THE ACCOUNT AUDITED, Or the Date of the Resurrection OF THE WITNESSES, Pretended to be demonstrated by M. Cary a Minister.

Examined by a Friend to the Truth and Ministry.

LUKE 21.36.

Watch ye, and pray alwayes, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to passe, and to stand before the Son of man.

LONDON, Printed for T.R. & E. M. in the yeere 1649.

The Account Audited, OR The date of the RESURRECTION of the WITNESSES pretended to be demon­strated by M. Cary a Minister.

WHen I first saw the Title Page of M. Cary's Book posted up, professing a clear demonstration, that the Resurrection of the Witnesses, spoken of in Revel. 11. was accomplisht; I was glad to see a Treatise of that nature come forth: partly as supposing that the Lord might have brought to publike view, some more satisfactory Exposition of that difficult Scripture, then had yet seen the light; but chiefly as conceiving some hopes, that per­adventure the sad season might be already past for the slaying of the Witnesses; the neer approach whereof is much feared by many of the Saints. And as naturally men are apt to believe things to be as they desire to have them; so did I finde more willingnesse in my mind, to dispose me to close with the Au­thors judgement, then I found reason in that Book to perswade me to it; for when that Treatise came to my hands, I read it o­ver with much greedinesse and expectation, till I came to that place, where the commencement with the expiring of the time for the Witnesses prophesying in sack-cloth, is stated, which if right­ly placed, would have been the Key to unlock the Controver­sies of the Text; but being misplaced serv'd only to check my expectation; for, if specious allusions (of which the Au hor is not destitute) could have cleared the text without the right clue of Chronology, the taske had been long since performed by divers others; who not only with as good colour for the phrase of the context, but also with much mor [...] ex [...]ctnesse for the Historicall application, have published their conjectures up­on it.

This Author professes to go a way different from all others: for in the Epistle to the Reader I finde these words, That which I chiefly aime at in this discourse, is that which is not yet printed by a­ny other, and whether any other have yet observed it, I know not. And yet so confident is this Female-Minister M. Cary in her sole in­vention; as if there might not be so much as roome left to doubt whether she had performed her undertaking; for thus I finde in the Post-script, that the Witnesses are indeed slaine, and risen, and do stand upon their feet, is altogether unquestionable, because (as appears by the foregoing discourse) this prophesie of the slaying of the Witnesses and of their rising, &c. is in every parti­cular jota and tittle of it most exactly accomplished; the like confidence she discovers in the Epistle Dedicatory, and in the Preamble, and in divers other passages of the Book. And truly it is pity that a woman of her parts should build with so much confidence upon so rotten a foundation; the discovery whereof is the drift of these following lines.

As there are many things in that Book which are good, and of which a Christian improvement may be made; so are there divers passages, both in her exposition, and also in her appli­cation, which are liable to just exception; yet that part con­cerning the time of the Resurrection of the Witnesses, is that which I purposely chose to debate, 1. Because the Authors maine confidence lies there. 2. Because most of the other mi­stakes in that Treatise will stand or fall with the date of the Re­surrection, as being either strained to comply with it, or drawn by inference from it. 3. Because the ordinary Reader may be most apt to passe over those passages of the Book without search, 1. through credulity, not suspecting what the Author obtrudes for granted; or, 2. for want of skill in ciphring, not being a­ble to cast up the Accompts of years and dayes mentioned by the Author; or, 3. through want of History, not being fur­nisht with such Books as handle the matters of fact, which the Author relates; which things, as I have diligently searcht into for my own satisfaction, concerning the time stated in M. Ca­ry's Book: so I judged it my duty, having seen the Authors mi­stakes in that point, to publish briefly somewhat to keep others from being carried away in those mistakes.

