 15]they) maketh the words, I am no Priest, (otherwise false in themselues) to be true, as it were one Pro­position. And thus they thinke to auoyd the guilt of a lie.

This Sophistrie did Master Garnet teach in wri­ting, and practized it egregiously in the Tower: and this Master Parsons did vehemently defend, which other Priests vsed as a Gygas Ring, to become inuisible to men; that no Examiner could espie any of their Priest-hoods.

If they thinke it lawfull thus cunningly to e­quiuocate, for the preseruation of their owne bo­dies, and the bodies of others, will they not iudge it necessary, for the gaining of mens soules, trowe we? What credit then shall wee giue vnto such re­ports, which they shall falsly inuent, to draw men vnto their Religion, by saying (as they haue most falsly done) such a Protestant Bishop died in the Ro­mish faith; or such a Boy was exorcized and dispos­sessed of the Deuill, by the helpe of a Romish Priest? Or such a vision of our Lady appeared vnto me, tel­ling me that I cannot take the Oath of Allegeance, without mortall sinne? To these men we obiect, Are you so vnconscionable as to lye thus? They readily will answere vs, we lye not, for we did equiuocate. As for example, He died a Catholike, (reseruing) for ought that you shall know: and the Boy was dispossessed by a Priest (reseruing) if dispossessed: And the blessed Virgin appeared vnto me, (reseruing) but only in my conceit. This being the professed guile and deceit of these kind of men, we haue iust cause not to be­leeue them.

The seuenth Aduertisement; Shewing that Mentall reseruation is no better than lewde lying.

THis tricke of Mentall reseruation hath beene sufficiently proued to be not only a lye, but e­uen the blacke Art of lying. As for example; If a Iesuite, being asked whether hee be the true Sub­iect of the King of Great Brittaine, shall answere, contrary to their meaning, I am, (but reseruing in his minde this negatiue particle) not; can this make one Proposition? Is it not rather a Contradiction, and consequently a flat lye? Let Truth it selfe speake, Mat. 5.37. Iames 5.12. Let your yea be yea (saith Christ,) and your nay be nay: wherein as rash swearing is forbidden, so is true speaking cōmanded. Now I suppose that none can denie but, I am, is yea, and, I am not, is nay; and consequently that their, I am, is alewde lye. And that indeed all such Reseruations (as can­not be qualified with some circumstance of speech, which vnto the intelligent hearer can no way im­port that he is no Priest) are vndoubtedly a lye, hath beene euinced from the testimonies of the learned men of their owne Schooles, in a Treatise purposely not long since writ vpon that subiect.

Only I adde for this present, that this Arte of Mentall Reseruation transcendeth all the wit, not only of Heathen men, but euen the practice of De­uils in their Equiuocations. For the Heathen, in saying, Cic. Offic. Iurauilinguâ, mentem iniuratam gere, were so farre from execusing this from a lye, that they [Page 17]called it false; only they thought it (but erroneous­ly) lawful for them to lie in such case of necessitie; when they had to deale with Pirates and Out­lawes. But it neuer entred into the Morall or Lo­gicall apprehensions of these great Masters of Learning, to conceiue otherwise of such Romish secret Notions, than as of very lies.

The Deuils, wee know, did Equiuocate in their Oracles, but only by a verball Equiuocation, con­sisting of an ambiguitie of words of double and doubtfull signification: wherein although there were deceit, yet was it not by a flat lie, but by an indirect truth. For example, To speake to a man, denying that he hath any money, and to say, yes fellow, thou hast a crowne (meaning, the crowne of his head;) the verball Equiuocation is in the word, Crowne, whereby the man is deceiued by the indirect, but yet true sence of the same word. Neuerthelesse these (we confesse) were called lying Oracles, not because of their verball Equiuocations, but because thereby they did seduce men into Er­rours. But Mentall Reseruation is such a Cacus' den as neyther Man, or Deuill by any circumstance of speech can possibly spie out.

The eight Aduertisement; Shewing the meanes to discerne false Miracles, ly vn­derstanding the properties of those that are true.

