THE
MALLEUS MALEFICARUM
of Heinrich Kramer and James Sprenger
The First Part - Treating on the three necessary concomitants of witchcraft
which are the Devil, a witch, and the permission of Almighty God.
The Second Part - Treating on the methods by which the works of witchcraft
are wrought and directed, and how they may be successfully annulled and
dissolved.
The Third Part - Relating to the judicial proceedings in both the
Ecclesiastical and Civil courts against witches and indeed all heretics.
THE FIRST PART
THE FIRST PART TREATING OF THE THREE NECESSARY CONCOMITANTS OF WITCHCRAFT,
WHICH ARE THE DEVIL, A WITCH, AND THE PERMISSION OF ALMIGHTY GOD
Question I Whether the Belief that there are such Beings as Witches is so
Essential a Part of the Catholic Faith that Obstinacy to maintain the
Opposite Opinion manifestly savours of Heresy.
Question II If it be in Accordance with the Catholic Faith to maintain that
in Order to bring about some Effect of Magic, the Devil must intimately co-
operate with the Witch, or whether one without the other, that is to say,
the Devil without the Witch, or conversely, could produce such an Effect.
Question III Whether Children can be Generated by Incubi and Succubi.
Question IV By which Devils are the Operations of Incubus and Succubus
Practised?
Question V What is the Source of the Increase of Works of Witchcraft?
Whence comes it that the Practice of Witchcraft hath so notably increased?
Question VI Concerning Witches who copulate with Devils. Why is it that
Women are chiefly addicted to Evil superstitions?
Question VII Whether Witches can Sway the Minds of Men to Love or Hatred.
Question VIII Whether Witches can Hebetate the Powers of Generation or
Obstruct the Venereal Act.
Question IX Whether Witches may work some Prestidigatory Illusion so that
the Male Organ appears to be entirely removed and separate from the Body.
Question X Whether Witches can by some Glamour Change Men into Beasts.
Question XI That Witches who are Midwives in Various Ways Kill the Child
Conceived in the Womb, and Procure an Abortion; or if they do not this Offer
New-born Children to Devils.
Question XII Whether the Permission of Almighty God is an Accompaniment of
Witchcraft.
Question XIII Herein is set forth the Question, concerning the Two Divine
Permissions which God justly allows, namely, that the Devil, the Author or
all Evil, should Sin, and that our First Parents should Fall, from which
Origins the Works of Witches are justly suffered to take place.
Solutions of the Arguments.
Question XIV The Enormity of Witches is Considered, and it is shown that
the Whole Matter should be rightly Set Forth and Declared.
Question XV It is Shown that, on Account of the Sins of Witches, the
Innocent are often Bewitched, yea, Sometimes even for their Own Sins.
Question XVI The Foregoing Truths are Set out in Particular, this by a
Comparison of the Works of Witches with Other Baleful Superstitions.
Question XVII A Comparison of their Crimes under Fourteen Heads, with the
Sins of the Devils of all and every Kind.
Question XVIII Here follows the Method of Preaching against and
Controverting Five Arguments of Laymen and Lewd Folk, which seem to be
Variously Approved, that God does not Allow so Great Power to the Devil and
Witches as is involved in the Performance of such Mighty Works of
Witchcraft.
THE SECOND PART
TREATING ON THE METHODS BY WHICH THE WORKS OF WITCHCRAFT ARE WROUGHT AND
DIRECTED, AND HOW THEY MAY BE SUCCESSFULLY ANNULLED AND DISSOLVED
Question I Of those against whom the Power of Witches availeth not at all.
Chapter I Of the several Methods by which Devils through Witches Entice and
Allure the Innocent to the Increase of that Horrid Craft and Company.
Chapter II Of the Way whereby a Formal Pact with Evil is made.
Chapter III How they are Transported from Place to Place.
Chapter IV Here follows the Way whereby Witches copulate with those Devils
known as Incubi.
Chapter V Witches commonly perform their Spells through the Sacraments of
the Church. And how they Impair the Powers of Generation, and how they may
Cause other Ills to happen to God's Creatures of all kinds. But herein we
except the Question of the Influence of the Stars.
Chapter VI How Witches Impede and Prevent the Power of Procreation.
Chapter VII How, as it were, they Deprive Man of his Virile Member.
Chapter VIII Of the Manner whereby they Change Men into the Shapes of
Beasts.
Chapter IX How Devils may enter the Human Body and the Head without doing
any Hurt, when they cause such Metamorphosis by Means of Prestidigitation.
Chapter X Of the Method by which Devils through the Operations of Witches
sometimes actually possess men.
Chapter XI Of the Method by which they can Inflict Every Sort of Infirmity,
generally Ills of the Graver Kind.
Chapter XII Of the Way how in Particular they Afflict Men with Other Like
Infirmities.
Chapter XIII How Witch Midwives commit most Horrid Crimes when they either
Kill Children or Offer them to Devils in most Accursed Wise.
Chapter XIV Here followeth how Witches Injure Cattle in Various Ways.
Chapter XV How they Raise and Stir up Hailstorms and Tempests, and Cause
Lightning to Blast both Men and Beasts.
Chapter XVI Of Three Ways in which Men and Women may be Discovered to be
Addicted to Witchcraft: Divided into Three Heads: and First of the
Witchcraft of Archers.
Question II The Methods of Destroying and Curing Witchcraft
Introduction, wherein is Set Forth the Difficulty of this Question.
Chapter I The Remedies prescribed by the Holy Church against Incubus and
Succubus Devils.
Chapter II Remedies prescribed for Those who are Bewitched by the
Limitation of the Generative Power.
Chapter III Remedies prescribed for those who are Bewitched by being
Inflamed with Inordinate Love or Extraordinary Hatred.
Chapter IV Remedies presribed for those who by Prestidigitative Art have
lost their Virile Members or have seemingly been Transformed into the Shapes
of Beasts.
Chapter V Prescribed Remedies for those who are Obsessed owing to some
Spell.
Chapter VI Prescribed Remedies; to wit, the Lawful Exorcisms of the Church,
for all Sorts of Infirmities and Ills due to Witchcraft; and the Method of
Exorcising those who are Bewitched.
Chapter VII Remedies prescribed against Hailstorms, and for animals that
are Bewitched.
Chapter VIII Certain Remedies prescribed against those Dark and Horrid
Harms with which Devils may Afflict Men.
THE THIRD PART
RELATING TO THE JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS IN BOTH THE ECCLESIASTICAL AND CIVIL
COURTS AGAINST WITCHES AND INDEED ALL HERETICS
Question I The Method of Initiating a Process
Question II Of the Number of Witnesses
Question III Of the Solemn Adjuration and Re-examination of Witnesses
Question IV Of the Quality and Condition of Witnesses
Question V Whether Mortal Enemies may be Admitted as Witnesses
Question VI How the Trial is to be Proceeded with and Continued. And how
the Witnesses are to be Examined in the Presence of Four Other Persons, and
how the Accused is to be Questioned in Two Ways
Question VII In Which Various Doubts are Set Forth with Regard to the
Foregoing Questions and Negative Answers. Whether the Accused is to be
Imprisoned, and when she is to be considered Manifestly Taken in the Foul
Heresy of Witchcraft. This is the Second Action
Question VIII Which Follows from the Preceding Question, Whether the Witch
is to be Imprisoned, and of the Method of Taking her. This is the Third
Action of the Judge
Question IX What is to be done after the Arrest, and whether the Names of
the Witnesses should be made Known to the Accused. This is the Fourth Action
Question X What Kind of Defence may be Allowed, and of the Appointment of
an Advocate. This is the Fifth Action
Question XI What Course the Advocate should Adopt when the Names of the
Witnesses are not Revealed to him. Ths Sixth Action
(the rest is missing)
The First Part - Treating on the three necessary concomitants of witchcraft
which are the Devil, a witch, and the permission of Almighty God.
Question I Whether the Belief that there are such Beings as Witches is so
Essential a Part of the Catholic Faith that Obstinacy to maintain the
Opposite Opinion manifestly savours of Heresy.
Question II If it be in Accordance with the Catholic Faith to maintain that
in Order to bring about some Effect of Magic, the Devil must intimately co-
operate with the Witch, or whether one without the other, that is to say,
the Devil without the Witch, or conversely, could produce such an Effect.
Question III Whether Children can be Generated by Incubi and Succubi.
Question IV By which Devils are the Operations of Incubus and Succubus
Practised?
Question V What is the Source of the Increase of Works of Witchcraft?
Whence comes it that the Practice of Witchcraft hath so notably increased?
Question VI Concerning Witches who copulate with Devils. Why is it that
Women are chiefly addicted to Evil superstitions?
Question VII Whether Witches can Sway the Minds of Men to Love or Hatred.
Question VIII Whether Witches can Hebetate the Powers of Generation or
Obstruct the Venereal Act.
Question IX Whether Witches may work some Prestidigatory Illusion so that
the Male Organ appears to be entirely removed and separate from the Body.
Question X Whether Witches can by some Glamour Change Men into Beasts.
Question XI That Witches who are Midwives in Various Ways Kill the Child
Conceived in the Womb, and Procure an Abortion; or if they do not this Offer
New-born Children to Devils.
Question XII Whether the Permission of Almighty God is an Accompaniment of
Witchcraft.
Question XIII Herein is set forth the Question, concerning the Two Divine
Permissions which God justly allows, namely, that the Devil, the Author or
all Evil, should Sin, and that our First Parents should Fall, from which
Origins the Works of Witches are justly suffered to take place.
Solutions of the Arguments.
Question XIV The Enormity of Witches is Considered, and it is shown that
the Whole Matter should be rightly Set Forth and Declared.
Question XV It is Shown that, on Account of the Sins of Witches, the
Innocent are often Bewitched, yea, Sometimes even for their Own Sins.
Question XVI The Foregoing Truths are Set out in Particular, this by a
Comparison of the Works of Witches with Other Baleful Superstitions.
Question XVII A Comparison of their Crimes under Fourteen Heads, with the
Sins of the Devils of all and every Kind.
Question XVIII Here follows the Method of Preaching against and
Controverting Five Arguments of Laymen and Lewd Folk, which seem to be
Variously Approved, that God does not Allow so Great Power to the Devil and
Witches as is involved in the Performance of such Mighty Works of
Witchcraft.
Question I Whether the Belief that there are such Beings as Witches is so
Essential a Part of the Catholic Faith that Obstinacy to maintain the
Opposite Opinion manifestly savours of Heresy
Whether the belief that there are such beings as witches is so
essential a part of the Catholic faith that obstinately to maintain the
opposite opinion manifestly savours of heresy. And it is argued that a firm
belief in witches is not a Catholic doctrine: see chapter 26, question 5, of
the work of Episcopus. Whoever believes that any creature can be changed for
the better or the worse, or transformed into another kind or likeness,
except by the Creator of all things, is worse than a pagan and a heretic.
And so when they report such things are done by witches it is not Catholic,
but plainly heretical, to maintain this opinion.
Moreover, no operation of witchcraft has a permanent effect among
us. And this is the proof thereof: For if it were so, it would be effected
by the operation of demons. But to maintain that the devil has power to
change human bodies or to do them permanent harm does not seem in accordance
with the teaching of the Church. For in this way they could destroy the
whole world, and bring it to utter confusion.
Moreover, every alteration that takes place in a human body - for
example, a state of health or a state of sickness - can be brought down to a
question of natural causes, as Aristotle has shown in his 7th book of
Physics. And the greatest of these is the influence of the stars. But the
devils cannot interfere with the stars. This is the opinion of Dionysius in
his epistle to S. Polycarp. For this alone God can do. Therefore it is
evident the demons cannot actually effect any permanent transformation in
human bodies; that is to say, no real metamorphosis. And so we must refer
the appearance of any such change to some dark and occult cause.
And the power of God is stronger than the power of the devil, so
divine works are more true than demoniac operations. Whence inasmuch as evil
is powerful in the world, then it must be the work of the devil always
conflicting with the work of God. Therefore as it is unlawful to hold that
the devil's evil craft can apparently exceed the work of God, so it us
unlawful to believe that the noblest works of creation, that is to say, man
and beast, can be harmed and spoiled by the power of the devil.
Moreover, that which is under the influence of a material object
cannot have power over corporeal objects. But devils are subservient to
certain influences of the stars, because magicians observe the course of
certain stars in order to evoke the devils. Therefore they have not the
power of effecting any change in a corporeal object, and it follows that
witches have even less power than the demons possess.
For devils have no power at all save by a certain subtle art. But an
art cannot permanently produce a true form. (And a certain author says:
Writers on Alchemy know that there is no hope of any real transmutation.)
Therefore the devils for their part, making use of the utmost of their
craft, cannot bring about any permanent cure - or permanent disease. But if
these states exist it is in truth owing to some other cause, which may be
unknown, and has nothing to do with the operations of either devils or
witches.
But according to the Decretals (33) the contrary is the case. “If by
witchcraft or any magic art permitted by the secret but most just will of
God, and aided by the power of the devil, etc . . . . ” The reference here
is to any act of witchcraft which may hinder the end of marriage, and for
this impediment to take effect three things can concur, that is to say,
witchcraft, the devil, and the permission of God. Moreover, the stronger can
influence that which is less strong. But the power of the devil is stronger
than any human power (Job xl). There is no power upon earth which can be
compared to him, who was created so that he fears none.