That the way of my proceeding may be the more clear, I shall desire the Christian Reader to take notice of thus much, [Page 3] the time of the Resurrection of the Witnesses which is the matter in difference between us, is that of which we read, Revel. 11. ver. 11. in these words, And after three dayes and an half, the Spirit of life from God intred into them, and they stood upon their feet. M. Cary in her expo­sition upon this verse in the 100. page of her Book writes thus, The fifth day of April 1645. did the Witnesses, the Saints stand upon their feet, having a Spirit of life from God put upon them. This is the Au­thors assertion, whose ground I shall recite and examine. Only by the way; if any should ask, what is meant by the two Witnesses? Wilson in his Dictionary for the Revelation, resolvs it in these words [two Witnesses] a competent number of faithful Preachers, which testifie against the errors of Antichrist, and for the Doctrine of Christ; thus he; and this, so farre as I can learne, is the most received interpretation; for my own part, though I will not now engage to determine what sort of persons the Witnesses are, yet I shall acquaint the Reader with this, that by Patrick Forbes, in his Commentary upon the Reve­lations, page 88. is hinted to us, as also it is by others (though M. Cary takes no notice of it; and indeed it makes not for her purpose) viz. that Elias and Moses ( those two which appeared with Christ at his transfiguration, Matth. 17.) are held forth as the types of the two Witnes­ses, and thus much is intimated to us in the description of the Wit­nesses in Revel. 11. v. 5, 6. which I shall thus make out to you, by comparing Scripture with Scripture. 1. Elias is hinted in verse 5. in these words, If any man will hurt them, fire proceedeth out of their mouth, and devoureth their enemies; and if any man will hurt them, he must in this manner be kild: This description hath reference to Elias (who also is called Elijah, thus much is clear from 2 Kings 1.10. And Elijah answered and said to the Captaine of fifty, if I be a man of God, then let fire come down from heaven, and consume thee and thy fifty; and there came down fire from heaven, and consumed him and his fifty, Luke 9.54. and when his Disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come downe from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did?

Elias also is hinted in ver. 6. in these words, these have power to shut heaven, that is raine not in the dayes of their prophesie; that this description hath reference to Elijah, will be easily gathered from these texts, 1 Kings 17.1. Elijah the Tishbits, who was of the inhabi­tants of Gilead, said unto Ahab, as the Lord God of Israel liveth, before whom I stand, there shall not be dew nor raine these years, but according to my words. James 5.17. Elias was a man subject to like passions as we [Page 4] are, and he prayed earnestly that it might not raine, and it rained not in the earth for the space of three yeers and six months.

2. Moses is hinted in the following part of the 6. verse in these words, and have power over waters to turne them to blood; that this is spoken with reference to Moses is cleare from Exodus 7.17. Be­hold, I will smite with the rod that is in my hand, upon the waters which are in the river, and they shall be turned to blood, Exod. 17.5. the Lord said to Moses, go on before the people, and take with thee of the Elders of Israel; and thy rod wherewith thou smotest the river, take in thy hand.

Moses also is hinted in the next expression of the 6. verse, in these words, and to smite the earth with all plagues; that this is spoken with reference to Moses, is cleer from Deut. 34.10, 11. There arose not a Prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face, in all the signes and the wonders which the Lord sent him to do in the land of Egypt to Pharaoh, and to all his servants, and to all his land. The variety of Plagues wherwith Moses smote the earth, is more at large declared in the History in Exod. to which I refer the Reader.

And now I shall give you the account, which M. Cary laies down to make good her opinion, that on the fifth of April 1645. was the day of the Resurrection of the Witnesses: which, that I may deale fairly both with the Author and the Reader, take thus at large in her own words.

Page 81. and 82. that term of time which the Beast was to continue, and the Saints to be trodden under foot, and to prophesie in seack-cloth, is a thousand two hundred and threescore yeers as appears pag. 62. Now this 1260 yeeres, being added to the yeere wherein the beast received his devilish power, and seat, and great authority, in the reigne of Phocas the Emperour; which was, as say Historians, in the year 404. I say, adding to this 1260. it makes up 1664. and this yeere 1664. should be the yeere wherein the Witnesses should finish their giving testimony, clothed in sack­cloth: if this 1260. yeers should be computed according to the rule of A­stronomers, allowing 365. dayes to a yeer, and to every fourth yeer adding a day more: but we finde that the holy Ghost in this prophesie, not obser­ving that rule, doth allow but 360. dayes to a yeere, and according to that rule 1260. dayes to three yeers and an half, and therefore in computing the time of the Witnesses, prophesying in sackcloth, we are to observe the rule which the holy Ghost here laies down, to allow 360. dayes to a yeer, and so the time of the Witnesses prophesying in sackcloth, is to expire eighteen yeers and almost an half, sooner then as by the other account, and so the be­ginning of the yeer 1645. was the time, &c.