THere are foure obseruable properties of diuine Miracles: I. is that the worke of the Miracle [Page 18]be done Transcendently, by exceeding all power of Nature or Art; II. Presently, without delay; III. Perfectly, without defect; The IV. is in re­spect of the forme, Sincerely, voyd of idle Super­stition. These are the true Characters of diuine working, by which if the Acts of Romish Priests be duely examined, they will be found exorbitant in all.

The ninth Aduertisement; Shewing the falshood of such Romish practizes; be­cause they are not done by a transcendent power.

ALthough the power of false Miracles, pro­phesied of by our Sauiour Christ, shall some­times worke such great wonders, as are able to de­ceiue, Mar. 13.22. if it were possible, the very Elect; so that wee must confesse (with their owne Iesuite) that False Miracles are sometimes so like vnto true, that they can hardly be discerned; Acofla Ies. de temp. nouiss. lib. 2.6.19. Bellar. l. 3. de Pant. c. 15. which (as another of them acknowledgeth) The Deuill worketh by secret, but naturall meanes, yet such as deceiue the sight and iudgements of men: Notwithstanding many others are done only by either naturall, or else artificiall workings. As namely all that are not done either presently or perfectly, as shall be shewed. But be it that the workes done by these Priests, could seeme to be done as perfectly as they would haue them, yet can they sauour of nothing but mans craft.

To instance but onely in that one thing, [Page 19]wherein (as it seemeth) they ioyntly glorie, Bellar. Bozius, and the Admi­rable Hist. which is the adoration done by bruite beasts, as namely by a Mule, a cade Lambe, and a Ma­stiffe Dogge, vnto the Hoast in the Sacrament. Why haue you neuer seene Apes and Babions so disciplined, as to kneele downe, and make courtsie? Did not Bankes teach his Horse the like feates; When to acquit himselfe of the suspition of dea­ling with the Deuill, he made his Horse Morocco to kneele downe before a Crucifix in France?

Come we neerer to our Exorcists, and see their doings, and wee find (by the confessions of their owne Patients) that if there be any disease, as sup­pose the Mother, then they call this a Deuill; and if there be none, yet through violent and vntempe­rate working by their hallowed fumes and sulphu­rous odours, which they vse in their Exorcismes, they make a Deuill, that is, some disease; and after, by suffering their supposed Demoniack to take a little rest, O then behold a Miracle! forsooth, they haue stilled the Deuill. I should but take paines fot repentance to busie my selfe, or my Reader with ripping vp the friuolous Wonders, which they haue registred, touching the power of expel­ling of Deuils. If any mans appetite serue him for these iunkets, let him reade their Legend, touching such Maruels, and he may soone satisfie, yea, and surfeit himselfe.

The tenth Aduertisement; Shewing (for the better discerning of false Miracles) the II. and III. Properties, which is, to be done Presently and Perfectly.

THe second, which is Presently, their owne Bi­shop Abulensis hath obserued; Abulen. in Mat. 8. q. 15. Nullum mira­culum successiuè esse factum, sed statim, quandò Christus illud fieri voluit: that Christ wrought no Miracle by piece-meale, but out of hand, so soone as hee would haue it done, Mark. 8.24, 25. What can bee obiected against this, but only the cure of him that was blind, whom Christ made first to see, and after to see perfectly? To this the same Bishop answe­reth most fitly, that This may be said to haue beene done presently, A'nden. ibid. because suddenly, and as soone as hee would haue it done.

The third, to doe it Perfectly, is as well acknow­ledged to be a proper character of a true Miracle, whereby diuine Miracles are distinguished from those that are Deuillish: Anastas Cochelet. Palaest honor. cap. 31. D [...]lrio Ies. disq. Mag. l. 1. c. 3. and that When they that are cured relapse into their former diseases, it is a certaine signe that it is not the gift of God, whose workes are perfect. Now let vs weigh the Priests practizes in these scales, and their workes will bee found too light, as not being done Presently: for these Exor­cists labour alwayes vpon their parties possessed, as Physicians doe vpon their Patients, consuming monethes in practizing their Art, before they can seeme to haue finished their cure. So it fell out with the Exorcists at Saint Baume in France, at Denham [Page 21]in Bucking hamshire, at Hackney neere London, and at Bilson in Staffordshire.