Answer. Here are three heretical errors which must be met, and when
they have been disproved the truth will be plain. For certain writers,
pretending to base their opinion upon the words of S. Thomas (iv, 24) when
he treats of impediments brought about by magic charms, have tried to
maintain that there is not such a thing as magic, that it only exists in the
imagination of those men who ascribe natural effects, the cause whereof are
not known, to witchcraft and spells. There are others who acknowledge indeed
that witches exist, but they declare that the influence of magic and the
effects of charms are purely imaginary and phantasmical. A third class of
writers maintain that the effects said to be wrought by magic spells are
altogether illusory and fanciful, although it may be that the devil does
really lend his aid to some witch.
The errors held by each one of these persons may thus be set forth
and thus confuted. For in the very first place they are shown to be plainly
heretical by many orthodox writers, and especially by S. Thomas, who lays
down that such an opinion is altogether contrary to the authority of the
saints and is founded upon absolute infidelity. Because the authority of the
Holy Scriptures says that devils have power over the bodies and over the
minds of men, when God allows them to exercise this power, as is plain from
very many passages in the Holy Scriptures. Therefore those err who say that
there is no such thing as witchcraft, but that it is purely imaginary, even
although they do not believe that devils exist except in the imagination of
the ignorant and vulgar, and the natural accidents which happen to a man he
wrongly attributes to some supposed devil. For the imagination of some men
is so vivid that they think they see actual figures and appearances which
are but the reflection of their thoughts, and then these are believed to be
the apparitions of evil spirits or even the spectres of witches. But this is
contrary to the true faith, which teaches us that certain angels fell from
heaven and are now devils, and we are bound to acknowledge that by their
very nature they can do many wonderful things which we cannot do. And those
who try to induce others to perform such evil wonders are called witches.
And because infidelity in a person who has been baptized is technically
called heresy, therefore such persons are plainly heretics.
As regards those who hold the other two errors, those, that is to
say, who do not deny that there are demons and that demons possess a natural
power, but who differ among themselves concerning the possible effects of
magic and the possible operations of witches: the one school holding that a
witch can truly bring about certain effects, yet these effects are not real
but phantastical, the other school allowing that some real harm does befall
the person or persons injured, but that when a witch imagines this damage is
the effect of her arts she is grossly deceived. This error seems to be based
upon two passages from the Canons where certain women are condemned who
falsely imagine that during the night they ride abroad with Diana or
Herodias. This may read in the Canon. Yet because such things often happen
by illusion are merely in the imagination, those who suppose that all the
effects of witchcraft are mere illusion and imagination are very greatly
deceived. Secondly, with regard to a man who believes or maintains that a
creature can be made, or changed for better or for worse, or transformed
into some other kind or likeness by anyone save by God, the Creator of all
things, alone, is an infidel and worse than a heathen. Wherefore on account
of these words “changed for the worse” they say that such an effect if
wrought by witchcraft cannot be real but must be purely phantastical.
But inasmuch as these errors savour of heresy and contradict the
obvious meaning of the Canon, we will first prove our points by the divine
law, as also by ecclesiastical and civil law, and first in general.
To commence, the expressions of the Canon must be treated of in
detail (although the sense of the Canon will be even more clearly elucidated
in the following question). For the divine in many places commands that
witches are not only to be avoided, but also they are to be put to death,
and it would not impose the extreme penalty of this kind if witches did not
really and truly make a compact with devils in order to bring about real and
true hurts and harms. For the penalty of death is not inflicted except for
some grave and notorious crime, but it is otherwise with death of the soul,
which can be brought about by the power of a phantastical illusion or even
by the stress of temptation. This is the opinion of S. Thomas when he
discusses whether it be evil to make use of the help of devils (ii. 7). For
in the 18th chapter of Deuteronomy it is commanded that all wizards and
charmers are to be destroyed. Also the 19th chapter of Leviticus says: The
soul which goeth to wizards and soothsayers to commit fornication with them,
I will set my face against that soul, and destroy it out of the midst of my
people. And again, 20: A man, or woman, in whom there is a pythonical or
divining spirit dying, let them die: they shall stone them. Those persons
are said to be pythons in whom the devil works extraordinary things.
Moreover, this must be borne in mind, that on account of this sin
Ochozias fell sick and died, IV. Kings I. Also Saul, I Paralipomenon, 10. We
have, moreover, the weighty opinions of the Fathers who have written upon
the scriptures and who have treated at length of the power of demons and of
magic arts. The writings of many doctors upon Book 2 of the Sentences may be
consulted, and it will be found that they all agree, that there are wizards
and sorcerers who by the power of the devil can produce real and
extraordinary effects, and these effects are not imaginary, and God permits
this to be. I will not mention those very many other places where S. Thomas
in great detail discusses operations of this kind. As, for example, in his
Summa contra Gentiles, Book 3, c. 1 and 2, in part one, question 114,
argument 4. And in the Second of the Second, questions 92 and 94. We may
further consult the Commentators and the Exegetes who have written upon the
wise men and the magicians of Pharao, Exodus vii. We may also consult what
S. Augustine says in The City of God, Book 18, c. 17. See further his second
book On Christian Doctrine. Very many other doctors advance the same
opinion, and it would be the height of folly for any man to contradict all
these, and he could not be held to be clear of the guilt of heresy. For any
man who gravely errs in an exposition of Holy Scripture is rightly
considered to be a heretic. And whosoever thinks otherwise concerning these
matters which touch the faith that the Holy Roman Church holds is a heretic.
There is the Faith.
That to deny the existence of witches is contrary to the obvious
sense of the Canon is shown by ecclesiastical law. For we have the opinions
of the commentators on the Canon which commences: If anyone by magic arts or
witchcraft . . . And again, there are those writers who speak of men
impotent and bewitched, and therefore by this impediment brought about by
witchcraft they are unable to copulate, and so the contract of marriage is
rendered void and matrimony in their cases has become impossible. For they
say, and S. Thomas agrees with them, that if witchcraft takes effect in the
event of a marriage before there has been carnal copulation, then if it is
lasting it annuls and destroys the contract of marriage, and it is quite
plain that such a condition cannot in any way be said to be illusory and the
effect of imagination.
Upon this point see what Blessed Henry of Segusio has so fully
written in his Summa: also Godfrey of Fontaine and S. Raymond of Peñafort,
who have discussed this question in detail very clearly, not asking whether
such a physical condition could be thought imaginary and unreal, but taking
it to be an actual and proven fact, and then they lay down whether it is to
be treated as a lasting or temporary infirmity if it continued for more than
the space of three years, and they do not doubt that it may be brought about
by the power of witchcraft, although it is true that this condition may be
intermittent. But what is a fact beyond dispute is that such impotency can
be brought about through the power of the devil by means of a contract made
with him, or even by the devil himself without the assistance of any witch,
although this most rarely happens in the Church, since marriage is a most
excellent sacrament. But amongst Pagans this actually does happen, and this
is because evil spirits act as if they had a certain legitimate dominion
over them, as Peter of Palude in his fourth book relates, when he tells of
the young man who had pledged himself in wedlock to a certain idol, and who
nevertheless in the Church the devil prefers to operate through the medium
of witches and to bring about such effects for his own gain, that is to say,
for the loss of souls. And in what manner he is able to do this, and by what
means, will be discussed a little later, where we shall treat of the seven
ways of doing harm to men by similar operations. And of the other questions
which Theologians and Canonists have raised with reference to these points,
one is very important, since they discuss how such impotence can be cured
and whether it is permissible to cure it by some counter-charm, and what is
to be done if the witch who cast the spell is dead, a circumstance of which
Godfrey of Fontaines treats in his Summa. And these questions will be amply
elucidated in the Third Part of this work.
This then is the reason why the Canonists have so carefully drawn up
a table of the various differing penalties, making a distinction between
private and open practice of witchcraft, or rather of divination, since this
foul superstition has various species and degrees, so that anyone who is
notoriously given to it must be refused Communion. If it be secretly
practised the culprit must do penance for forty days. And if he be a cleric
he is to be suspended and confined in a monastery. If he be a layman he
shall be excommunicated, wherefore all such infamous persons must be
punished, together with all those who resort to them, and no excuse at all
is to be allowed.
The same penalty too is prescribed by the civil law. For Azo, in his
Summa upon Book 9 of the Codex, the rubric concerning sorcerers, 2 after the
lex Cornelia, concerning assassins and murderers, lays down: Let it be known
that all those who are commonly called sorcerers, and those too who are
skilled in the art of divination, incur the penalty of death. The same
penalty is enforced yet again. For this is the exact sentence of these laws:
It is unlawful for any man to practise divination; and is he does so his
reward shall be death by the sword of the executioner. There are others too
who by their magic charms endeavour to take the lives of innocent people,
who turn the passions of women to lusts of every kind, and these criminals
are to be thrown to the wild beasts. And the laws allow that any witness
whatsoever is to be admitted as evidence against them. This the Canon
treating of the defence of the Faith explicitly enjoins. And the same
procedure is allowable in a charge of heresy. When such an accusation is
brought, any witness may come forward to give evidence, just as he may in a
case of lese-majesty. For witchcraft is high treason against God's Majesty.
And so they are to be put to the torture in order to make them confess. Any
person, whatsoever his rank or position, upon such an accusation may be put
to the torture, and he who is found guilty, even if he confesses his crime,
let him be racked, let him suffer all other tortures prescribed by law in
order that he may be punished in proportion to his offences.
Note: In days of old such criminals suffered a double penalty and
were often thrown to wild beast to be devoured by them. Nowadays they are
burnt at the stake, and probably this is because the majority of them are
women.
The civil law also forbids any conniving at or joining in such
practices, for it did not allow a diviner even to enter another person's
house; and often it ordered that all their possessions should be burnt, nor
was anyone allowed to patronize or to consult them; very often they were
deported to some distant and deserted island and all their goods sold by
public auction. Moreover, those who consulted or resorted to witches were
punished with exile and the confiscation of all their property. These
penalties were set in operation by the common consent of all nations and
rulers, and they have greatly conduced to the suppression of the practice of
such forbidden arts.
It should be observed that the laws highly commend those who seek to
nullify the charms of witches. And those who take great pains that the work
of man shall not be harmed by the force tempests or by hailstorms are worthy
of a great reward rather than of any punishment. How such damage may
lawfully be prevented will be discussed in full below. Accordingly, how can
it be that the denial or frivolous contradiction of any of these
propositions can be free from the mark of some notable heresy? Let every man
judge for himself unless indeed his ignorance excuse him. But what sort of
ignorance may excuse him we shall very shortly proceed to explain. From what
has been already said we draw the following conclusion; It is a most certain
and most Catholic opinion that there are sorcerers and witches who by the
help of the devil, on account of a compact which they have entered into with
him, are able, since God allows this, to produce real and actual evils and
harm, which does not render it unlikely that they can also bring about
visionary and phantastical illusions by some extraordinary and peculiar
means. The scope of the present inquiry, however, is witchcraft, and this
very widely differs from these other arts, and therefore a consideration of
them would be nothing to the purpose, since those who practise them may with
greater accuracy be termed fortune-tellers and soothsayers rather than
sorcerers.
It must particularly be noticed that these two last errors are
founded upon a complete misunderstanding of the words of the Canon (I will
not speak of the first error, which stands obviously self-condemned, since
it is clean contrary to the teaching of Holy Scripture). And so let us
proceed to a right understanding of the Canon. And first we will speak
against the first error, which says that the mean is mere illusion although
the two extremes are realities.
Here it must be noticed that there are fourteen distinct species
which come under the genus superstition, but these for the sake of brevity
it is hardly necessary to detail, since they have been most clearly set out
by S. Isidore in his Etymologiae, Book 8, and by S. Thomas in his Second of
the Second, question 92. Moreover, there will be explicit mention of these
rather lower when we discuss the gravity of this heresy, and this will be in
the last question of our First Part.
The category in which women of this sort are to be ranked is called
the category of Pythons, persons in or by whom the devil either speaks or
performs some astonishing operation, and this is often the first category in
order. But the category under which sorcerers come is called the category of
Sorcerers.
And inasmuch as these persons differ greatly one from another, it
would not be correct that they should not be comprised in that species under
which so many others are confined: Wherefore, since the Canon makes explicit
mention of certain women, but does not in so many words speak of witches;
therefore they are entirely wrong who understand the Canon only to speak of
imaginary voyages and goings to and fro in the body and who wish to reduce
every kind of superstition to this illusion: for as those women are
transported in their imagination, so are witches actually and bodily
transported. And he who wishes to argue from this Canon that the effects of
witchcraft, the infliction of disease or any sickness, are purely imaginary,
utterly mistakes the tenor of the Canon, and errs most grossly.
Further, it is to be observed that those who, whilst they allow the
two extremes, that is to say, some operation of the devil and the effect, a
sensible disease, to be actual and real, at the same time deny that any
instrument is the means thereof; that is to say, they deny that any witch
could have participated in such a cause and effect, these, I say, err most
gravely: for, in philosophy, the mean must always partake of the nature of
the two extremes.
