Pus-mantia the mag-astro-mancer, or, The magicall-astrologicall-diviner posed, and puzzled by John Gaule ...

CHAP. X.

10. From the Prestigiousness of Experiment.

1. VVHether it may not please Almighty God to per∣mit some experiments, or effects of Magick, and Astrologie; for the same intents, as he doth those of malefice, and sorcery? (Nay, and indeed, as in all other wicked wayes.) Namely, 1. For the magnifying of his own wisedome, justice, and power. His power, in that though the fallen creature may will evill of it self: yet is it not able to act all it wills, without his power or permission. His justice, in deserting the creature to its own pravity and malice; and so punishing sinne with sinne. His wisedome, in so directing it, as to work good out of evill. 2. For the convincing of the Devill, of the malice of his own will, of the wretchedness of his own power; and of the fallacy of his own Art. In that he would doe more malefice if he might; can doe nothing but by permission; promises nothing but ambi∣guously, because he is not certain himself, till he have tempted God. 3. For the dereliction of the Artists, or Actors, to the delusion of a false Faith, a bold temptation, and proud curiosity. Because they believe without a promise, and so believe the Devill, more than God. They tempt the Devill, as well as God; that is, tempt the Devill, to tempt God. They are inquisitive af∣ter the knowledge of those things, which are neither for them nor Devills, but for God alone to know. 4. For the execution, obdura∣tion, and delusion of their credulous and superstitious Proselytes and Clients, in the vanity of their carnall hopes and fears. Because

they will not receive the love of the truth, but will choose their own delusions, and trust to lying wonders, after Satans working (which are praestigious experiments) for this cause God also choo∣ses their delusions, yea, sends them strong delusions (confirmed not only by inward perswasions, but outward experiments) that they should believe a lye: sc. vain observations, prognostications, and predictions. 5. For the tryall of the Faith, Patience, and Prudence of the saints. That they may learn to believe, not because of a sensible experiment, but because of a spirituall promise; And may submissively admire Gods permission, not believing rashly every presaging spirit; but discreetly trying the spirits, whether they are of God.

2. How can that be a sufficient proof of the verity of any Sci∣ence; or of the lawfulness of any Art; which the Devill makes to be the chiefest means of his own science, and the only proof of his own art? For is not the Devills main knowledge experimentall; or gotten by long experience of times, and men, and things? And glories he not in this, that he may be permitted to set before mens eyes some externall experiment, that so he may win their hearts to give credit to his prestigious delusions? Yea, may not the Devill be permitted to give an experiment in some things; that so his disci∣ples may become the more curious, tempting, credulous, supersti∣tious, even in those things, where there can be no experiment at all?

3. Whether there can be any effect simply and purely reall, wherein the Devill hath a hand? (I speak it not only of sinfull wayes in generall, whereto he tempts men; but of sinfull arts and artifices in speciall, whereby men tempt him.) Because where he hath no power, he is there forced to prestigious sleights, to prevent the detection of his impotency: and where he hath a power or per∣mission, yet there notwithstanding he chooses to be prestigious; Because he loves to delude out of the prevarication of his own will; but hates all reality, as an imitation of Gods own acting.

4. Whether a bare experiment be a good ground for a Christi∣an mans Faith? Not only because the Holy Ghost distinguishes be∣twixt Faith and sight: but because (even in this very particular) he grants the experiment; yet neverthelesse forbids the Faith, Deut. 13. 1, 2, 3. Mat. 24 24, 25, 26. 2 Thes. 29. to 13.

5. Whether such feats and pranks as Magicians call their ex∣periments; be not like to those playd or practised by Pharaohs

Magicians? Exod. 7. and 8. Wisd. 17. 7. And what were all they but prestigious illusions and impostures: or such Gypsy-tricks, as gave the name to all the like feats for ever after? For who will say (although it seemed so) that the Magicians of Egypt wrought really, or experimentally in the production of Serpents, Frogs, &c? because that were verily to produce a thing in Nature, which is not for an Angelicall, much lesse for a Diabolicall power to perform. God will not communicate this his power (otherwise than as his instruments) to those whom he hath called to imitate him; and therefore not to those who set up themselves to counter∣feit him. Now then, since the practices of these prime Magicians were not reall experiments, but phantasticall illusions; what then may we think of all the rest, however they may seem or appear?