Then that they are not so Perfectly holpen, See hereafter. doth appeare by the Exorcists often boasting, how they driue the Deuill (as though it were a running gow­tish spirit, flitting from one ioynt to another) som­time into the Tongue, sometime into the Toe, and sometime into places, for modestie not to bee na­med. Wherein they play with the Deuill only as idle fellowes doe with their Apes, making them skip from one place to another; when as the power of diuine Exorcisme was instantly and absolutely to expell the Deuill, but not to dally and sport with him in his hold of possession.

The eleuenth Aduertisement; Shewing the last note of false Miracles, by want of the fourth propertie of true workes, to wit, religi­ous Sinceritie without Superstition.

AGainst this they erre both in their manner, in­struments, and end of working. The manner is by vsing some set forme of words.

The twelfth Aduertisement; Shewing their Superstition by their formes.

THat is worth our obseruation, which hath falne from the penne of their owne Iesuite, [Page 22]namely, De'lrio Ies. disq. Magic. in quest. var. de morb. sa­nand. that Holy men of former times [non sunt vsi formis conceptis, &c.] did not vse any set formes of words, but sometime one manner, and sometime another, such as the Spirit of God did suggest vnto them: nor did God grant vnto them the gifts of hea­ling vnder the condition of vsing any forme of speech. Which is no more than that which their Espencaeus will haue vs to obserue in the practise of Christ and of his Disciples. Christ (saith he) vsed not a­ny peculiar Ceremonies, Espen. in Tim. Digress. l. 1. c. 15. but simply commanding the Deuill, by his inuisible power did driue him out. Nei­ther yet doe wee reade that the Apostles of Christ did vse any set forme, or ceremonie. If wee shall bring the practises of their Priests to be tryed by this test, wee shall find that their formall Exorcismes differ but little from Magicall Incantations. For (to o­mit others) our Exorcists at Bilson did professe at their first comming to the Boy that they could doe nothing, See hereafter. for dispossessing of the Deuill out of him, before that they had obtayned a Booke called Thesaurus Exorcismorum, which (said they) is now at London. Doe you not now see the distance betwixt the Spirit and the power of the Priest to bee as much as from Bilson to London, that is, an hundred miles at least? are these Exorcists? And although we know that the Deuill is a great Scholler, yet did euer the manner of Exorcising anciently consist in Booke-formes? is not this grosse Superstition? So likewise are their other Circumstantiall Acts, of almost, stifling their Patients with sulphureous Fumes; buffetting them with their Priestly stoles; besprinkling them with pale fuls of Holy-Water, [Page 23]and Herbes; yea, and (whereof notwithstanding some haue not beene ashamed to boast off, as wor­thie of the dignitie of a Miraculist) Daemonem po­dicis crepitu, aut recentis stercoris foetore depellere: See in their Cosmus Philiarch. de offic. sacerd. lib. 3. cap. 11. that is, The repelling of the Deuill with the blast of such a winde, and the stench of such an herbe which I shame to english. Which if it were possible for a man to beleeue, yet might they consider the va­nitie of these fooleries; and vnderstand that the Deuill, that nimble Antique, doth but dally with them, passing and repassing as Boyes doe in their sports, when and how hee listeth: as was discer­ned in a yong Monke obsessed of the Deuill, Gerard. Naza­reth. apud Zuinger. theat. hum. vit. lib. 4. in Tit. de Daemo­niacis. which Deuill indured the application of holy-Water and o­ther hallowed things, but yet refused to depart from the partie obsessed vntil such time as this Nouice was soundly lasht with a Whip; whereupon the Deuill gaue place, and then he was deliuered.

The thirteenth Aduertisement; Shewing their second point of Superstition, in respect of the ordinarie instruments of working, which in these latter times are Images.

THe Patriarke Tharasius in that latter Synod of Nice (which was the great Patronesse of the worship of Images, but after contradicted by the Councell of Frankford) did confesse in the presence of all the Bishops there assembled, that No Mira­cles were then wrought by Images among Christians, Surius Tom. 3. Conc. Act. 4. [Page 24] for their beliefe. But he that shall now trauell tho­row either Romish Countries,' or Bookes shall bee stored with any Miracles, of whatsoeuer sort, (put them all together) more than those which are done by the Images of the blessed Virgin, as at Lorretto, at Hales, at Sichem; where with the Bookes of Tur­sellinus, Lipsius, and Costerus are so fraught.