Moreover, it is useless to argue that any result of witchcraft may
be a phantasy and unreal, because such a phantasy cannot be procured without
resort to the power of the devil, and it is necessary that there should be
made a contract with the devil, bu which contract the witch truly and
actually binds herself to be the servant of the devil and devotes herself to
the devil, and this is not done in any dream or under any illusion, but she
herself bodily and truly co-operates with, and conjoins herself to, the
devil. For this indeed is the end of all witchcraft; whether it be the
casting of spells by a look or by a formula of words or by some other charm,
it is all of the devil, as will be made clear in the following question.
In truth, if anyone cares to read the words of the Canon, there are
four points which must particularly strike him. And the first point is this:
It is absolutely incumbent upon all who have the cure of souls, to teach
their flocks that there is one, only, true God, and that to none other in
Heaven or earth may worship by given. The second point is this, that
although these women imagine they are riding (as they think and say) with
Diana or with Herodias, in truth they are riding with the devil, who calls
himself by some such heathen name and throws a glamour before their eyes.
And the third point is this, that the act of riding abroad may be merely
illusory, since the devil has extraordinary power over the minds of those
who have given themselves up to him, so that what they do in pure
imagination, they believe they have actually and really done in the body.
And the fourth point is this: Witches have made a compact to obey the devil
in all things, wherefore that the words of the Canon should be extended to
include and comprise every act of witchcraft is absurd, since witches do
much more than these women, and witches actually are of a very different
kind.
Whether witches by their magic arts are actually and bodily
transported from place to place, or whether this merely happens in
imagination, as is the case with regard to those women who are called
Pythons, will be dealt with later in this work, and we shall also discuss
how they are conveyed. So now we have explained two errors, at least, and we
have arrived at a clear understanding of the sense of the Canon.
Moreover, a third error, which mistaking the words of the Canon says
that all magic arts are illusions, may be corrected from the very words of
the Canon itself. For inasmuch as it says that he who believes any creature
can be made or transformed for the better or the worse, or metamorphosed
into some other species or likeness, save it be by the Creator of all things
Himself, etc . . . . he is worse than an infidel. These three propositions,
if they are thus understood as they might appear on the bare face of them,
are clean contrary to the sense of Holy Scripture and the commentaries of
the doctors of the Church. For the following Canon clearly says that
creatures can be made by witches, although they necessarily must be very
imperfect creatures, and probably in some way deformed. And it is plain that
the sense of the Canon agrees with what S. Augustine tells us concerning the
magicians at the court of Pharao, who turned their rods into serpents, as
the holy doctor writes upon the 7th chapter of Exodus, ver. II, - and Pharao
called the wise men and the magicians . . . . We may also refer to the
commentaries of Strabo, who says that devils hurry up and down over the
whole earth, when by their incantations witches are employing them at
various operations, and these devils are able to collect various species to
grow. We may also refer to Blessed Albertus Magnus, De animalibus. And also
S. Thomas, Part I, question 114, article 4. For the sake of conciseness we
will not quote them at length here, but this remains proven, that it is
possible for certain creatures to be created in this way.
With reference to the second point, that a creature may be changed
for better or worse, it is always to be understood that this can only be
done by the permission and indeed by the power of God, and that this is only
done in order to correct or to punish, but that God very often allows devils
to act as His ministers and His servants, but throughout all it is God alone
who can afflict and it is He alone who can heal, for “I kill and I make
alive” (Deuteronomy xxxii, 39). And so evil angels may and do perform the
will of God. To this also S. Augustine bears witness when he says: There are
in truth magic spells and evil charms, which not only often afflict men with
diseases but even kill them outright. We must also endeavour clearly to
understand what actually happens when nowadays by the power of the devil
wizards and witches are changed into wolves and other savage beasts. The
Canon, however, speaks of some bodily and lasting change, and does not
discuss those extraordinary things which may be done by glamour of which S.
Augustine speaks in the 18th book and the 17th chapter of Of the City of
God, when he reports many strange tales of that famous witch Circe, and of
the companions of Diomedes and of the father of Praestantius. This will be
discussed in detail in the Second Part.
The second part of our inquiry is this, whether obstinately to
maintain that witches exist is heretical. The questions arises whether
people who hold that witches do not exist are to be regarded as notorious
heretics, or whether they are to be regarded as gravely suspect of holding
heretical opinions. It seems that the first opinion is the correct one. For
this is undoubtedly in accordance with the opinion of the learned Bernard.
And yet those persons who openly and obstinately persevere in heresy must be
proved to be heretics by unshaken evidence, and such demonstration is
generally one of three kinds; either a man has openly preached and
proclaimed heretical doctrines; or he is proved to be a heretic by the
evidence of trustworthy witnesses; or he is proved to be a heretic by his
own free confession. And yet there are some who rashly opposing themselves
to all authority publicly proclaim that witches do not exist, or at any rate
that they can in no way afflict and hurt mankind. Wherefore, strictly
speaking those who are convicted of such evil doctrine may be
excommunicated, since they are openly and unmistakably to be convicted of
false doctrine. The reader may consult the works of Bernard, where he will
find that this sentence is just, right, and true. Yet perhaps this may seem
to be altogether too severe a judgement mainly because of the penalties
which follow upon excommunication: for the Canon prescribes that a cleric is
to be degraded and that a layman is to be handed over to the power of the
secular courts, who are admonished to punish him as his offence deserves.
Moreover, we must take into consideration the very great numbers of persons
who, owing to their ignorance, will surely be found guilty of this error.
And since the error is very common the rigor of strict justice may be
tempered with mercy. And it is indeed our intention to try to make excuses
for those who are guilty of this heresy rather than to accuse them of being
infected with the malice of heresy. It is preferable then that if a man
should be even gravely suspected of holding this false opinion he should not
be immediately condemned for the grave crime of heresy. (See the gloss of
Bernard upon the word Condemned.) One may in truth proceed against such a
man as against a person who is gravely suspect, but he is not to be
condemned in his absence and without a hearing. And yet the suspicion may be
very grave, and we cannot refrain from suspecting these people, for their
frivolous assertions do certainly seem to affect the purity of the faith.
For there are three kinds of suspicion - a light suspicion, a serious
suspicion, and a grave suspicion. These are treated of in the chapter on
Accusations and in the chapter on Contumacy, Book 6, on Heretics. And these
things come under the cognizance of the archidiaconal court. Reference may
also be made to the commentaries of Giovanni d'Andrea, and in particular to
his glosses upon the phrases Accused; Gravely suspect; and his note upon a
presumption of heresy. It is certain too that some who lay down the law on
this subject do not realize that they are holding false doctrines and
errors, for there are many who have no knowledge of the Canon law, and there
are some who, owing to the fact that they are badly informed and
insufficiently read, waver in their opinions and cannot make up their minds,
and since an idea merely kept to oneself is not heresy unless it be
afterwards put forward, obstinately and openly maintained, it should
certainly be said that persons such as we have just mentioned are not to be
openly condemned for the crime of heresy. But let no man think he may escape
by pleading ignorance. For those who have gone astray through ignorance of
this kind may be found to have sinned very gravely. For although there are
many degrees of ignorance, nevertheless those who have the cure of souls
cannot plead invincible ignorance, as the philosophers call it, which by the
writers on Canon law and by the Theologians is called Ignorance of the Fact.
But what is to be blamed in these persons is Universal ignorance, that is to
say, an ignorance of the divine law, which, as Pope Nicholas has laid down,
they must and should know. For he says: The dispensation of these divine
teachings is entrusted to our charge: and woe be unto us if we do not sow
the good seed, woe be unto us if we do not teach our flocks. And so those
who have the charge of souls are bound to have a sound knowledge of the
Sacred Scriptures. It is true that according to Raymond of Sabunde and S.
Thomas, those who have the cure of souls are certainly not bound to be men
of any extraordinary learning, but they certainly should have a competent
knowledge, that is to say, knowledge sufficient to carry out the duties of
their state.
And yet, and this may be some small consolation to them, the
theoretical severity of law is often balanced by the actual practice, and
they may know that this ignorance of the Canon law, although sometimes it
may be culpable and worthy of blame, is considered from two points of view.
For sometimes persons do not know, they do not wish to know, and they have
no intention of knowing. For such persons there is no excuse, but they are
to be altogether condemned. And of these the Psalmist speaks: He would not
understand in order that he might do good. But secondly, there are those who
are ignorant, yet not from any desire not to know. And this diminishes the
gravity of the sin, because there is no actual consent of the will. And such
a case is this, when anyone ought to know something, but cannot realize that
he ought to know it, as S. Paul says in his 1st Epistle to Timothy (i.13):
But I obtained the mercy of God, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief.
And this is technically said to be an ignorance, which indirectly at least
is the fault of the person, insomuch as on account of many of occupations he
neglects to inform himself of matters which he ought to know, and he does
not use any endeavour to make himself acquainted with them, and this
ignorance does not entirely excuse him, but it excuses him to a certain
degree. So S. Ambrose, writing upon that passage in the Romans (ii, 4):
Knowest thou not, that the benignity of God leadeth thee to penance? says,
If thou dost not know through thine own fault then thy sin is very great and
grievous. More especially then in these days, when souls are beset with so
many dangers, we must take measures to dispel all ignorance, and we must
always have before our eyes that sever judgement which will be passed upon
us if we do not use, everyone according to his proper ability, the one
talent which has been given. In this way our ignorance will be neither thick
nor stupid, for metaphorically we speak of men as thick and stupid who do
not see what lies directly in their very way.
And in the Flores regularum moralium the Roman Chancellor commenting
upon the second rule says: A culpable ignorance of the Divine law does not
of necessity affect the ignorant person. The reason is this: the Holy Spirit
is able directly to instruct a man in all that knowledge essential to
salvation, if these things are too difficult for him to grasp unaided by his
own natural intellect.
The answer to the first objection then is a clear and correct
understanding of the Canon. To the second objection Peter of Tarentaise
(Blessed Innocent V) replies: No doubt the devil, owing to his malice which
he harbours against the human race, would destroy mankind if he were allowed
by God to do so. The fact that God allows him sometimes to do harm and that
sometimes God hinders and prevents him, manifestly brings the devil into
more open contempt and loathing, since in all things, to the manifestation
of His glory, God is using the devil, unwilling though he be, as a servant
and slave. With regard to the third objection, that the infliction of
sickness or some other harm is always the result of human effort, whereby
the witch submits her will to evil, and so actually as any other evil-doer,
by the volition of her will can afflict some person or bring about some
damage or perform some villainous act. If it be asked whether the movement
of material objects from place to place by the devil may be paralleled by
the movement of the spheres, the answer is No. Because material objects are
not thus moved by any natural inherent power of their own, but they are only
moved by a certain obedience to the power of the devil, who by the virtue of
his own nature has a certain dominion over bodies and material things; he
has this certain power, I affirm, yet he is not able to add to created
material objects any form or shape, be it substantial or accidental, without
some admixture of or compounding with another created natural object. But
since, by the will of God, he is able to move material objects from place to
place, then by the conjunction of various objects he can produce disease or
some circumstance such as he will. Wherefore the spells and effects of
witchcraft are not governed by the movement of the spheres, nor is the devil
himself thus governed, inasmuch as he may often make use of these conditions
to do him service.
The answer to the fourth objection. The work of God can be destroyed
by the work of the devil in accordance with what we are now saying with
reference to the power and effects of witchcraft. But since this can only be
by the permission of God, it does not at all follow that the devil is
stronger than God. Again, he cannot use so much violence as he wishes to
harm the works of God, because if he were unrestricted he would utterly
destroy all the works of God.
The answer to the fifth objection may be clearly stated thus: The
planets and stars have no power to coerce and compel devils to perform any
actions against their will, although seemingly demons are readier to appear
when summoned by magicians under the influence of certain stars. It appears
that they do this for two reasons. First, because they know that the power
of that planet will aid the effect which the magicians desire. Secondly,
They do this in order to deceive men, thus making them suppose that the
stars have some divine power or actual divinity, and we know that in days of
old this veneration of the stars led to the vilest idolatry.
With reference to the last objection, which is founded upon the
argument that gold is made by alchemists, we may put forward the opinion of
S. Thomas when he discusses the power of the devil and how he works:
Although certain forms having a substance may be brought about by art and
the power of a natural agent, as, for example, the form fire is brought
about by art employed on wood: nevertheless, this cannot be done
universally, because art cannot always either find or yet mix together the
proper proportions, and yet it can produce something similar. And thus
alchemists make something similar to gold, that is to say, in so far as the
external accidents are concerned, but nevertheless they do not make true
gold, because the substance of gold is not formed by the heat of fire which
alchemists employ, but by the heat of the sun, acting and reacting upon a
certain spot where mineral power is concentrated and amassed, and therefore
such gold is of the same likeness as, but is not of the same species as,
natural gold. And the same argument applies to all their other operations.