6. Why should Magicians and Astrologians rejoyce and boast their art under this notion of Experiment, rather than any other? Seeing an effect is of a cause properly; an Event is of a cause re∣motely; A Consequent is of a cause indirectly, an Accident is of a Cause unknown: but an Experiment cannot be but of a known cause. For an experiment properly is not so much of the thing, as to the person. And to the person, as observing it comming to passe from a proper cause, by proper means, and to a proper end. For if the proper cause be not observed, then is it no experiment, but an accident▪ if the proper means be not observed, then is it not an ex∣periment, but a consequent; if the proper end be not observed, then is it not an experiment, but not an imposture: Because it is the end that really denominates, distinguishes, and perfects rhe act or work. Neither can he be sayd to have had experience of the end, only because of the execution; if he had it not first in his intention. Now how much of all this is proper to them or their art?

7. Whether, as the grounds of their art are but bare suppositi∣ons: so those they call the experiments of it be any thing else than meer accidents? For of the many effects or experiments that were pretended; what demonstration is there, that all these, or any of them were really and indeed, from the influences and powers of the starres? Because such mutations, alterations, casualties, events, fol∣lowed after such, not only aspects, or conjunctions, but even Comets and Eclipses: does it therefore follow necessarily to conclude, that they were the causes of them? Nay, how would they make it evi∣dent, not only to a hard, but to a wary faith, that they were indeed so much as the prenuntiating signes of them?

8. For as much as the most skilfull of them have ingenuously ac∣knowledged, that they have been greatly distracted, and infi∣nitely puzzled, betwixt observation; and experiment on the one part; and cause, or reason on the other. So that that which hath been defective here, hath made them difficult to assent: and that redundant there, ashamed to doubt. Now how shall we assent, or be∣lieve, that can make no observation: since they themselves can make no demonstration. If we doe suppose them to be experiments, or accidents, or consequents at large: yet how can we be vainly perswaded that they come from such causes, or are signified by such signs, which they themselves are not able to demonstrate?

9. What a fond sophisticating fallacy is this, so much in use a∣mong the historizing or exemplanizing Astrologers: Who goe a∣bout to impose upon a••l men, from former ages, and events: as if no man understood how to distinguish betwixt a causall, and a consecutive (I had almost said a casuall) experiment. For aske of themselves, if this be not their way? Anno Mundi, Anno Domi∣ni, &c. viz. In such a year of the world, of our Lord; during such a Trigon (Fiery, Aery, Watry, Earthy) there was such a conjuncti∣on, of such and such Planets (benefick, malefick) in such and such Houses, and Signs of the Zodiack (together with such Eclipses, Co∣mets, and other prodigies, or portents.) And there followed there∣upon, &c. What (in the name of God) when, where, to whom, and how? Now marke them well what followed? War, and Peace; discomfiture, and victory; captivity, and liberty; heresy, and true doctrine; prosperity, and persecution; innovation, and reformation; Sickness, and recovery; famine, and plenty; birth, and death. When followed they? In the same year of the conjun∣ction; or the year following; or else 3. 5. 7. years after (nay and all these contraries, oft times during the same conjunction, or its effects.) Where followed they? Here, and there; far, and near; so wide was the extent of the conjunction; conjoyning severall Countries, and Regions together. To whom? To Emperours, Kings, Princes, Magistrates, Noble-men, Clergy-men, Common people, every body, any body. Lastly how? why there followed, or happened, &c. And that's more properly, plainly and truly spoken, than all the rest. And so let it rest (from their own con∣fession) a conscientionall, accidentall event (and such it may be said, in respect of any thing that preceded) but no appropriate, cau∣sate, and observate experiment.

10. What true and plain experience can the Planetaries pos∣sibly have, or pretend: when (as themselves say) the same con∣junctions, or constellations return not; some in so many scores; some in so many hundreds; some in so many thousand years? Now experience is properly of a thing frequently to be observed, by the same man; and frequently to be observed from the same cause, by the same means, and to the same end?

11. Whether it be good, and safe, to gather an universall pro∣position, or make a generall conclusion of experiment; from exam∣ples of a particular event? Especially, when those examples are extraordinary, singular, rare, accidentall, obscure, fabulous, &c. Likewise, when the causes are uncertain, and the effects unanswera∣ble, and the ends contrary?

12. Whether the truth, and reality of an experiment, be suf∣ficient to justify the goodness, and lawfulness of the art? Who will say▪ because the effect was palpable, therefore the means are lau∣dable? Because some Astrologicall predictions have proved experimentally true peradventure: will any one therefore argue that the principles and practices of it are therefore morally good? Who can deny that even diabolicall predictions have too often come to passe?