But because their Patriark durst say in so great and generall a presence of Bishops and Diuines, that no Miracles were wrought by Images, except a­mong Infidels, what can any collect from thence but either that Images were not so miraculous in those former times, when notwithstanding, ifeuer, (that being the time wherein they most of all con­tended for the worship of Images) they were to bee exspected: or else that the people of these times, which are so addicted to such Miracles, are more Infidels. How soeuer it must needs sauour of much Superstition that the vulgar people (as appeareth by the complaint of their owne Authours) Ado­ring Images most idolatrously, should be nourished in their Idolatrous fancies by the pretended Miracles wrought by Images. In all which maruels nothing seemeth more maruellous then the fascination of men, in beeleeuing them.

This place required that I should speake of their diuers Ceremonies in their Exorcismes, to shew their numerall Crossings, Reliques of false Saints, their Holy-Water, which they consecrate both to driue away Deuils, and to purge veniall sinnes; besides other formes of their practice, which are altogether superstitious, if not also sacrilegious. For [Page 25](to instance in the last) what greater sacrilege can there be, than to assume power to ordaine any ele­ment, for conferring of a spirituall grace of remis­sion of sinnes? What is this else than to institute a Sacrament, an act properly and soly belonging to the authoritie of him, who is the Creatour of soules? But these things being obuious vnto all men, I tooke hereby occasion to insert the former obseruation, concerning Images, albeit without Exorcismes.

The fourteenth Aduertisement; Shewing the second point of their Superstition, by their impious and abhominable Consultation with Deuils in their Exorcismes, for resolution in points of Religion.

COncerning this I will first manifest that they vsually practize it; and secondly, propound their Reasons for so doing, and confute them.

The fifteenth Aduertisement; Shewing the falsitie of their Reasons, for their consul­ting with Deuils, by their Exorcismes, in questions of Religion.

THe Adinration, which they defend to bee so powerfull, is of two sorts, the one is of an ab­solute command, the secondis of stipulation or ob­ligation, by a formall Oath.

The Adiuration by absolute command they contend to proue first by the example of Christ a­gainst the Deuill; the next by the example of the Deuill against Christ. The second they labour to make good by vertue of the band of a formall Oath. My part and office will bee to confute them in all, as well particularly as generally.

The sixteenth Aduertisement. Shewing the falsebood of their second Reason, for the proofa of their power of Adiuration, to constraine the Deuill to speake truth, taken from the Deuills adiuring of Christ; with the particular confura­tion thereof.

THey set this down for an vndoubted Maxime, that the Deuils must necessarily speake truth, Whensoeuer the Exorcist shall exact an oath of the De­uils, Admir. Hist. pag. 131. compalling them to sweare, according to the meaning of God and his Church. They doe not de­ny (neither doe we charge them with it) that the Deuill, when bee speaketh of himselfe, is a liar, and the father of lies: but onely say, that being adiu­red to tell the truth, hee is then compelled to speake truth. Epistle to the Reader, before the History. Their proofe is thus grounded. The Deuill said vnto Christ, Mark. s. [I charge thee by God, that thou doe not torment vs, but suffer vs to enter into the herd of Swine:] Wherein [...] may obserue (saith he) a remarkable point, that Christ being adiured by the name of God, although it was done by the Deuill, yet condescended to the Deuils tequest. And thus they would perswade vs, that by virtue of this band of an Oath the Deuill is tied infallibly to confesse the truth. And hence it is that these Priests in France, and they at Denhom, and at Bilson, to­gether with others, in then questioning with De­uills, doe relye altogether vpon the coaction of them by an Oath.