This then is our proposition: devils by their act do bring about
evil effects through witchcraft, yet it is true that without the assistance
of some agent they cannot make any form, either substantial or accidental,
and we do not maintain that they can inflict damage without the assistance
of some agent, but with such an agent diseases, and any other human passions
or ailments, can be brought about, and these are real and true. How these
agents or how the employment of such means can be rendered effective in co-
operation with devils will be made clear in the following chapters.
Question II If it be in Accordance with the Catholic Faith to maintain that
in Order to bring about some Effect of Magic, the Devil must intimately co-
operate with the Witch, or whether one without the other, that is to say,
the Devil without the Witch, or conversely, could produce such an Effect.
If it be in accordance with the Catholic Faith to maintain that in
order to bring about some effect of magic, the devil must intimately co-
operate with the witch, or whether one without the other, that is to say,
the devil without the witch, or conversely, could produce such an effect.
And the first argument is this: That the devil can bring about an
effect of magic without the co-operation of any witch. So S. Augustine
holds. All things which visibly happen so that they can be seen, may (it is
believed) be the work of the inferior powers of the air. But bodily ills and
ailments are certainly not invisible, nay rather, they are evident to the
senses, therefore they can be brought about by devils. Moreover, we learn
from the Holy Scriptures of the disasters which fell upon Job, how fire fell
from heaven and striking the sheep and the servants consumed them, and how a
violent wind threw down the four corners of a house so that it fell upon his
children and slew them all. The devil by himself without the co-operation of
any witches, but merely by God's permission alone, was able to bring about
all these disasters. Therefore he can certainly do many things which are
often ascribed to the work of witches.
And this is obvious from the account of the seven husbands of the
maiden Sara, whom a devil killed. Moreover, whatever a superior power is
able to do, it is able to do without reference to a power superior to it,
and a superior power can all the more work without reference to an inferior
power. But an inferior power can cause hailstorms and bring about diseases
without the help of a power greater than itself. For Blessed Albertus Magnus
in his work De passionibus aeris says that rotten sage, if used as he
explains, and thrown into running water, will arouse most fearful tempests
and storms.
Moreover, it may be said that the devil makes use of a witch, not
because he has need of any such agent, but because he is seeking the
perdition of the witch. We may refer to what Aristotle says in the 3rd book
of his Ethics. Evil is a voluntary act which is proved by the fact that
nobody performs an unjust action, and a man who commits a rape does this for
the sake of pleasure, not merely doing evil for evil's sake. Yet the law
punishes those who have done evil as if they had acted merely for the sake
of doing evil. Therefore if the devil works by means of a witch he is merely
employing an instrument; and since an instrument depends upon the will of
the person who employs it and does not act of its own free will, therefore
the guilt of the action ought not to be laid to the charge of the witch, and
in consequence she should not be punished.
But an opposite opinion holds that the devil cannot so easily and
readily do harm by himself to mankind, as he can harm them through the
instrumentality of witches, although they are his servants. In the first
place we may consider the act of generation. But for every act which has an
effect upon another some kind of contact must be established, and because
the devil, who is a spirit, can have no such actual contact with a human
body, since there is nothing common of this kind between them, therefore he
uses some human instruments, and upon these he bestows the power of hurting
by bodily touch. And many hold this to be proven by the text, and the gloss
upon the text, in the 3rd chapter of S. Paul's Epistle to the Galatians: O
senseless Galatians, who hath bewitched you that you should not obey the
truth? And the gloss upon this passage refers to those who have singularly
fiery and baleful eyes, who by a mere look can harm others, especially young
children. And Avicenna also bears this out, Naturalism, Book 3, c. the last,
when he says; “Very often the soul may have as much influence upon the body
of another to the same extent as it has upon its own body, for such is the
influence of the eyes of anyone who by his glance attracts and fascinates
another.” And the same opinion is maintained by Al-Gazali in the 5th book
and 10th c. of his Physics. Avicenna also suggests, although he does not put
this opinion forward as irrefutable, that the power of the imagination can
actually change or seem to change extraneous bodies, in cases where the
power of the imagination is too unrestrained; and hence we father that the
power of the imagination is not to be considered as distinct from a man's
other sensible powers, since it is common to them all, but to some extent it
includes all those other powers. And this is true, because such a power of
the imagination can change adjacent bodies, as, for example, when a man is
able to walk along some narrow beam which is stretched down the middle of a
street. But yet if this beam were suspended over deep water he would not
dare to walk along it, because his imagination would most strongly impress
upon his mind the idea of falling, and therefore his body and the power of
his limbs would not obey his imagination, and they would not obey the
contrary thereto, that is to say, walking directly and without hesitation.
This change may be compared to the influence exercised by the eyes of a
person who has such influence, and so a mental change is brought about
although there is not any actual and bodily change.
Moreover, if it be argued that such a change is cause by a living
body owing to the influence of the mind upon some other living body, this
answer may be given. In the presence of a murderer blood flows from the
wounds in the corpse of the person he has slain. Therefore without any
mental powers bodies can produce wonderful effects, and so a living man if
he pass by near the corpse of a murdered man, although he may not be aware
of the dead body, is often seized with fear.
Again, there are some things in nature which have certain hidden
powers, the reason for which man does not know; such, for example, is the
lodestone, which attracts steel and many other such things, which S.
Augustine mentions in the 20th book Of the City of God.
And so women in order to bring about changes in the bodies of others
sometimes make use of certain things, which exceed our knowledge, but this
is without any aid from the devil. And because these remedies are mysterious
we must not therefore ascribe them to the power of the devil as we should
ascribe evil spells wrought by witches.
Moreover, witches use certain images and other strange periapts,
which they are wont to place under the lintels of the doors of houses, or in
those meadows where flocks are herding, or even where men congregate, and
thus they cast spells over their victims, who have oft-times been known to
die. But because such extraordinary effects can proceed from these images it
would appear that the influence of these images is in proportion to the
influence of the stars over human bodies, for as natural bodies are
influenced by heavenly bodies, so may artificial bodies likewise be thus
influenced. But natural bodies may find the benefit of certain secret but
good influences. Therefore artificial bodies may receive such influence.
Hence it is plain that those who perform works of healing may well perform
them by means of such good influences, and this has no connexion at all with
any evil power.
Moreover, it would seem that most extraordinary and miraculous
events come to pass by the working of the power of nature. For wonderful and
terrible and amazing things happen owing to natural forces. And this S.
Gregory points out in his Second Dialogue. The Saints perform miracles,
sometimes by a prayer, sometimes by their power alone. There are examples of
each; S. Peter by praying raised to life Tabitha, who was dead. By rebuking
Ananias and Sapphira, who were telling a lie, he slew the without any
prayer. Therefore a man by his mental influence can change a material body
into another, or he can change such a body from health to sickness and
conversely.
Moreover, the human body is nobler than any other body, but because
of the passions of the mind the human body changes and becomes hot or cold,
as is the case with angry men or men who are afraid: and so even greater
change takes place with regard to the effects of sickness and death, which
by their power can greatly change a material body.
But certain objections must be allowed. The influence of the mind
cannot make an impression upon any form except by the intervention of some
agent, as we have said above. And these are the words of S. Augustine in the
book which we have already quoted: It is incredible that the angels who fell
from Heaven should be obedient to any material things, for the obey God
only. And much less can a man of his natural power bring about extraordinary
and evil effects. The answer must be made, there are even to-day many who
err greatly on this point, making excuses for witches and laying the whole
blame upon the craft of the devil, or ascribing the changes that they work
to some natural alteration. These errors may be easily made clear. First, by
the description of witches which S. Isidore gives in his Etymologiae, c. 9:
Witches are so called on account of the blackness of their guilt, that is to
say, their deeds are more evil than those of any other malefactors. He
continues: They stir up and confound the elements by the aid of the devil,
and arouse terrible hailstorms and tempests. Moreover, he says they distract
the minds of men, driving them to madness, insane hatred, and inordinate
lusts. Again, he continues, by the terrible influence of their spells alone,
as it were by a draught of poison, they can destroy life.
And the words of S. Augustine in his book on The City of God are
very much to the point, for he tells us who magicians and witches really
are. Magicians, who are commonly called witches, are thus termed on account
of the magnitude of their evil deeds. These are they who by the permission
of God disturb the elements, who drive to distraction the minds of men, such
as have lost their trust in God, and by the terrible power of their evil
spells, without any actual draught or poison, kill human beings. As Lucan
says: A mind which has not been corrupted by any noxious drink perishes
forspoken by some evil charm. For having summoned devils to their aid they
actually dare to heap harms upon mankind, and even to destroy their enemies
by their evil spells. And it is certain that in operations of this kind the
witch works in close conjunction with the devil. Secondly, punishments are
of four kinds: beneficial, hurtful, wrought by witchcraft, and natural.
Beneficial punishments are meted out by the ministry of good Angels, just as
hurtful punishments proceed from evil spirits. Moses smote Egypt with ten
plagues by the ministry of good Angels, and the magicians were only able to
perform three of these miracles by the aid of the devil. And the pestilence
which fell upon the people for three days because of the sin of David who
numbered the people, and the 72,000 men who were slain in one night in the
army of Sennacherib, were miracles wrought by the Angels of God, that is, by
good Angels who feared God and knew that they were carrying out His
commands.
Destructive harm, however, is wrought by the medium of bad angels,
at whose hands the children of Israel in the desert were often afflicted.
And those harms which are simply evil and nothing more are brought about by
the devil, who works through the medium of sorcerers and witches. There are
also natural harms which in some manner depend upon the conjunction of
heavenly bodies, such as dearth, drought, tempests, and similar effects of
nature.
It is obvious that there is a vast difference between all these
causes, circumstances, and happenings. For Job was afflicted by the devil
with a harmful disease, but this is nothing to the purpose. And if anybody
who is too clever and over-curious asks how it was that Job was afflicted
with this disease by the devil without the aid of some sorcerer or witch,
let him know that he is merely beating the air and not informing himself as
to the real truth. For in the time of Job there were no sorcerers and
witches, and such abominations were not yet practised. But the providence of
God wished that by the example of Job the power of the devil even over good
men might be manifested, so that we might learn to be on our guard against
Satan, and, moreover, by the example of this holy patriarch the glory of God
shines abroad, since nothing happens save what is permitted by God.
With regard to the time at which this evil superstition, witchcraft,
appeared, we must first distinguish the worshippers of the devil from those
who were merely idolaters. And Vincent of Beauvais in his Speculum
historiale, quoting many learned authorities, says that he who first
practised the arts of magic and of astrology was Zoroaster, who is said to
have been Cham the son of Noe. And according to S. Augustine in his book Of
the City of God, Cham laughed aloud when he was born, and thus showed that
he was a servant of the devil, and he, although he was a great and mighty
king, was conquered by Ninus the son of Belus, who built Ninive, whose reign
was the beginning of the kingdom of Assyria in the time of Abraham.
Thus Ninus, owing to his insane love for his father, when his father
was dead, ordered a statue of his father to be made, and whatever criminal
took refuge there was free from any punishment which he might have incurred.
From this time men began to worship images as though they were gods; but
this was after the earliest years of history, for in the very first ages
there was no idolatry, since in the earliest times men still preserved some
remembrance of the creation of the world, as S. Thomas says, Book 2,
question 95, article 4. Or it may have originated with Nembroth, who
compelled men to worship fire; and thus in the second age of the world there
began Idolatry, which is the first of all superstitions, as Divination is
the second, and the Observing of Times and Seasons the third.
The practices of witches are included in the second kind of
superstition, which is to say Divination, since the expressly invoke the
devil. And there are three kinds of this superstition: - Necromancy,
Astrology, or rather Astromancy, the superstitious observation of stars, and
Oneiromancy.
I have explained all this at length that the reader may understand
that these evil arts did not suddenly burst upon the world, but rather were
developed in the process of time, and therefore it was not impertinent to
point out that there were no witches in the days of Job. For as the years
went by, as S. Gregory says in his Moralia, the knowledge of the Saints
grew: and therefore the evil craft of the devil likewise increased. The
prophet Isaias says: The earth is filled with the knowledge of the Lord (xi,
6). And so in this twilight and evening of the world, when sin is
flourishing on every side and in every place, when charity is growing cold,
the evil of witches and their inequities superabound.
And since Zoroaster was wholly given up to the magic arts, it was
the devil alone who inspired him to study and observe the stars. Very early
did sorcerers and witches make compacts with the devil and connive with him
to bring harm upon human beings. This is proved in the seventh chapter of
Exodus, where the magicians of Pharao by the power of the devil wrought
extraordinary wonders, imitating those plagues which Moses had brought upon
Egypt by the power of good angels.
Hence it follows the Catholic teaching, that in order to bring about
evil a witch can and does co-operate with the devil. And any objections to
this may briefly be answered thus.
1. In the first place, nobody denies that certain harms and damages
which actually and visibly afflict men, animals, the fruits of the earth,
and which often come about by the influence of stars, may yet often be
brought about by demons, when God permits them do to act. For as S.
Augustine says in the 4th book Of the City of God: Demons may make use of
both fire and air if God allow them so to do. And a commentator remarks: God
punishes by the power of evil angels.