And page 98. and 99. on the 23. day of October 1641. did the beast begin the war in Ireland, and he continued overcoming the Witnesses, the Saints of Jesus Christ in Ireland and in England, untill the fifth day of April. 1645. and from the 23. of October 1641. unto the fifth of A­pril 1645. there is just a thousand two hundred and sixty dayes; which ac­cording to the Scripture account, (though not according to the heathen account) is three yeers and a half compleat: and when this three yeers and a half were expired; which was I say, on the fifth of April 1645. then was the Resurrection of the Witnesses, for they having lain dead for three yeers and a half before; then the Spirit of life from God entred into them: and the yeer 1645. as it is the yeer wherein the Witnesses were raised from the dead, so it is the yeer wherein the terme of time in which they were to prophesie in sackcloth, and to be trodden under foot was to expire, and the yeer also wherein the prevailing power of the Beast over the Saints was to expire, as is made evident in the opening of the 2 verse page 60. &c. Now that on the fifth day of April 1645. the Saints, Witnesses, and Servants of Jesus Christ were raised up, and that then a Spirit of life from God entred into them, appears thus: on the fifth day of April 1645 the Parliaments Army, who had stood for the defence of the Saints against the Beast, and had been before that time exceedingly overcome, and were brought into a very low condition at that time, being new modelled, and having a great many precious Saints in it, both eminent Commanders, and inferior Officers and common Souldiers; and being then put under the conduct of Sir Thomas Fairfax; they then began to march against the enemy, and then had a Spirit of life from God that entred into them, &c.

Upon this account the Author is confident, that her new tenet is sufficiently demonstrated: to which I enter my dissent; and now come to show you upon what grounds I am unsatisfied with what I have transcribed out of that Book, and shall desire the ingenuous Reader to weigh the following exceptions which I shall lay down, according to the order wherein the things I except against are laid downe.

1. Exception.

The Author tels us page 81 and 82. That Historians say, the yeere 40 [...]. was the yeere wherein the Beast received his devilish power and seat in the reigne of Phocas the Emperour. This being the first root of the Account, deserves throughly to be examined, as being of greatest influence into the present controversie. I shall therefore debate it fully, wherein we might have made a more short cut; if the Author had told us who are those Historians, and where they say so. I have [Page 6] upon this occasion perused variety of Historians: but all that I have met with do make the History of Phocas at least 200. y. later.

In the fourth Book of ancient History, which out of several Au­thors treats of the Roman Emperours for above 700. yeeres after Christ, I finde but one Emperour Phocas mentioned, and no other of that or the like name; & concerning him I there read thus: That Mauricius the Emperour being by dreame forewarned of a conspiracie a­gainst him by Phocas a Commander of some forces in the borders of Sarmatia, this Mauricius sent for his son in Law Philip, and acquainted him therewith: Philip wondring at it, told the Emperour that he knew the man, namely Phocas, to be one that durst not attempt such a designe; as being too fearfull, though wicked enough to do it; to which Mauricius replyed, that he had the more reason to take heed of him, because those which are fearfull, when once they assay wicked enterprises, know not how to give over, but act with the more cruelty: & so it proved in the event; for this Phocas murdered the Emperour Mauricius and his three sons, and then being chosen Emperour by that wicked Army whose lea­der he was, did at the instance of Pope Boniface the third, appoint the seat of Rome to be the head of all Churches.

Szegedin in his Looking-Glasse of the Popes, writes thus. Boni­face the third, was by Phocas the Emperour (who was an adulterer, parricide, and Tyrant) confirmed chief and supreme over all Bishops.

Doctor Favour in his book of antiquity, p. 436. writes thus. This Mystery of iniquity, in the dayes of Phocas the Emperour that had murthered his Master Mauricius, and usurped his crown, began to work more strongly. For Boniface ( Bishop of Rome) obtained of Phocas, that the Church of Rome should be the head of all Churches.

This is the substance of what Historians speak concerning the preeminence of the Roman Bishops obtained in the reigne of Pho­cas, and in this we agree, but the difference lies concerning the time, which M. Cary affirms to be in the yeere 404. and I finde to be in the yeere 604. or rather a little after; for though Phocas might have begun his reign in 604. yet the donation of the supremacy to Boniface, might well be after that yeere, which I the rather assent to, because our industrious Countrey man Barns the Martyr tels us in his Treatise of the lives of the Popes, that Sabinian predeces­sour to Boniface, lived under Phocas the Emperour, and for this he cites Platina and Volaterranus; and Pareus also in his Marrow of Ec­clesiasticall History, makes Phocas's grant of the supremacy to Boni­face the third, to be after the first yeer of his Empire.