13. Whether of one Magicall divination, or Astrologicall pre∣diction, that hath had any reality of effect: morethan ten of them have not been found to have been, as false in the intention; so fayling in the execution? And wherefore doe they so vauntingly proclame those few, that have (by chance) taken effect: and so cunningly conceal those many, that have proved false, and fru∣strate? And why should one, or two fortuitous, and casuall e∣vents win credit to the Art: and yet not ten, nor an hundred (false and frustrate predictions) prevail to disparage it? Since one lye may make many truths to be suspected: why should one acci∣dentall truth be taken for a confirmation, or covert of many lyes?

14 May not the peremptory prediction of Magicall Astrolo∣gers (that swear upon their own Prognostications) prove so to de∣mentate, and bewitch people; as that they can now dream of no∣thing else? and if Good; so elevate them, with transported hopes; as that they cannot now choose but goe on with uncontrol∣lable confidence in the attempt. But if bad; so distract them with confounding despayrs; as that they cannot but carelesly give them∣themselves

over to such wayes, and means, as must necessarily bring them to such fearfull ends?

15. Doe we not know the force of Imagination? that it may very often produce reall and palpable effects: and yet the ima∣gination not less vain, and absurd, for all that? In like manner, why may not the strong imaginations that are here betwixt the Actors, and Assenters, be effectuall to the producing of some such notable experiment, or event?

16. Whether an experiment in Magick, and Astrologie, may not be like unto an experiment in Physick, or Medicine? sc. brought to effect many times Empirically, Quack-salvingly, ignorantly, blindly, upon a rash adventure; and without, yea against all rules of art?

19. Whether the complement of some prognosticated effects (even naturall, as well as accidentall) may not fitly be thus com∣pared? viz. To many arrows shot at rovers, and one now and then hitting the mark. To many small bullets shot out of a great Guns mouth, and one or so (among all) doing execution. To a Dice-player, that in often throwing, sometimes names his cast be∣fore-hand. To the many words of a loquacious babler; whereof some may prove true; although without his understanding, and against his intention. To a man stumbling upon that by chance, and in the dark; which with all his light, and diligence, he could hardly have found out.

18. Have not dreams (ordinary dreams) very often proved true? Is there therefore any certainty to be had of such dreams? Have not conjurations and enchantments wrought stupendious effects? Are these arts therefore to be approved because of such proofs as these?

49. Whether the Prognosticators themselves are not very doubt∣full of the event, or experiment? Seeing that they studiously de∣liver their predictions, either with such cautions, or equivocations: as whether they fall out, or not; or whether this way, or that; yet something however may be pretended to have been foretold.

20. What's the reason that none of the Diviners, or calculating predictors, dare once scarcely so much as offer to tast of their own drugs or dregs which they propine to all the world, and would willingly make the whole earth drunken withall, that they might see mens nakedness? Nor yet wage their own law; wherewith they seek to set all others in a contention? I mean, scarce any one

of them not once begun to try an experiment of their own Theams and Scheams upon themselves? Think they we would envy their foreseen felicity? Or are they conscious and affraid of their so often experienced infortunity; which their very art, without such precise erection, hath justly made them obnoxious unto? So that no marvell, they had rather pretend an experiment of their art upon others, than find it in themselves.

20. Whether those Theams, and Scheams they tell us of, con∣cerning so many famous mens deaths, sicknesses, victories, advance∣ments, liberties, captivities, learnings, errors, &c. were not (most of them) erected by them after the events? And then, what a rare art is this; to make a man a prophesier à posteriori? And though he can hardly deduce the event, from the presignification of the stars: yet he can easily (which is all one) extoll to the Stars, the presignification of the event.

22. Whether mens fortunes, or successes (especially for the constant, yea and ultimate experiments of them) doe not more follow their manners; than depend upon their Stars? For, let them resolve us, if a man (according to his manners) may not either live a happier life, than his Stars promise; or dye a dreadfuller death, than his stars threaten?

23. Whether this be not a true conclusion? That all experi∣ments pretended from sydereall positures and effluxes (besides some certain distinctions of times, some naturall temperaments, some me∣dicinall operations, some nauticall arts, and some seasonable obser∣vations about husbandry) are nothing else but prestigious impo∣stures, jugling leiger de mains, or prodigious illusions?