2. From this obviously follows the answer to any objection
concerning Job, and to any objections which may be raised to our account of
the beginnings of magic in the world.
3. With regard to the fact that rotten sage which is thrown into
running water is said to produce some evil effect without the help of the
devil, although it may not be wholly disconnected with the influence of
certain stars, we would point out that we do not intend to discuss the good
or evil influence of the stars, but only witchcraft, and therefore this is
beside the point.
4. With regard to the fourth argument, it is certainly true that the
devil only employs witches to bring about their bale and destruction. But
when it is deduced that they are not to be punished, because they only act
as instruments which are moved not by their own volition but at the will and
pleasure of the principal and agent, there is a ready answer: For they are
human instruments and free agents, and although they have made a compact and
a contract with the devil, nevertheless they do enjoy absolute liberty: for,
as has been learnt from their own revelations - and I speak of women who
have been convicted and burned at the stake and who were compelled to wreak
vengeance and evil and damage if they wished to escape punishments and blows
inflicted by the devil - yet these women co-operate with the devil although
they are bound to him by that profession by which at first they freely and
willingly gave themselves over to his power.
With regard to these other arguments, in which it is proved that
certain old women have an occult knowledge which enables them to bring about
extraordinary and indeed evil effects without the aid of the devil. It must
be understood that from one particular to conclude a universal argument is
contrary to all sound reason. And when, as it seems, throughout the whole of
the Scriptures no such instance can be found, save where it speaks of the
charms and spells old women practise, therefore we must not hence conclude
that this is always the case. Moreover, the authorities on these passages
leave the matter open to question, that is to say, whether such charms have
any efficacy without the co-operation of the devil. These charms or
fascinations seem capable of division into three kinds. First, the senses
are deluded, and this may truly be done by magic, that is to say, by the
power of the devil, if God permit it. And the senses may be enlightened by
the power of good angels. Secondly, fascination may bring about a certain
glamour and a leading astray, as when the apostle says: Who hath bewitched
you? Galatians iii, I. In the third place, there may be a certain
fascination cast by the eyes over another person, and this may be harmful
and bad.
And it is of this fascination that Avicenna and Al-Gazali have
spoken; S. Thomas to thus mentions this fascination, Part I, question 117.
For he says the mind of a man may be changed by the influence of another
mind. And that influence which is exerted over another often proceeds from
the eyes, for in the eyes a certain subtle influence may be concentrated.
For the eyes direct their glance upon a certain object without taking notice
of other things, and although the vision be perfectly clear, yet at the
sight of some impurity, such, for example, a woman during her monthly
periods, the eyes will as it were contract a certain impurity. This is what
Aristotle says in his work On Sleep and Waking, and thus if anybody's spirit
be inflamed with malice or rage, as is often the case with old women, then
their disturbed spirit looks through their eyes, for their countenances are
most evil and harmful, and often terrify young children of tender years, who
are extremely impressionable. And it may be that this is often natural,
permitted by God; on the other hand, it may be that these evil looks are
often inspired by the malice of the devil, with whom old witches have made
some secret contract.
The next question arises with regard to the influence of the
heavenly bodies, and here we find three very common errors, but these will
be answered as we proceed to the explain other matters.
With regard to operations of witchcraft, we find that some of these
may be due to mental influence over others, and in some cases such mental
influence might be a good one, but it is the motive which makes it evil.
And there are four principal arguments which are to be objected
against those who deny that there are witches, or magical operations, which
may be performed at the conjunction of certain planets and stars, and that
by the malice of human beings harm may be wrought through fashioning images,
though the use of spells, and by the writing of mysterious characters. All
theologians and philosophers agree that the heavenly bodies are guided and
directed by certain spiritual mediums. But those spirits are superior to our
minds and souls, just as the heavenly bodies are superior to other bodies,
and therefore they can influence both the mind and body of a man, so that he
is persuaded and directed to perform some human act. But in order yet more
fully to attempt a solution of these matters, we may consider certain
difficulties from a discussion of which we shall yet more clearly arrive at
the truth. First, spiritual substance cannot change bodies to some other
natural form unless it be through the mediumship of some agent. Therefore,
however strong a mental influence may be, it cannot effect any change in a
man's mind or disposition. Moreover, several universities, especially that
of Paris, have condemned the following article: - That an enchanter is able
to cast a camel into a deep ditch merely by directing his gaze upon it. And
so this article is condemned, that a corporeal body should obey some
spiritual substance if this be understood simply, that is to say, if the
obedience entails some actual change or transformation. For in regard to
this it is God alone Who is absolutely obeyed. Bearing these points in mind
we may soon see how that fascination, or influence of the eyes of which we
have spoken, is possible. For it is not possible that a man through the
natural powers of his mind should direct such power from his eyes that,
without the agency of his own body or of some other medium, he should be
able to do harm to the body of another man. Nor is it possible that a man
through the natural powers of his mind should at his will bring about some
change, and by directing this power through the mediumship of his eyes
entirely transform the body of a man, upon whom he fixes his gaze, just as
his will and pleasure may be.
And therefore in neither of these ways can one man influence another
and fascinate another, for no man by the natural powers of his mind alone
possesses such an extraordinary influence. Therefore, to wish to prove that
evil effects can be produced by some natural power is to say that this
natural power is the power of the devil, which is very far indeed from the
truth.
Nevertheless, we may more clearly set forth how it is possible for a
careful gaze to do harm. It may so happen that if a man or a woman gaze
steadfastly at some child, the child, owing to its power of sight and power
of imagination, may receive some very sensible and direct impression. And an
impression of this kind is often accompanied by a bodily change, and since
the eyes are one of the tenderest organs of the body, therefore they are
very liable to such impressions. Therefore it may well happen that the eyes
receive some bad impression and change for the worse, since very often the
thoughts of the mind or the motions of the body are particularly impressed
upon and shown by the eyes. And so it may happen that some angry and evil
gaze, if it has been steadfastly fixed and directed upon a child, may so
impress itself upon that child's memory and imagination that it may reflect
itself in the gaze of the child, and actual results will follow, as, for
example, he may lose his appetite and be unable to take food, he may sicken
and fall ill. And sometimes we see that the sight of a man who is suffering
from his eyes may cause the eyes of those who gaze upon him to dazzle and
feel weak, although to a large extent this is nothing else but the effect of
pure imagination. Several other examples of the same sort might be discussed
here, but for the sake of conciseness we will not discuss them in any
further detail.
All this is borne out of the commentators upon the Psalm, Qui timent
te uidebunt me. There is a great power in the eyes, and this appears even in
natural things. For if a wolf see a man first, the man is struck dumb.
Moreover, if a basilisk see a man first its look is fatal; but if he see it
first he may be able to kill it; and the reason why the basilisk is able to
kill a man by its gaze is because when it sees him, owing to its anger a
certain terrible poison is set in motion throughout its body, and this it
can dart from its eyes, thus injecting the atmosphere with deadly venom. And
thus the man breathes in the air which it has infected and is stupefied and
dies. But when the beast is first seen by the man, in a case when the man
wishes to kill the basilisk, he furnishes himself with mirrors, and the
beast seeing itself in the mirrors darts out poison towards it reflection,
but the poison recoils and the animal dies. It does not seem plain, however,
why the man who thus kills the basilisk should not die too, and we can only
conclude that this is on account of some reason not clearly understood.
So far we have set down our opinions absolutely without prejudice
and refraining from any hasty or rash judgement, not deviating from the
teachings and writings of the Saints. We conclude, therefore, that the
Catholic truth is this, that to bring about these evils which form the
subject of discussion, witches and the devil always work together, and that
in so far as these matters are concerned one can do nothing without the aid
and assistance of the other.
We have already treated of this fascination. And now with reference
to the second point, namely, that blood will flow from a corpse in the
presence of a murderer. According to the Speculum naturale of Vincent of
Beauvis, c. 13, the wound is, as it were, influenced by the mind of the
murderer, and that wound receives a certain atmosphere which has been
impressed by and is permeated with his violence and hatred, and when the
murderer draws near, the blood wells up and gushes forth from the corpse.
For it would seem that this atmosphere, which was cause and as it were
entered the wound owing to the murderer, at his presence is disturbed and
greatly moved, and it is owing to this movement that the blood streams out
of the dead body. There are some who declared that it is due to some other
causes, and they say that this gushing forth of blood is the voice of the
blood crying from the earth against the murderer who is present, and that
this is on account of the curse pronounced against the murderer Cain. And
with regard to that horror which a person feels when he is passing near the
corpse of a man who has been murdered, although he may not be in any way
cognizant of the vicinity of a dead body, this horror is psychic, it infects
the atmosphere and conveys a thrill of fear to the mind. But all these
explanations, be it noted, do not in any way affect the truth of the evil
wrought by witches, since they are all perfectly natural and arise from
natural causes.
In the third place, as we have already said above, the operations
and rites of witches are placed in that second category of superstition
which is called Divination; and of this divination there are three kinds,
but the argument does not hold good with reference to the third kind, which
belongs to a different species, for witchcraft is not merely any divination,
but it is that divination, the operations of which are performed by express
and explicit invocations of the devil; and this may be done in very many
ways, as by Necromancy, Geomancy, Hydromancy, etc.
Wherefore this divination, which is used when they are working their
spells, must be judged to be the height of criminal wickedness, although
some have attempted to regard it from another point of view. And they argue
thus, that as we do not know the hidden powers of nature, it may be that the
witches are merely employing or seeking to employ these hidden powers:
assuredly if they are employing the natural power of natural things to bring
about a natural effect, this must be perfectly lawful. as indeed is obvious
enough. Or even let us conceive that if the superstitiously employ natural
things, as, for example, by writing down certain characters or unknown names
of some kind, and that then they use these runes for restoring a person to
health, or for inducing friendship, or with some useful end, and not at all
for doing any damage or harm, in such cases, it may be granted, I say, that
there is no express invocation of demons; nevertheless it cannot be that
these spells are employed without a tacit invocation, wherefore all such
charms must be judge to be wholly unlawful.
And because these and many other charms like to them may be placed
in the third category of superstition, that is to say, idle and vain
observing of time and seasons, this is by no means a relevant argument as to
the heresy of witches. But of this category, the observing of times and
seasons, there are four distinct species: A man may use such observations to
acquire certain knowledge: or he may in this way seek to inform himself
concerning lucky or unlucky days and things: or he may use sacred words and
prayers as a charm with no reference to their meaning: or he may intend and
desire to bring about some beneficial change in some body. All this S.
Thomas has amply treated in that question where he asks, Whether such
observing be lawful, especially if it be to bring about a beneficial change
in a body, that is to say, the restoration of persons to health. But when
witches observe times and seasons, their practices must be held to belong to
the second kind of superstition, and therefore, in so far as they are
concerned, questions concerning this third class are wholly impertinent.
We now proceed to a fourth proposition, inasmuch as from
observations of the kind we have discussed certain charts and images are
wont to be made, but these are of two separate sorts, which differ entirely
one from the other; and these are Astronomical and Necromantic. Now in
Necromancy there is always an express and particular invocation of demons,
for this craft implies that there has been an express compact and contract
with them. Let us therefore only consider Astrology. In Astrology there is
no compact, and therefore there is no invocation, unless by chance there be
some kind of tacit invocation, since the figures of demons and their names
sometimes appear in Astrological charts. And again, Necromantic signs are
written under the influence of certain stars in order to counteract the
influence and oppositions of other heavenly bodies, and these are inscribed,
for signs and characters of this kind are often engraved upon rings, gems,
or some other precious metal, but magic signs are engraved without any
reference to the influence of the stars, and often upon any substance, nay,
even upon vile and sordid substances, which when buried in certain places
bring about damage and harm and disease. But we are discussing charts which
are made with reference to the stars. And these Necromantic charts and
images have no reference to any heavenly body. Therefore a consideration of
them does not enter into the present discussion.
Moreover, many of these images which have been made with
superstitious rites have no efficacy at all, that is to say, in so far as
the fashioning of them is concerned, although it may be that the material of
which they are made does possess a certain power, although this is not due
to the fact that they were made under the influence of certain stars. Yet
many hold that it is in any case unlawful to make use even of images like
these. But the images made by witches have no natural power at all, nor has
the material of which they are formed any power; but they fashion such
images by command of the devil, that by so doing they may, as it were, mock
the work of the Creator, and that they may provoke Him to anger so that in
punishment of their misdeeds He may suffer plagues to fall upon the earth.
And in order to increase their guilt they delight especially to fashion many
such images at the more solemn seasons of the year.
With regard to the fifth point, S. Gregory is there speaking of the
power of grace and not of the power of nature. And since, as S. John says,
we are born of God, what wonder then that the sons of God enjoy
extraordinary powers.
With regard to the last point we will say this, that a mere likeness
is irrelevant, because the influence of one's own mind on one's own body is
different from its influence upon another body as though the body were the
material form of the mind, and the emotions are an act of the body, but
separate, therefore the emotion can be changed by the influence of the mind
whensoever there is some bodily change, heat or cold, or any alteration,
even to death itself. But to change the actual body, no act of the mind is
sufficient by itself, unless there can be some physical result which alters
the body. Whence witches, by the exercise of no natural power, but only by
the help of the devil, are able to bring about harmful effects. And the
devils themselves can only do this by the use of material objects as their
instruments, such as bones, hair, wood, iron, and all sorts of objects of
this kind, concerning which operation we shall treat more fully a little
later.