But, concerning the example which they haue vrged, of the Deuills adiuring of Christ in the name [Page 33]of God, it cannot but prooue to be either an illogi­call argument, or else blasphemous. For wee de­mand, whether the Deuill, adiuring Christ in the name of God, did constraine Christ to speake truth, or no? If they say that hee did not, then is it no small absurditie, to proone a compulsarie charge of a Priest, against the Deuill, by Christs voluntarie answer to the Deuill. But if they say, that the all­iuration, vsed by the Deuill, had power to con­straine Christ, by virtue of the name of God, to make an answer, then is it altogether blasphe­mous, for what is it else, than to make the Deuill the Exorcizer of Christ? It had beene well that these men, that thus vrge and presse their power of Exorcization, had remembred that which is re­corded in the Acts 19. of the runnagate Exorcifts, the sonnes of Sceua a Iew, when they tooke vpon them to adiure euill spirits, saying, [ [...],] Wee adiure you by Iesus: but what? Acts 19.13. &c. It followeth, The Deuils in the possessed partie did violently fall vp­on those Exorcists, and made them runne away; then might they haue learned rather to reason thus, That if Exorcisme was not of power in it selfe by the name of Iesus (who is God blessed for euer) to driue away the Deuills; how then could we say that it had power from the mouth of deuils, in the name of God, to mooue Christ Iesus himselfe? And inferre thereupon, saying to themselues, Why doe wee not now blush that wee haue argued so fondly?

The seuenteenth Aduertisement. Shewing their second ground, taken from an Oath, by virtue of the band of an Oath of Stipulation (the Priests imposing a formall Oath vpon the Deuill,) and the falshood thereof.

FOr in their Admirable French Historie the Exorcists say, Admir. Hist. pag. 186. that the Deuils, when they are con­strained by the Name of God, and by the authoritie of the Church to take an Oath, the Oath bindeth them. And as if, by vertue of the same Oath, the Exorcists themselues were bound to beleeue the Deuill, they put the Deuill to an Oath, Pag. 206. saying, It was thought fit, that Vetrine the Deuill should solemnly sweare vpon the blessed Sacrament, for confirmation of that which he had aboue spoken. But did euer the Deuill take such an Oath? Pag. 95, [...] 239. Yes (say they) hee sware by the liuing God, that he was constrained to say the truth; And, he moke a solemne Oath, with all the properties of an Oath.

The eighteenth Aduertisement. Shewing the falshood of this piece of nice learning, in imposing a formall Oath of Stipulation vpon the Deuill, and the impietie thereof, the Deuill being no way capable of a formall Oath.

THe word [ [...], I exorcize,] in the vse of Diuines, Exorcizare di­cuntur, hoc est, per diuina Dia­bolum ad urande expellere. Aug. de beat. vita. in Christian Schooles, is not taken for the Imposition of a formall Oath vpon Deuils, [Page 35]but an allegation of the powerfull Name and au­thoritie of God, to command the Deuills; as wee see not onely in the example of the Apostles, but euen by the Acts of those deuellish Exorcists, Act. 19. saying vnto the spirits, Acts 19.13. Wee adiure you by Iesus. Now the forme of an Oath is of two kindes; and accordingly the Band and Obligation is two­fold. The first kind is a simple Inuocation of God, by calling him to witnesse; and thus the Deuill sware, saying, By the liuing God, &c. The second is a mixt Oath, by an oppignoration and pledge; pawning some pretious thing vnto God: thus the Deuill, they say, did sweare By the Sacrament, and by the Gospel. And wee make no question but the Deuill was able to sweare by God, and by the Gospel of Christ, thereby seeming to seeke Gods glorie. For what cannot hee sweare to doe, who can change himselfe into the seeming shape of an Angel of light? But our onely probleme is, whe­ther the Deuil be capable of the band of an Oath, or no? Wee thinke wee may sweare he is not; nei­ther of the band of an Oath, made only by Inuo­cation and Testification, in calling God to witnesse; nor yet of oppignoration and pledge, which is a se­cond and more solemne tye in an Oath.

For the band of an Oath of Inuocation consist­eth, betweene the Iustice of God, and mans con­science, Rom. 2.15. being bound by that law written in his heart, his conscience bearing witnesse, and thoughts accusing or excusing him before God. This is the band of conscience towards God, whereby the partie swearing acknowledgeth himselfe obliged [Page 36]to speake a truth, lest that hee become gulitie of transgression against God. Therefore to impose an Oath vpon the Deuill, is to suppose him being a damnable Reprobate, whose propertie is to bee most, maliciously obstinate against God and godli­nesse, to be capable of such a Conscience, which is required in an Oath, and consequently a conscio­nable honest Deuill.