I shall now for the satisfaction of the Reader, set down what I have met with in other Authors, word for word, with directions to the pla­ces where they may turn to them, which take as followes.

In the state of the Church, translated out of French into English, page 183. ‘In the yeer 604. Phocas after he had wickedly slain his Ma­ster, was chosen by the unlucky Army whereof he had charge; a very slave of covetousnesse, who handled secret matters with Courtiers af­ter the manner of the Persians, and sold the offices of Magistrates and judgements, dearly loved such as tormented the people by rapine and extortion: this is he who first ordain'd that Rome should be the chief of all Churches.’

In the Treatise of the lives of the Popes written in Spanish by Cyprian Valera, and translated into English, pag. 34. ‘In the 605. year died Sa­binianus [whose successor] Boniface the third being Patriach of Rome, was made Pope by means of Phocas the Emperour, who was an adul­terer, murtherer, and tyrant; a murtherer I call him, for that to make himselfe Emperor (as he did) he murthered Mauricius his Lord and Christian Emperor.’

In Morneys Mystery of Iniquity, pag. 117. ‘ Boniface the third in the yeer 605. to effect that which his predecessors had projected, took his advantage, seeing the Emperour Phocas on the one side displeased with Cyriacus Patriarch of Constantinople, because he would not ap­prove of his murders; and on the other, jealous the hatred of his deal­ings might happily cause Italy to revolt from under him: and there­upon he asked, and by the proffers which he made of his good service obtained of him, that the Church of Rome should thence forward be the head of all other Churches, and the Bishop of Rome should be called the Soveraigne and Universall Bishop.’

In Heylins Microcosmus the fifth Edition, pag 179. ‘ Phocas having killed the Emperour Mauricius, his wife and children An. 604. to as­sure himself of Italy ready to revolt from so barbarous a tyrant, made Boniface the third Universall Bishop, and head of the Church; be­fore this time the Bishops of Constantinople and Ravenna, did often dispute with the Bishops of Rome for superiority; the seat of Religion commonly following the seat of the Empire, and the Bishop of Con­stantinople prevailed so far, that with the permission of Mauricius the Emperour, he took upon him the title of Universall Patriarch.’

As for the yeer 404. which M. Cary builds upon for the History of Phocas the Emperour, and his donation of the supremacy to the Church of Rome, I shall say this farther; that it may appear to any that have op­portunity [Page 8] to search into Histories; that there was no such Emperour as Phocas, in or neere that time, but the Emperours at that time were (according to Historians) Arcadius and Honorias. To cleere this yet more fully, I shall give you a Catalogue of the Emperours as I finde it in Heylins Microcosmus, Edition the first, pag. 88. Italy con­tinued a m mber of the Empire till the yeer 399. in which Theodosius the great divided the Empire; to Arcadius his elder son he gave the Eastern, to Honorius the younger the Westerne part of this Monarchy.

The Westerne Emperors in the yeer
  • 399 Honorius.
  • 458 Severianus
  • 4 [...]5 Valentinianus.
  • 462 Anthemius
  • 454 Maximianus.
  • 467 Orestes
  • 473 Augustulus the last that ever kept his daily residence in Italy, a thing ominous, that Augustus should establish and Augustu­lus ruinate that spacious Monarchy.
And pag. 219. the Constantinopolitan Emperours in the yeere
  • 399 Arcadius
  • 412 Theodosius the 2 d
  • 454 Martianus
  • 461 Leo
  • 478 Zeno
  • 494 Anastasius
  • 521 Justinus
  • 528 Justinianus
  • 566 Justinus the 2 d
  • 577 Tiberius
  • 584 Mauritius
  • 604 Phocas who made the Bishops of Rome Popes, and heads of the Church.

As I have thus by a List of the Roman Emperours proved, that Pho­cas his donation to Boniface the third could not be neer the y. 404. So I might in the next place shew the like by the List of the Roman Bish­ops; for Boniface the first of that name Bishop of R me is placed by Hi­storians after the yeer 404. and there were above twenty Bishops of Rome successively between Boniface the first and Boniface the third, as may appear by this Catalogue.