Now with regard to the tenor of the Bull of our Most Holy Father the
Pope, we will discuss the origin of witches, and how it is that of recent
years their works have so multiplied among us. And it must be borne in mind
that for this to take place, three things concur, the devil, the witch, and
the permission of God who suffers such things to be. For S. Augustine says,
that the abomination of witchcraft arose from this foul connexion of mankind
with the devil. Therefore it is plain that the origin and the increase of
this heresy arises from this foul connexion, a fact which many authors
approve.
We must especially observe that this heresy, witchcraft, not only
differs from all other heresy in this, that not merely by a tacit compact,
but by a compact which is exactly defined and expressed it blasphemes the
Creator and endeavours to the utmost to profane Him and to harm His
creatures, for all other simple heresies have made no open compact with the
devil, no compact, that is, either tacit or exactly expressed, although
their errors and misbelief are directly to be attributed to the Father of
errors and lies. Moreover, witchcraft differs from all other harmful and
mysterious arts in this point, that of all superstition it is essentially
the vilest, the most evil and the worst, wherefore it derives its name from
doing evil, and from blaspheming the true faith. (Melaficae dictae a
Melficiendo, seu a male de fide sentiendo.)
Let us especially note too that in the practice of this abominable
evil, four points in particular are required. First, most profanely to
renounce the Catholic Faith, or at any rate to deny certain dogmas of the
faith; secondly, to devote themselves body and soul to all evil; thirdly, to
offer up unbaptized children to Satan; fourthly, to indulge in every kind of
carnal lust with Incubi and Succubi and all manner of filthy delights.
Would to God that we might suppose all this to be untrue and merely
imaginary, if only our Holy Mother the Church were free from the leprosy of
such abomination. Alas, the judgement of the Apostolic See, who is alone the
Mistress and the Teacher of all truth, that judgement, I say, which has been
expressed in the Bull of our Holy Father the Pope, assures us and makes us
aware that amongst us, and we dare not refrain from inquiring into them lest
we imperil our own salvation. And therefore we must discuss at length the
origin and the increase of these abominations; it has been a work of much
labour indeed, and we trust that every detail will most exactly and
carefully be weighed by those who read this book, for herein will be found
nothing contrary to sound reason, nothing which differs from the words of
Scripture and the tradition of the Fathers.
Now there are two circumstances which are certainly very common at
the present day, that is to say, the connexion of witches with familiars,
Incubi and Succubi, and the horrible sacrifices of small children. Therefore
we shall particularly deal with these matters, so that in the first place we
shall discuss these demons themselves, secondly, the witches and their
works, and thirdly, we will inquire wherefore such things are suffered to
be. Now these demons work owing to their influence upon man's mind and upon
his free will, and they choose to copulate under the influence of certain
stars rather than under the influence of others, for it would seem that at
certain times their semen can more easily generate and beget children.
Accordingly, we must inquire why the demons should act at the conjunction of
certain stars, and what times these are.
There are three chief points to discuss. First, whether the
abominable heresies can be multiplied throughout the world by those who give
themselves to Incubi and Succubi. Secondly, whether their actions have not a
certain extraordinary power when performed under the influence of certain
stars. Thirdly, whether this abominable heresy is not widely spread by those
who profanely sacrifice children to Satan. Moreover, when we have discussed
the second point, before we proceed to the third, we must consider the
influence of the stars, and what power they have in acts of witchcraft.
With regard to the first question there are three difficulties which
need elucidation.
The first is a general consideration of these demons, which are
called Incubi.
The second question is more particular, for we must inquire, How can
these Incubi perform the human act of copulation?
The third question is also a special one, How do witches bind
themselves to and copulate with these devils?
Question III Whether Children can be Generated by Incubi and Succubi.
At first it may truly seem that it is not in accordance with the
Catholic Faith to maintain that children can be begotten by devils, that is
to say, by Incubi and Succubi: for God Himself, before sin came into the
world, instituted human procreation, since He created woman from the rib of
man to be a helpmeet unto man: And to them He said: Increase, and multiply,
Genesis ii, 24. Likewise after sin had come into the world, it was said to
Noe: Increase, and multiply, Genesis ix, 1. In the time of the new law also,
Christ confirmed this union: Have ye not read, that he who made man from the
beginning, Made them male and female? S. Matthew xix, 4. Therefore, men
cannot be begotten in any other way than this.
But it may be argued that devils take their part in this generation
not as the essential cause, but as a secondary and artificial cause, since
they busy themselves by interfering with the process of normal copulation
and conception, by obtaining human semen, and themselves transferring it.
Objection. The devil can perform this act in every state of life,
that is to say, in the matrimonial state, or not in the matrimonial state.
Now he cannot perform it in the first state, because then the act of the
devil would be more powerful than the act of God, Who instituted and
confirmed this holy estate, since it is a state of continence and wedlock.
Nor can he effect this in any other estate: since we never read in Scripture
that children can be begotten in one state and not in another.
Moreover, to beget a child is the act of a living body, but devils
cannot bestow life upon the bodies which they assume; because life formally
only proceeds from the soul, and the act of generation is the act of the
physical organs which have bodily life. Therefore bodies which are assumed
in this way cannot either beget or bear.
Yet it may be said that these devils assume a body not in order that
they may bestow life upon it, but that they may by the means of this body
preserve human semen, and pass the semen on to another body.
Objection. As in the action of angels, whether they be good or bad,
there is nothing superfluous and useless, nor is there anything superfluous
and useless in nature. But the devil by his natural power, which is far
greater than any human bodily power, can perform any spiritual action, and
perform it again and again although man may not be able to discern it.
Therefore he is able to perform this action, although man may not be able to
discern when the devil is concerned therewith. For all bodily and material
things are on a lower scale than pure and spiritual intelligences. But the
angels, whether they be good or whether they be evil, are pure and spiritual
intelligences. Therefore they can control what is below them. Therefore the
devil can collect and make use as he will of human semen which belongs to
the body.
However, to collect human semen from one person and to transfer it
to another implies certain local actions. But devils cannot locally move
bodies from place to place. And this is the argument they put forward. The
soul is purely a spiritual essence, so is the devil: but the soul cannot
move a body from place to place except it be that body in which it lives and
to which it gives life: whence if any member of the body perishes it becomes
dead and immovable. Therefore devils cannot move a body from place to place,
except it be a body to which they give life. It has been shown, however, and
is acknowledged that devils do not bestow life on anybody, therefore they
cannot move human semen locally, that is, from place to place, from body to
body.
Moreover, every action is performed by contact, and especially the
act of generation. But it does not seem possible that there can be any
contact between the demon and human bodies, since he has not actual point of
contact with them. Therefore he cannot inject semen into a human body, and
therefore since this needs a certain bodily action, it would seem that the
devil cannot accomplish it.
Besides, devils have no power to move those bodies which in a
natural order are more closely related to them, for example the heavenly
bodies, therefore they have no power to move those bodies which are more
distant and distinct from them. The major is proved, since the power that
moves and the movement are one and the same thing according to Aristotle in
his Physics. It follows, therefore, that devils who move heavenly bodies
must be in heaven, which is wholly untrue, both in our opinion, and in the
opinion of the Platonists.
Moreover, S. Augustine, On the Trinity, III, says that devils do
indeed collect human semen, by means of which they are able to produce
bodily effects; but this cannot be done without some local movement,
therefore demons can transfer semen which they have collected and inject it
into the bodies of others. But, as Walafrid Strabo says in his commentary
upon Exodus vii, II: And Pharao called the wise men and the magicians:
Devils go about the earth collecting every sort of seed, and can by working
upon them broadcast various species. See also the gloss on those words
(Pharao called). And again in Genesis vi the gloss makes two comments on the
words: And the sons of God saw the daughters of men. First, that by the sons
of God are meant the sons of Seth, and by the daughters of men, the
daughters of Cain. Second, that Giants were created not by some incredibly
act of men, but by certain devils, which are shameless towards women. For
the Bible says, Giants were upon the earth. Moreover, even after the Flood
the bodies not only of men, but also of women, were pre-eminently and
incredibly beautiful.
Answer. For the sake of brevity much concerning the power of the
devil and his works in the matter of the effects of witchcraft is left out;
for the pious reader either accepts it as proved, or he may, if he wish to
inquire, find every point clearly elucidated in the second Book of
Sentences, 5. For hw will see that the devils perform all their works
consciously and voluntarily; for the nature that was given them has not been
changed. See Dionysius in his fourth chapter on the subject; their nature
remained intact and very splendid, although they cannot use it for any good
purpose.
And as to their intelligence, he will find that they excel in three
points of understanding, in their age-long experience, and in the revelation
of the higher spirits. He will find also how, through the influence of the
stars, they learn the dominating characteristics of men, and so discover
that some are more disposed to work witchcraft that others, and that they
molest these chiefly for the purpose of such works.
And as to their will, the reader will find that it cleaves
unchangeably to evil, and that they continuously sin in pride, envy, and
gross covetousness; and that God, for his own glory, permits them to work
against His will. He will also understand how with these two qualities of
intellect and will devils do marvels, so that there is no power in earth
which can be compared to them: Job xli. There is no power on the earth which
can be compared with him, who was created that he should fear no one. But
here the gloss says, Although he fears no one he is yet subject to the
merits of the Saints.
He will find also how the devil knows the thoughts of our hearts;
how he can substantially and disastrously metamorphose bodies with the help
of an agent; how he can move bodies locally, and alter the outward and inner
feelings to every conceivable extent; and how he can change the intellect
and will of a man, however indirectly.
For although all this is pertinent to our present inquiry, we wish
only to draw some conclusion therefrom as to that nature of devils, and so
proceed to the discussion of our question.
Now the Theologians have ascribed to them certain qualities, as that
they are unclean spirits, yet not by very nature unclean. For according to
Dionysius there is in them a natural madness, a rabid concupiscence, a
wanton fancy, as is seen from their spiritual sins of pride, envy, and
wrath. For this reason they are the enemies of the human race: rational in
mind, but reasoning without words; subtle in wickedness, eager to hurt; ever
fertile in fresh deceptions, they change the perceptions and befoul the
emotions of men, they confound the watchful, and in dreams disturb the
sleeping; they bring diseases, stir up tempests, disguise themselves as
angels of light, bear Hell always about them; from witches they usurp to
themselves the worship of God, and by this means magic spells are made; they
seek to get a mastery over the good, and molest them to the most of their
power; to the elect they are given as a temptation, and always they lie in
wait for the destruction of men.
And although they have a thousand ways of doing harm, and have tried
ever since their downfall to bring about schisms in the Church, to disable
charity, to infect with the gall of envy the sweetness of the acts of the
Saints, and in every way to subvert and perturb the human race; yet their
power remains confined to the privy parts and the navel. See Job xli. For
through the wantonness of the flesh they have much power over men; and in
men the source of wantonness lies in the privy parts, since it is from them
that the semen falls, just as in women it falls from the navel.
These things, then, being granted for a proper understanding of the
question of Incubi and Succubi, it must be said that it is just as Catholic
a view to hold that men may at times be begotten by means of Incubi and
Succubi, as it is contrary to the words of the Saints and even to the
tradition of Holy Scripture to maintain the opposite opinion. And this is
proved as follows. S. Augustine in one place raises this question, not
indeed as regards witches, but with reference to the very works of devils,
and to the fables of the poets, and leave the matter in some doubt; though
later on he is definite in the matter of Holy Scripture. For in his De
Ciuitate Dei, Book 3, chapter 2, he says: We leave open the question whether
it was possible for Venus to give birth to Aeneas through coition with
Anchises. For a similar question arises in the Scriptures, where it is asked
whether evil angels lay with the daughters of men, and thereby the earth was
then filled with giants, that is to say, preternaturally big and strong men.
But he settles the question in Book 5, chapter 23, in these words: It is a
very general belief, the truth of which is vouched for by many from their
own experience, or at least from heresay as having been experienced by men
of undoubted trustworthiness, that Satyrs and Fauns (which are commonly
called Incubi) have appeared to wanton women and have sought and obtained
coition with them. And that certain devils (which the Gauls call Dusii)
assiduously attempt and achieve this filthiness is vouched for by so many
credible witness that it would seem impudent to deny it.
Later in the same book he settles the second contention, namely,
that the passage in Genesis about the sons of God (that is Seth) and the
daughters of men (that is Cain) does not speak only of Incubi, since the
existence of such is not credible. In this connexion there is the gloss
which we have touched upon before. He says that it is not outside belief
that the Giants of whom the Scripture speaks were begotten not by men, but
by Angels or certain devils who lust after women. To the same effect is the
gloss in Esaias xiii, where the prophet foretells the desolation of Babylon,
and the monsters that should inhabit it. He says: Owls shall dwell there,
and Satyrs shall dance there. By Satyrs here devils are meant; as the gloss
says, Satyrs are wild shaggy creatures of the woods, which are a certain
kind of devils called Incubi. And again in Esaias xxxiv, where he prophesies
the desolation of the land of the Idumeans because they persecuted the Jews,
he says: And it shall be an habitation of dragons, and a court for owls. The
wild beasts also of the desert shall meet . . . The interlinear gloss
interprets this as monsters and devils. And in the same place Blessed
Gregory explains these to be woodland gods under another name, not those
which the Greeks called Pans, and the Latins Incubi.