The mixed Oath is not onely the inuocation of the supreme Iudge and auenger, in a generall man­ner, but the addition also (for more specialtie and solemnitie) of some thing else, by way of pledge, which is called an Oath by oppignoration; as if a Christian should in solemne protestation, sweare by God his Sauiour, and by the Sacrament, or by the holy Gospell: intending thereby the ingage­ment of his owne portion of comfort and blessing by and in them; and forfeiture thereof if hee vio­late his Oath (as in all Oathes is implyed a volun­tary Execration vpon default) by losse of those precious benefits, which he might otherwise enioy in those pawnes and pledges. Now as for the Di­uels, what interest can they haue in the promises of Christ belonging to saluation reuealed in the Gospell of Christ, and sealed by his Sacraments, who are forlorne of all interest in Christ himselfe, crying vnto him and saying, Mark. 5. What haue we to doe with thee, Iesu, thou Sonne of the highest God? &c. what for­feiture can they feare of loosing their pledge, which they haue irreuocably lost, when they first aposta­ted from God, and thereupon did eternally loose all hope of happinesse; being reserued (as the Apo­stle [Page 37]speaketh) to the chaines of darknesse, Iude v. 6. for euer­more?

Moreouer, an Oath being that high part of re­ligious seruice belonging vnto God, which hee ap­propriateth to himselfe, saying, Thou shalt serue the Lord and sweare by his name (where, Deut. 6.13. in the LXX. it is [...]; and [...], by the confession of the Romanists, is proper only vnto God himselfe, as a supreme part of his worship) let them, who pre­sume of such familiar conference with the Deuill, consult with him vpon this question, whither hee can be capable of the office of [...]. Howbeit wee thinke it no lesse than a Diabolicall propha­nation of the name of God to impose vpon those damned spirits the band of an Oath, whereof they cannot be any way capable, to performe it truely and internally, by reason of the obstinacie of their wils, and the desperatenesse of their state and con­dition. Thus farre of our particular confuration of their particular Reasons.

The nineteenth Aduertisement; Shewing the Confutation of their profession of con­sulting with Deuils in generall, by manifesting the infatuation thereof.

LEt Romish Priests imagine what they please, of the power which they haue ouer the Deuill, to compell him to speake truth; yet this wee hold [Page 38]for a truth infallible, that it was neuer permitted to any to aduise with the Deuill, about questions of Religion, to receiue any satisfaction from him, but directly the contrarie.

The twentieth Aduertisement; Shewing the falshood of their doctrine, for consulting with Deuils; first from the examples of Christ, and of his Disciples.

THe Priests, for the establishing of their autho­ritie, in Interrogating the Deuill in questions of Religion, and power of constraining him to answere the truth, haue pitched vpon the confession of the deuill, Mark. 5.7. when he called Christ, The Son of God: And then, adiuring Christ not to torment him: And after vpon Christs asking the deuill his name. From whence their collections are in effect these. First, Christ asked the deuill a question: Ergo, wee may interrogate the deuill. Secondly, The deuill said, thou art the Sonne of God: Ergo, hee was constrayned to speake a truth. Thirdly, The deuill adiured Christ, saying, I adiure thee; and Christ condescended: Ergo their Adiuration of the deuill doth inforce him to speake truth: and consequently they haue licence to demand questions of the deuill, concerning Re­ligion; authoritie to adiure the deuill, to answere; and power to enforce him to answere nothing but truth. Whēce it must follow that men may receiue [Page 39]their resolution, in Theologicall points of Religi­on, from the deuils.

I maruell what Deuill gaue them these grounds of thus reasoning, sure I am they haue no founda­tion in the Gospell of Christ. For (to answere order­ly) first, the only question that euer Christ asked the deuill was this, What is thy name? neuer any, concerning any matter of doctrine; whereof wee haue shewed the reason before. Secondly, the de­uils Confession, that Christ is the Sonne of God, was neyther extorted, nor imbraced by Christ, which we are now to proue. Thirdly, the Adiuration, which the deuill vsed to Christ, our Sauiour condes­cended not vnto, but repelled; for the deuill said, I adiure thee that thou torment me not. But why said he thus? it followeth in the next words, Because Christ had said to the deuill, come out of the man: therefore the deuill adiuring Christ, that hee him­selfe might keepe his possession, and Christ not­withstanding expelling him out of his hold, it is euident that Christ condescended not to the deuils ad­iuration. Thus by way of Answere.