  • Boniface the first
  • 1 Caelestinus
  • 2 Sixtus 3.
  • 3 Leo
  • 4 Hilarius
  • 5 Simplicius
  • 6 Foelix 3.
  • 7 G [...]lasius
  • 8 Anastasius 2
  • 9 Symmichus
  • 10 Hormisda
  • 11 John 1
  • 12 Foelix 4
  • 13 Boniface the second
  • 14 John 2
  • 15 Agapetus
  • 16 Sylverius
  • 17 Vigilius
  • 18 Pelagius 1
  • 19 John 3
  • 20 Benedict
  • 21 Pelagius 2
  • 22 Gregory the great
  • 23 Sabinianus

Boniface the third, in whose time Phocas gave the cheifdome to the Roman Seat.

Having thus abundantly discovered the grosse Error, which is the foundation of M. Cary's reckoning; who pretends to calculate the Resurrection of the Witnesses to a very day; I shall leave it to the head [Page 9] of prudence with the heart of charity to consider, whence so grosse a mistake of 200 yeers could arise. I have cast about in my thoughts to see how a mistake of this nature could, in an Author of such abilities, be interpreted more favorably then a wilfull misreckoning; and two wayes I doe apprehend that possibly the mistake might be en­tertained unawares. 1. Peradventure the Author might have read in some History book, the yeer 404 misprinted for 604. for misprinting of one figure might happily fall out in some Copy pend of that sub­ject; though I have not yet met with that misprint in any one of those Treatises, or in any of those Editions, which I have sought out and di­ligently compared on set Purpose. 2. Peradventure the Author might not have read the History of Phocas; but only received it upon hear­say, and so she might either have mistook the Relator, or swallowed down the relators mistake; and this later conjecture I look upon as the most probable in that it suits b [...]st with her own words; for shee doth not say, as historians write; but as say Historians. Thus have I given my Reader the best light I can, to furnish his charity with a fa­vourable construction of the foresaid mistake, which may in part excuse the Authors credulity, but will not be able to justifie her confidence, nor her cause; for, the correcting of this mistake, if the rest of her account hold good, wil make the Resurrection of the Witnesses to fall out 200. yeers later then she counts for; namely in the yeer 1845. and this shall suffice for my first and principall Exception.

2. Exception.

The Author pag. 82. deducing from the astronomicall years, five dayes in a year, and one day every fourth yeer, for the space of 1260. yeers, doth abate for it 18 yeers and almost in half: which if it be meane of astronomicall yeers (which are the yeers that she doth substract) doth not amount to so much: for, five times 1260. dayes and 315. dayes put together, make but 6615, which is not 18. astronomicall yeers and a quarter, no nor half a quarter; for, it is but [...]0. dayes over the 18. yeers.

3. Exception.

The Author pag. 82. from the yeer which in ordinary account is 1664 deducing 18. yeers and almost an half (for the difference betwixt the astronomical account, and the account which she followes) tels us, that then the account will fall in the beginning of the yeer 1645. the false­hood whereof I shall thus discover: to the beginning of the yeer 1645. adde almost half a yeer, and it will be about the midst of the yeer 1645. to which adde the 18 yeers, and it will be in the 1663. not in 1664. the deduction therfore of 18. y. and almost an half, though we should begin [Page 10] the deduction from the very first day of the yeer 1664. will make the ac­count to fall out after the midst of the yeer 1645. which is about halfe a yeer later then M. Cary counts.

4. Exception.

The Author pag. 98. makes the time of the Witnesses lying dead for three yeers and a half, to begin on the day when the War began in Ireland; which how it will stand with what the Author sayes else­where, I know not, unlesse we should make the Saints in England to ly dead from the first day of the War in Ireland; which how rationall it is let indifferent men judge; & yet thus it must be upon her grounds: for, by the Witnesses she understands (at least principally) the Saints in England; for thus she explains her self, pag. 87. as the War in England and Ireland was made by the Beast, so it was made by him against the Wit­nesses, the Saints, and precious ones of Jesus Christ; for that which is done against the most considerable number of Saints, is done against the whole; as being the way to prevaile over all. Now in England there are a more conside­rable number of the faithful servants and Witnesses of Iesus Christ, then in any Kingdom in the world, as one truly said, England is the richest ship in the world; for God hath more of those precious jewels in it, then he hath i [...] a­ny other Kingdom in the world.