Similarly Blessed Isidore, in the last chapter of his 8th book,
says: Satyrs are they who are called Pans in Greek and Incubi in Latin. And
they are called Incubi from their practice of overlaying, that is
debauching. For they often lust lecherously after women, and copulate with
them; and the Gauls name them Dusii, because they are diligent in this
beastliness. But the devil which the common people call an Incubus, the
Romans called a fig Faun; to which Horace said, “O Faunus, love of fleeing
nymphs, go gently over my lands and smiling fields.”
As to that of S. Paul in I. Corinthians xi, A woman ought to have a
covering on her head, because of the angels, many Catholics believe that
“because of the angels” refers to Incubi. Of the same opinion is the
Venerable Bede in his History of the English; also William of Paris in his
book De Uniuerso, the last part of the 6th treatise. Moreover, S. Thomas
speaks of this (I. 25 and II. 8, and elsewhere; also on Esaias xii and xiv).
Therefore he says that it is rash to deny such things. For that which
appears true to many cannot be altogether false, according to Aristotle (at
the end of the De somno et uigilia, and in the 2nd Ethics). I say nothing of
the many authentic histories, both Catholic and heathen, which openly affirm
the existence of Incubi.
But the reason the devils turn themselves into Incubi or Succubi is
not for the cause of pleasure, since a spirit has not flesh and blood; but
chiefly it is with this intention, that through the vice of luxury they may
work a twofold harm against men, that is, in body and in soul, that so men
may be more given to all vices. And there is no doubt that they know under
which stars the semen is most vigorous, and that men so conceived will be
always perverted by witchcraft.
When Almighty God had enumerated many vice of luxury rife among the
unbelievers and heretics, from which He wished His people to be clean, He
says in Leviticus xviii: Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things:
for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you: and
the land is defiled: therefore I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it. The
gloss explains the word “nations” as meaning devils who, on account of their
multitude, are call the nations of the world, and rejoice in all sin,
especially in fornication and idolatry, because by these are defiled the
body and the soul, and the whole man, which is called “the land.” For every
sin that a man commits is outside his body, but the man who commits
fornication sins in his body. If anyone wishes to study further the
histories concerning Incubi and Succubi, let him read (as has been said)
Bede in his History of the English, and William, and finally Thomas of
Brabant in his book About Bees.
To return to the matter in hand. And first for the natural act of
propagation instituted by God, that is, between male and female; that as
though by the permission of God the Sacrament of Matrimony can be made void
by the work of the devil through witchcraft, as has been shown above. And
the same is much more strongly true of any other venereal act between man
and woman.
But if it is asked why the devil is allowed to case spells upon the
venereal act, rather than upon any other human act, it is answered that many
reasons are assigned by the Doctors, which will be discussed later in the
part concerning the divine permission. For the present that reason that has
been mentioned before must suffice, namely, that the power of the devil lies
in the privy parts of men. For of all struggles those are the harder where
the fight is continuous and victory rare. And it is unsound to argue that in
that case the work of the devil is stronger than the work of God, since the
matrimonial act instituted by God can be made void: for the devil does not
make it void by violence, since he has no power at all in the matter except
as he is permitted by God. Therefore it would be better to argue from this
that he is powerless.
Secondly, it is true that to procreate a man is the act of a living
body. But when it is said that devils cannot give life, because that flows
formally from the soul, it is true; but materially life springs from the
semen, and an Incubus devil can, with God's permission, accomplish this by
coition. And the semen does not so much spring from him, as it is another
man's semen received by him for this purpose (see S. Thomas, I. 51, art. 3).
For the devil is Succubus to a man, and becomes Incubus to a woman. In just
the same way they absorb the seeds of other things for the generating of
various thing, as S. Augustine says, de Trinitate 3.
Now it may be asked, of whom is a child born the son? It is clear
that he is not the son of the devil, but of the man whose semen was
received. But when it is urged that, just as in the works of Nature, so
there is no superfluity in the works of angels, that is granted; but when it
is inferred that the devil can receive and inject semen invisibly, this also
is true; but he prefers to perform this visibly as a Succubus and an
Incubus, that by such filthiness he may infect body and soul of all
humanity, that is, of both woman and man, there being, as it were, actual
bodily contact.
Moreover, devils can do invisibly more things which they are not
permitted to do visibly, even if the so wished; but they are allowed to do
them invisibly, either as a trial for the good, or as a punishment for the
wicked. Finally, it may happen that another devil may take the place of the
Succubus, receive the semen from him, and become and Incubus in the place of
the other devil; and this for a threefold reason. Perhaps because one devil,
allotted to a woman, should receive semen from another devil, allotted to a
man, that in this way each of them should be commissioned by the prince of
devils to work some witchcraft; since, to each one is allotted his own
angel, even from among the evil ones; or because of the filthiness of the
deed, which one devil would abhor to commit. For in many inquiries it is
clearly shown that certain devils, out of some nobility in their natures,
would shrink from a filthy action. Or it may be in order that the Incubus
may, instead of a man's semen, but interposing himself on to a woman,
invisibly inject his own semen, that is, that which he has invisibly
received. And it is not foreign to his nature or power to effect such an
interposition; since even in bodily form he can interpose himself invisibly
and without physical contact, as was shown in the case of young man who has
betrothed to an idol.
Thirdly, it is said that the power of an angel belongs in an
infinite degree to the higher things; that is to say, that his power cannot
be comprehended by the lower orders, but is always superior to them, so that
it is not limited to one effect only. For the highest powers have most
unbounded influence over creation. But because he is said to be infinitely
superior, that is not to say that he is indifferently powerful for any work
that is propounded for him; for then he might just as well be said to be
infinitely inferior, as superior.
But there must be some proportion between the agent and the patient,
and there can be no proportion between a purely spiritual substance and a
corporeal one. Therefore not even the devils have any power to cause an
effect, except through some other active medium. And this is why they use
the seeds of things to produce their effects; see S. Augustine, de
Trinitate, 3. Wherefore this argument goes back to the preceding one, and is
not strengthened by it, unless anyone wishes for S. Augustine's explanation
why the Intelligences are said to have infinite powers of the higher and not
of the lower degree, given to them in the order of things corporeal and of
the celestial bodies, which can influence many and infinite effects. But
this is not because of the weakness of the inferior powers. And the
conclusion is that devils, even without assuming bodies, can work
transmutations in semen; although this is no argument against the present
proposition, concerning Incubi and Succubi, whose actions they cannot
perform except by assuming bodily shape, as has been considered above.
For the fourth argument, that devils cannot move bodies or semen
locally, which is substantiated by the analogy of the soul. It must be said
that it is one thing to speak of the spiritual substance of the actual angel
or devil, and another thing to speak of the actual soul. For the reason why
the soul cannot locally move a body unless it has given life to it, or else
by contact of a living body with one that is not living, is this: that the
soul occupies by far the lowest grade in the order of spiritual beings, and
therefore it follows that there must be some proportionate relation between
it and the body which it is able to move by contact. But it is not so with
devils, whose power altogether exceeds corporeal power.
And fifthly, it must be said that the contact of a devil with a
body, either in the way of semen or in any other way, is not a corporeal but
a virtual contact, and takes place in accordance with the suitable
proportion of the devil's power. And such bodies are the celestial bodies,
and even the whole earth or the elements of the world, the power of which we
may call superior on the authority of S. Thomas in his questions concerning
Sin (quest. 10, de Daemonibus). For this is either because of the essence of
nature, or because of condemnation for sin. For there is a due order in
things, in accordance both with their very nature and with their motion. And
just as the higher heavenly bodies are moved by the higher spiritual
substances, as are the good Angels, so are the lower bodies moved by the
lower spiritual substances, as are the devils. And if this limitation of the
devils' power is due to the essence of nature, it is held by some that the
devils are not of the order of those higher angels, but are part of this
terrestrial order created by God; and this was the opinion of the
Philosophers. And if it is due to condemnation for sin, as is held by the
Theologians, then they were thrust from the regions of heaven into this
lower atmosphere for a punishment, and therefore are not able to move either
it or the earth.
This has been said on account of two easily dispelled arguments: -
One, regarding the heavenly bodies, that the devils could also move these,
if they were able to move bodies locally, since the stars are neared to them
in nature, as also the last argument alleges. The answer is that this is not
valid; for if the former opinion holds good, those bodies exceed the
proportion of the devils' power: and if the second is true, then again they
cannot move them, because of their punishment for sin.
Also there is the argument that objects that the motion of the whole
and of the part is the same thing, just as Aristotle in his 4th Physics
instances the case of the whole earth and a clod of soil; and that therefore
if the devils could move a part of the earth, they could also move the whole
earth. But this is not valid, as is clear to anyone who examines the
distinction. But to collect the semen of things and apply it to certain
effects dos not exceed their natural power, with the permission of God, as
is self-evident.
In conclusion, in spite of the contention of some that devils in
bodily shape can in no way generate children, and that by the “sons of God”
is meant the descendants of Cain; nevertheless the contrary is clearly
affirmed by many. And that which seems true to many cannot be altogether
false, according to Aristotle in his 6th Ethics and at the end of the de
Somno et Uigilia. And now also in modern times we have the well-attested
deeds and words of witches who truly and actually perform such things.
Therefore we make three propositions. First, that the foulest
venereal acts are performed by such devils, not for the sake of delectation,
but for the pollution of the souls and bodies of those to whom they act as
Succubi and Incubi. Second, that through such action complete contraception
and generation by women can take place, inasmuch as they can deposit human
semen in the suitable place of a woman's womb where there is already a
corresponding substance. In the same way they can also collect the seeds of
other things for the working of their effects. Third, that in the begetting
of such children only the local motion is to be attributed to devils, and
not the actual begetting, which arises not from the power of the devil or of
the body which he assumes, but from the virtue of him whose semen it was;
wherefore the child is the son not of the devil, but of some man.
And here there is a clear answer to those who would contend that
there are two reasons why devils cannot generate children: - First, that
generation is effected by the formative virtue which exists in semen
released from a living body; and that because the body assumed by devils is
not of such a sort, therefore, etc. The answer is clear, that the devil
deposits naturally formative semen in its proper place, etc. Secondly, it
may be argued that semen has no power of generation except as long as the
heat of life is retained in it, and that this must be lost when it is
carried great distances. The answer is that devils are able to store the
semen safely, so that its vital heat is not lost; or even that it cannot
evaporate so easily on account of the great speed at which they move by
reason of the superiority of the move over the thing moved.
Question IV By which Devils are the Operations of Incubus and Succubus
Practised?
Is it Catholic to affirm that the functions of Incubi and Succubi
belong indifferently and equally to all unclean spirits? And it seems that
it is so; for to affirm the opposite would be to maintain that there is some
good order among them. It is argued that just as in the computation of the
Good there are degrees and orders (see S. Augustine in his book on the
nature of the Good), so also the computation of the Evil is based upon
confusion. But as among the good Angels nothing can be without order, so
among the bad all is disorder, and therefore they all indifferently follows
these practices. See Job x.: A land of darkness, as darkness itself; and of
the shadow of death, without any order, and where the light is as darkness.
Again, if they do not all indifferently follow these practices, this
quality in them comes either from their nature, or from sin, or from
punishment. But it does not come from their nature, since they are all
without distinction given to sin, as was set out in the preceding question.
For they are by nature impure spirits, yet not so unclean as to pejorate
their good parts; subtle in wickedness, eager to do harm, swollen with
pride, etc. Therefore these practices in them are due either to sin or to
punishment. Then again, where the sin is greater, there is the punishment
greater; and the higher angels sinned more greatly, therefore their
punishment they have the more to follow these filthy practices. If this is
not so, another reason will be given why they do not indifferently practise
these things.
And again, it is argued that where there is no discipline or
obedience, there all work without distinction; and it is submitted that
there is no discipline or obedience among devils, and no agreement. Proverbs
xiii.: Among the proud there is always contention.
Again, just as because of sin they will all equally be case into
Hell after the Day of Judgement, so before that time they are detained in
the lower mists on account of the duties assigned to them. We do not read
that there is equality on account of emancipation, therefore neither is
there equality in the matter of duty and temptation.
But against this there is the first gloss on I Corinthians xv: As
long as the world endures Angels are set over Angels, men over men, and
devils over devils. Also in Job xl it speaks of the scales of Leviathan,
which signify the members of the devil, how one cleaves to another.
Therefore there is among them diversity both of order and of action.