We are now to retort their Arguments, and to driue their weapon to their owne pates, by pro­uing, from the example of Christ, that we are not to admit of any colloquie with the Deuill in Exor­cismes, about matter of Christian Learning. The first place is Mark. 1. Mark. 1.24, 25. Where one deuill confessed Christ to be the holy one of God; a blessed confession, but, because a damned Confessor, instantly Iesus (as the Text sheweth) did rebuke the deuill, saying, [Page 40]hold thy peace, Mark. 3.11, 12. and come out of the man. In Mark. 3. diuers impure spirits when they saw Iesus, cryed out and said, Thou art that Sonne of God. but what? it immediately followeth, And Iesus straitly charged them not to make him knowne. What may we iustly inferre from all this? Espen. in Tim. digress. l. 1. c. 14. I had rather your owne Espen­caeus should tell you. Christ would not suffer the de­uill to speake, no not the truth; to teach vs that wee giue not any credit at all vnto the deuill, although it may be he speake a truth. Orig. hom. in Exod. And to this end he produ­ceth the iudgement of Origen, concluding from the same Scriptures that Wee are not to interrogate de­uils, nor to entertaine any colloquie with euill Spirits, but to dispell them by Prayer and Fasting. Wee find the same Father thus reprouing and condemning the Heathen Inchanters. Orig. in Num. c. 23. hom. 16. God (saith hee) will not haue vs to bee the disciples of deuils; it is better to bee ignorant than to be taught by them: for this cause our Lord Iesus did not vouchsafe to receiue any testimonie from the deuill, but saith to him, hold thy peace thou foule spirit, and depart out of the man. Wee need no other Comment vpon these Texts than that which hath beene receiued from the golden mouth of Chrysostome. Chrysost. tom. 2. hom. 5. in Mar. Christ saith to the deuill, Mar. 3. Hold thy peace, and come out of the man: As if Christ had said (saith hee) I came not to seeke my approbation from thy testimonie, but to cast thee out of my crea­ture? no commendable commendation can proceede out of the mouth of a Sinner: I need not the testimo­nie of him, whose torment I desire: let thy silence bee my prayse, hold thou therefore thy peace, get thee out [Page 41]of the man; what doest, thou in my House and Inne? &c. So Saint Chrysostome, euen so plainly, that for me to make any collections from him were but to comment vpon a Comment.

Yet may we not omit that when Christ (if euer) had conference with the Deuill in the Wildernesse, Mat. 4. the Deuill was still the Opponent, and Christ neuer obiected or interrogated, but answered: to the first it is said, Christ answered, it is written, Man, Ver. 4. &c. to the second likewise Christ answered, It is written, Verse 7. Thou shalt not &c. & to the third Christ answered, Get thee hence Satan. Wherefore, as Christ, Verse 10. so eue­ry Christian may make answeres to the deuill, ne­uer seeke answeres from him; and allow no vse of Conference with him but that which may put him to silence.