5. Exception.

The Author pag. 98. makes the fifth of April 1645. to be the day of the Resurrection of the Witnesses, wherein she contradicts her own ac­count, pag. 82. but, because this exception hath affinity with the third, I shall say no more to it but this; that if she had made her day for the Resurrection of the Witnesse a yeer later, she would have agreed with her own account, which now she doth not: for, her abated 18. yeeres and almost a half, added to April the fifth 1646. would have made the day to have faln out in the yeer 1664. as the 1260. added to her 404. makes up the same account.

6. Exception.

The Author pag. 98. makes the time of the Resurrection of the Witnesses, and the expiring of the time for prophesying in sack cloth, to be all one, and so the time that the Witnesses lye dead, must be three yeers and an half before the finishing of their testimony: which, how [Page 11] contrary it is to the Scripture, will easily appear, Revel 11.3.7. I will give power unto my two Witnesses, and they shall prophesie 1260 dayes clothed in sack-cloth, and when they shall have finished their testimony, the Beast that ascendeth out of the bottomlesse pit shall make war against them, and shall o­ver come them, and kill them. I shall here only insert a passage out of Brightman on the Revelations, printed in the yeer 1644. his words in pag. 372. of that impression, are these, Thi time of three dayes and a half beginneth not before the 1260. dayes be ended; for so it is said afore, and when they have finished. Besides, the Prophets lay kild and unburied for these three dayes and a half, but the time of the 1260. dayes is the time of their prophesying in sack-cloth; so that they can by no means be referred to the same time.

7. Exception.

The Author pag. 99. makes the Resurrection of the Witnesses to be an army businesse, which I see no reason for, but rather reasons against it; which I shall briefly propose in behalf of my Exception.

My first reason is taken from the context in Revel. 11. when the Wit­nesses are in slaying, the slaying of them indeed is described as an army businesse, ver. 7. in these words, shall make war against them, and shall over­come them, and kill them: but when the holy Ghost speaks of the Resur­rection of the Witnesses, it is in another strain, ver. 11. and after 3. dayes and an half, the spirit of life from God entred into them, and they stood upon their feet, and great fear fell upon them that saw them. Here is no warlike word used; & though it is said that a great fear fell upon others at the Resurrection of the Witnesses; yet it is not said it fell upon the Beast that slew them, or upon their enemies; but it is said indefinitely, it fill upon them that saw them: for such an astonishing work of God as that in Ezek. 37. (whence the phrases are taken) might cause a fear, though of a dif­ferent kind, to fall upon all the spectators both friends and enemies: and though it may be granted, that a singular fear might fall upon their e­nemies, in respect of their great guilt in slaying of them, and the unex­pected check to their insulting over them when they were slaine; yet this fear might well be without an army, by some speciall presence of God shining forth in the Witnesses. As after that Herod had beheaded John the Baptist, and Christs fame was spread, though Christ had no army with him, Herod was perplexed: and why did he fear? was it not because it was said by some, that John the Baptist was risen from the dead? by some, that Elias; by some, that one of the old Prophets? as you may read Luke c. 9. v. 7, 8, 9.

My second reason is taken from the description of the Witnesses, in [Page 12] Revel. 11. v. 4. under the phrase of Candlesticks, and Olive-trees; the ex­position of both which might be taken from Zach. 4. where we shall finde expressions rather excluding then implying the aid of an Army; that Zach. 4. doth explain the later expression, is acknowledged by M. Cary pag. 69. and pag. 70. in these words, These two Witnesses are the two Olive-trees; in that they are said to be (the) two Olive-trees, it im­plyes it hath reference to some passages of Scripture, wherein there is a former mention of them. Now the place where they are mentioned is Ezek 4. so that Zechariah doth prophesie of these two Winesses, un­der the expression of two Olive-trees. Now in that place, Zach. 4.4. we finde that the Prophet doth ask the Angel, what these be; and then the Angel makes this answer, this is the word of the Lord unto Zerubbabel, saying, not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, saith the Lord of hosts; Who art thou O great mountain? before Zerubbabel thou shalt become a plaine, and he shall bring forth the head stone thereof with shoutings, crying, grace, grace unto it. In this text thus cited by M. Cary, observe, how expresly the aid of armies is excluded by a double barre, ver. 6. in these words, not by might, nor by power; where, by the way, it is observable, that the marginall note in our Bibles, insteed of might, reads army.