The Apostles of Christ were the Disciples of their Master, as wel in practise as knowledge, which we may obserue in the example of Saint Paul. and Silas, Acts 16. For Saint Paul (to vse the words of Origen) imitating Christ, Orig. hom. 16. ni Acts 16. turning himselfe to the Spirit of diuination, said, [I command thee in the Name of Iesus Christ go out of her.] Wherein though some may peraduenture aske why Saint Paul should in such vehemencie rebuke that Spirit; What, did the deuill speake any Blasphemie? [ The Woman (saith the Text) hauing a Spirit of diuination followed Paul and them that were with him, and cryed saying, These men are the Seruants of God most High, who shew the way of saluation. Whence it is manifest that Paul was not offended at any words of blasphemie, but [Page 42]that he held it an indignitie vnto his preaching to re­ceiue any testimony from such a spirit. So Origen. And indeed Saint Paul and Silas did not spend any time of conference with that spirit, but instantly discharge their office of Exorcizing, commanding the spirit to come out of the Maide, and he went out at the same houre. An Act altogether repugnant to the practice of Romish Priests, who professedly aske questions, compelling (as they say) the de­uils to testifie that which may best serue for the dignitie of their Priest-hood: whereas the Apostle did not daigne, but rather abhorre, and was grie­ued at this so specious a testimonie, that they were the Seruants of the Highest. On the contrary, these Priests doe greatly glorie in such Te­stimonies; as among others, the French Priests re­ioyce to heare the deuill Verrine auerre, Admir. hist. p. 133 saying, of them; You are Priests, it is no offence if a man neg­lect and turne from an Angell of Heauen, and doe ho­nour and reuerence vnto you. Compare those diffe­rent examples, the one holding it an indignitie, the other a dignitie to receine testimonie of their offi­ces from the deuill; and the distance will appeare to be little lesse than betweene a Professor Apostoli­call and Apostaticall.

The one and twentieth Aduertisement; Shewing the falshood of the same doctrine, concerning consultation with Deuils in questions of Religion, by testimonies of Fathers, and necessarie Reasons.

WE haue alreadie heard the testimonies of Origen, and Chrysostome, concerning this point; Thyraeus Ies. de locis infestie, part. 1. Maldon. Ies. Com. in Matth. Chrysost hom. vlt. de Lazare. Tere. de anima. Athan. ad An­tioch q. 11. & 13 Theophy. in Mat. 8. Isidor. Etym. lib. 8. c. 9. absence from our Aduersarie Papers will not suffer me to inquire exactly into other Fathers: nor shall I greatly need it, especially seeing the Ie­suites themselues doe acknowledge, that ancient Fa­thers, such as were Chrysostome, Tertullian, Atha­nasius, Theophilact, Isidore, doe all denie that the soules of men departed doe at any time appeare [...], that is, in their owne persons; but that they who take their semblance vpon them are verie deuils, who seeke to seduce vs. And therefore these Fathers aduise vs not to haue any businesse with them, or to giue any credit to their testimonies, but to content our selues with direction from holy Scriptures. Which they should not haue done, if that those spirits might, by the power of Adiurati­on, be compelled to shew that they were deuils; and that, being knowne, they would confesse nothing but truth.

All which notwithstanding, the Romish Priests ordinarily seeke to bee informed of them concer­ning Purgatorie, Indulgences, worshipping of Images, and other Mysteries of Romish Superstition; which Bellarmine and other Iesuites doe endeuour to confirme by Apparitions of the dead: when as [Page 44](according to the iudgement of ancient Fathers) the soule that it conuersant in holy Writ will re-resolue, [...]. that though the Deuill (as in the petition of Not to omit (which is else-where forgotten) that the Boy of Bilson did fayne him­selfe to abhor, and to be affe­cted with this Petition as with the first verse of Saint Iohns Gospell. Ʋide pag. 58. 59. Deliuer vs from euill) may come into his Pater-Noster, yet that he shall neuer enter into his Creed.

Not to stand any longer vpon Antiquitie, I would but desire any one Example of any one Father, in the space of fiue hundred yeares after Christ; or Historie, in the same compasse of time, recording and approuing any Conference with the Deuill, by way of Exorcisme, or otherwise for satisfaction of any Christian in points of Religion. Let vs at last reason the matter with these men.

The two and twentieth Aduertisement, Shewing the Reasons which may be produced against this perswasion of the Deuil; arising aswell from the Cause it selfe, as from the Euents.

The 23. and last Aduertisement Is to demonstrate the Romish falshood, in Exorci­zing, by the Euents: which is particularly exem­plified in a discouerie of their Impostures, about the Boy of Bilson; not inferiour vnto any of the rest of their prankes in this kind.

BVt before wee come to lay downe the naked truth of the matter, touching that Boy, and how things stood de facto; let vs first suffer the Romish Priests to boast themselues a while of their miraculous power, in Exorcizing this Child; whom for a while you must imagine bee really bewitched and possessed of the Deuill: that after­wards, by the the euent, may be verified of these Miraculists, that Scripture, which saith, Phil. 3.19. Whose glorie is in their shame.