8. Exception.

The Author pag. 99. for the reason why the fifth day of April 1645. should be the day of the Witnesses Resurrection, layes down this; that the Parliaments army being new modelled, began then to march against the enemy, to which I have four things to say.

1. That the Author leaves us in a great mist, to finde out so glorious a day as the Resurrection of the Witnesses; for she tels us only in general of the new modeld armies beginning to march against the enemies; but whether the new model were then compleated, or but begun, she tels us not; nor yet whether the maine body of the army began then to march, or some small parts of it; nor, whether that part of the army which then began to march (if indeed any did then march) were at that time new modeld or not, nor whence they marcht that day, nor whether they marcht that day, nor upon what service, nor under what speciall Leader; nor any the like circumstances, by which the truth of what she affirmes might be tried.

2. Suppose it could appear by credible testimony, that some part of the army did march on April the fifth 1645. and that that party did march against an enemy, and that that party was new modeld before its [Page 13] march, and that they were the first forces that did march being new modeld: though all this should be supposed to be true; yet this would be but a poor matter to make a day of Resurrection: and I appeale to any indifferent persons, whose judgements are for a martiall Resurre­ction; whether many, and many passages might not be observed, both in this army since the new modelling of it, and in the Parliaments army before the new modelling, and in other armies in former ages, which might with better colour lay claime to the dignity of ushering in the Witnesses Resurrection.

3. I have with much inquisitivenesse endeavoured to finde out what particular passage might cause the 5 of April to be fingled out as the day of the Witnesses Resurrection, rather then any other day in April, or any other day in the whole yeere: and I can finde none besides M. Ca­ry that makes any mention of any passage in the army as on that day. I have, by me, three severall Lists of passages of the army in that yeere, and none of them doth mention the fifth of April, or so much as intimate any action, march, or motion, on that day. I have perused many other printed Lists, and I finde not that day at all taken notice of in any of them; but other dayes in that moneth I finde mentioned with remark­able passages on them. And here I shall leave it to the Reader to judge, how likely it is that the Resurrection of the Witnesses, which should fill the spectators with fear, could passe undiscerned by those, who have made it their work to observe the footsteps of Providence in the army, if indeed it were an army providence, and at that time, when the observations of so many were at work about the new model.

4. Master Sprigge, a man unlikely to deprive the army of any deserved honour, and likely to know more of the passages of the army then M. Cary: in his large book called Englands Recovery; being the History of the motions, actions and successes of the army under the immediate conduct of his Excellency (then) Sir Thomas Fairfax, in that Treatise makes no mention (that I could finde) of that fifth of April, nor inti­mates any thing sutable to what M. Cary relates in order thereto; but rather the contrary, so far as I can judge from these ensuing passages, which I shall give you in his owne words, Sir Thomas Fairfax having with much modesty accepted this command, immediatly applies himself to the discharge of it; it was the first of April ere his Commission was granted, and the third of April he went from London to Windsor, to see and personally to assist in the framing of a new army. His Excellency continued at Windsor from the third to the last of April in that worke, the difficulty whereof might well account for this time, if it had been a longer space; considering that [Page 14] besides the fitting of the trains for the field, and the attendance of the [...] from London, which with the old that continued, were to make up the [...] signed number, an entire new form was to be introduced into the whole army the forces that remained of the whole army being not only to be recruited, bu [...] to be reduced into new companies and regiments, as if they had been new ra [...]sed, pag. 9. and afterwards pag. 15. the first of May his Excellency began hi [...] march with the whole army, in this first march of the new model, &c.

Now Reader weigh impartially what thou hast read, and so I leav [...] it to thine own judgment to determine, whether the pretended demonstration of M. Cary be more then a partiall fansie, and whether her sin­gle opinion be not maintained with more then single mistakes, if thou art one who wilt own the truth in these times; Farewell, and pray for the faith and patience of the Saints.

FINIS.

Imprimatur,

April 11. 1649.
JO. DOWNAME.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. Searching, reading, printing, or downloading EEBO-TCP texts is reserved for the authorized users of these project partner institutions. Permission must be granted for subsequent distribution, in print or electronically, of this EEBO-TCP Phase II text, in whole or in part.