Another question arises, whether or not the devils can be restrained
by the good Angels from pursuing these foul practices. It must be said that
the Angels to whose command the adverse Influences are subject are called
Powers, as S. Gregory says, and S. Augustine (de Trinitate, 3). A rebellious
and sinful spirit of life is subject to an obedient, pious and just spirit
of life. And those Creatures which are more perfect and nearer to God have
authority over the others: for the whole order of preference is originally
and in the first place in God, and is shared by His creatures according as
they approach more nearly to Him. Therefore the good Angels, who are nearest
to God on account of their fruition in Him, which the devils lack, have
preference over the devils, and rule over them.
And when it is urged that devils work much harm without any medium,
or that they are not hindered because they are not subject to good Angels
who might prevent them; or that if they are so subject, then the evil that
is done by the subject is due to negligence on the part of the master, and
there seems to be some negligence among the good Angels: the answer is that
the Angels are ministers of the Divine wisdom. It follows then that, as the
Divine wisdom permits certain evil to be done by bad Angels or men, for the
sake of the good that He draws therefrom, so also the good Angels do not
altogether prevent wicked men or devils from doing evil.
Answer. It is Catholic to maintain that there is a certain order of
interior and exterior actions, and a degree of preference among devils.
Whence it follows that certain abominations are committed by the lowest
orders, from which the higher orders are precluded on account of the
nobility of their natures. And this is generally said to arise from a
threefold congruity, in that such things harmonize with their nature, with
the Divine wisdom, and with their own wickedness.
But more particularly as touching their nature. It is agreed that
from the beginning of Creation some were always by nature superior, since
they differ among themselves as to form; and no two Angels are alike in
form. This follows the more general opinion, which also agrees with the
words of the Philosophers. Dionysus also lays it down in his tenth chapter
On the Celestial Hierarchy that in the same order there are three separate
degrees; and we must agree with this, since they are both immaterial and
incorporeal. See also S. Thomas (ii. 2). For sin does not take away their
nature, and the devils after the Fall did not lose their natural gifts, as
has been said before; and the operations of things follow their natural
conditions. Therefore both in nature and in operation they are various and
multiple.
This harmonizes also with the Divine wisdom; for that which is
ordained is ordained by God (Romans xiii). And since devils were deputed by
God for the temptation of men and the punishment of the damned, therefore
they work upon men from without by many and various means.
It harmonizes also with their own wickedness. For since they are at
war with the human race, they fight in an orderly manner; for so they think
to do greater harm to men, and so they do. Whence it follows that they do
not share in an equal manner in their most unspeakable abominations.
And this is more specifically proved as follows. For since, as has
been said, the operation follows the nature of the thing, it follows also
that those whose natures are subordinate must in turn be subordinate to
themselves in operation, just as is the case in corporeal matters. For since
the lower bodies are by natural ordination below the celestial bodies, and
their actions and motions are subject to the actions and motions of the
celestial bodies; and since the devils, as has been said, differ among
themselves in natural order; therefore they also differ among themselves in
their natural actions, both extrinsic and instrinsic, and especially in the
performance of the abominations in question.
From which it is concluded that since the practice of these
abominations is for the most part foreign to the nobility of the angelic
nature, so also in human actions the foulest and beastliest acts are to be
considered by themselves, and not in relation to the duty of human nature
and procreation.
Finally, since some are believed to have fallen from every order, it
is not unsuitable to maintain that those devils who fell from the lowest
choir, and even in that held the lowest rank, are deputed to and perform
these and other abominations.
Also it must be carefully noted that, though the Scripture speaks of
Incubi and Succubi lusting after women, yet nowhere do we read that Incubi
and Succubi fell into vices against nature. We do not speak only of sodomy,
but of any other sin whereby the act is wrongfully performed outside the
rightful channel. And the very great enormity of such as sin in this way is
shown by the fact that all devils equally, of whatsoever order, abominate
and think shame to commit such actions. And it seems that the gloss on
Ezekiel xix means this, where it says: I will give thee into the hands of
the dwellers in Palestine, that is devils, who shall blush at your
iniquities, meaning vices against nature. And the student will see what
should be authoritatively understood concerning devils. For no sin has God
so often punished by the shameful death of multitudes.
Indeed many say, and it is truly believed, that no one can
unimperilled persevere in the practice of such vices beyond the period of
the mortal life of Christ, which lasted for thirty-three years, unless he
should be saved by some special grace of the Redeemer. And this is proved by
the fact that there have often been ensnared by this vice octogenarians and
centenarians, who had up to that time ruled their lives according to the
discipline of Christ; and, having forsaken Him, they have found the very
greatest difficulty in obtaining deliverance, and in abandoning themselves
to such vices.
Moreover, the names of the devils indicate what order there is among
them, and what office is assigned to each. For though one and the same name,
that of devil, is generally used in Scripture because of their various
qualities, yet the Scriptures teach that One is set over these filthy
actions, just as certain other vices are subject to Another. For it is the
practice of Scripture and of speech to name every unclean spirit Diabolus,
from Dia, that is Two, and Bolus, that is Morsel; for he kills two thing,
the body and the soul. And this is in accordance with etymology, although in
Greek Diabolus means shut in Prison, which also is apt, since he is not
permitted to do as much harm as he wishes. Or Diabolus may mean Downflowing,
since he flowed down, that is, fell down, both specifically and locally. He
is also named Demon, that is, Cunning over Blood, since he thirsts for and
procures sin with a threefold knowledge, being powerful in the subtlety of
his nature, in his age-long experience, and in the revelation of the good
spirits. He is called also Belial, which means Without Yoke or Master; for
he can fight against him to whom he should be subject. He is called also
Beelzebub, which means Lord of Flies, that is, of the souls of sinners who
have left the true faith of Christ. Also Satan, that is, the Adversary; see
I S. Peter ii: For your adversary the devil goeth about, etc. Also Behemoth,
that is, Beast, because he makes men bestial.
But the very devil of Fornication, and the chief of that
abomination, is called Asmodeus, which means the Creature of Judgement: for
because of this kind of sin a terrible judgement was executed upon Sodom and
the four other cities. Similarly the devil of Pride is called Leviathan,
which means Their Addition; because when Lucifer tempted our first parents
he promised them, out of his pride, the addition of Divinity. Concerning him
the Lord said through Esaias: I shall visit it upon Leviathan, that old and
tortuous serpent. And the devil of Avarice and Riches is called Mammon, whom
also Christ mentions in the Gospel (S. Matthew vi): Ye cannot serve God,
etc.
To the arguments. First, that good can be found without evil, but
evil cannot be found without good; for it is poured upon a creature that is
good in itself. And therefore the devils, in so far as they have a good
nature, were ordained in the course of nature; and for their actions see Job
x.
Secondly, it can be said that the devils deputed to work are not in
Hell, but in the lower mists. And they have here an order among themselves,
which they will not have in Hell. From which it may be said that all order
ceased among them, as touching the attainment of blessedness, at that time
when they fell irrecoverably from such rank. And it may be said that even in
Hell there will be among them a gradation of power, and of the affliction of
punishments, inasmuch as some, and not others, will be deputed to torment
the souls. But this gradation will come rather from God than from
themselves, as will also their torments.
Thirdly, when it is said that the higher devils, because they sinned
the more, are the more punished, and must therefore be the more bound to the
commission of these filthy acts, it is answered that sin bears relation to
punishment, and not to the act or operation of nature; and therefore it is
by reason of their nobility of nature that these are not given to such
filthiness, and it has nothing to do with their sin or punishment. And
though they are all impure spirits, and eager to do harm, yet one is more so
than another, in proportion as their natures are the further thrust into
darkness.
Fourthly, it is said that there is agreement among devils, but of
wickedness rather than friendship, in that they hate mankind, and strive
their utmost against justice. For such agreement is found among the wicked,
that they band themselves together, and depute those whose talents seem
suitable to the pursuit of particular iniquities.
Fifthly, although imprisonment is equally decreed for all, now in
the lower atmosphere and afterwards in Hell, yet not therefore are equal
penalties and duties equally ordained for them: for the nobler they are in
nature and the more potent in office, the heavier is the torment to which
they are subjected. See Wisdom vi: “The powerful shall powerfully suffer
torments.”
Question V What is the Source of the Increase of Works of Witchcraft?
Whence comes it that the Practice of Witchcraft hath so notably increased?
Is it in any way a Catholic opinion to hold that the origin and
growth of witchcraft proceed from the influence of the celestial bodies; or
from the abundant wickedness of men, and not from the abominations of Incubi
and Succubi? And it seems that it springs from man's own wickedness. For S.
Augustine says, in Book LXXXIII, that the cause of a man's depravity lies in
his own will, whether he sins at his own or at another's suggestion. But a
witch is depraved through sin, therefore the cause of it is not the devil
but human will. In the same place he speaks of free-will, that everyone is
the cause of his own wickedness. And he reasons thus: that the sin of man
proceeds from free-will, but the devil cannot destroy free-will, for this
would militate against liberty: therefore the devil cannot be the cause of
that or any other sin. Again, in the book of Ecclesiastic Dogma it is said:
Not all our evil thoughts are stirred up by the devil, but sometimes they
arise from the operation of our own judgement.
Again, if the stars were not the cause of human actions both good
and bad, Astrologers would not so frequently foretell the truth about the
result of wars and other human acts: therefore they are in some way a cause.
Again, the stars influence the devils themselves in the causing of
certain spells; and therefore they can all the more influence men. Three
proofs are adduced for this assumption. For certain men who are called
Lunatics are molested by devils more at one time than at another; and the
devils would not so behave, but would rather molest them at all times,
unless they themselves were deeply affected by certain phases of the Moon.
It is proved again from the fact the Necromancers observe certain
constellations for the invoking of devils, which they would not do unless
they knew that those devils were subject to the stars.
And this is also adduced as a proof; that according to S. Augustine
(de Ciuitate Dei, 10), the devils employ certain lower bodies, such as
herbs, stones, animals, and certain sounds and voices, and figures. But
since the heavenly bodies are of more potency than the lower bodies,
therefore the stars are a far greater influence than these things. And
witches are the more in subjection in that their deeds proceed from the
influence of those bodies, and not from the help of evil spirits. And the
argument is supported from I Kings xvi, where Saul was vexed by a devil, but
was calmed when David struck his harp before him, and the evil departed.
But against this. It is impossible to produce an effect without its
cause; and the deeds of witches are such that they cannot be done without
the help of devils, as is shown by the description of witches in S. Isidore,
Ethics VIII. WItches are so called from the enormity of their magic spells;
for they disturb the elements and confound the minds of men, and without any
venomous draught, but merely by virtue of incantations, destroy souls, etc.
But this sort of effects cannot be caused by the influence of the stars
through the agency of a man.
Besides, Aristotle says in his Ethics that it is difficult to know
what is the beginning of the operation of thought, and shows that it must be
something extrinsic. For everything that begins from a beginning has some
cause. Now a man begins to do that which he wills; and he begins to will
because of some pre-suggestion; and if this is some precedent suggestion, it
must either proceed from the infinite, or there is some extrinsic beginning
which first brings a suggestion to a man. Unless indeed it be argued that
this is a matter of chance, from which it would follow that all human
actions are fortuitous, which is absurd. Therefore the beginning of good in
the good is said to be God, Who is not the cause of sin. But for the wicked,
when a man begins to be influenced towards and wills to commit sin, there
must also be some extrinsic cause of this. And this can be no other than the
devil; especially in the case of witches, as is shown above, for the stars
cannot influence such acts. Therefore the truth is plain.
Moreover, that which has power over the motive has also power over
the result which is caused by the motive. Now the motive of the will is
something perceived through the sense or the intellect, both of which are
subject to the power of the devil. For S. Augustine says in Book 83: This
evil, which is of the devil, creeps in by all the sensual approaches; he
places himself in figures, he adapts himself to colours, he attaches himself
to sounds, he lurks in angry and wrongful conversation, he abides in smells,
he impregnates with flavours and fills with certain exhalations all the
channels of the understanding. Therefore it is seen that it is in the
devil's power to influence the will, which is directly the cause of sin.
Besides, everything which has a choice of two ways needs some
determining factor before it proceeds to the action. And the free-will of
man has the choice between good and ill; therefore when he embarks upon sin,
it needs that he is determined by something towards ill. And this seems
chiefly to be done by the devil, especially in the actions of witches, whose
will is made up for evil. Therefore it seems that the evil will of the devil
is the cause of evil will in man, especially in witches. And the argument
may be substantiated thus; that just as a good Angel cleaves to good, so
does a bad Angel to evil; but the former leads a man into goodness,
therefore the latter leads him into evil. For it is, says Dionysius, the
unalterable and fixed law of divinity, that the lowest has it cause in the
highest.
Answer. Such as contend that witchcraft has its origin in the
influence of the stars stand convicted of three errors. In the first place,
it is not possible that it originated from astromancers and casters of
horoscopes and fortune-tellers. For if it is asked whether the vice of
witchcraft in men is caused by the influence of the stars, then, in
consideration of the variety of men's characters, and for the upholding of
the true faith, a distinction must be maintained; namely, that there are two
ways in which it can be understood that men's characters can be caused by
the stars. Either completely and of necessity, or by disposition and
contingency. And as for the first, it is not only false, but so heretical
and contrary to the Christian religion, that the true faith cannot be
maintained in such an error. For this reason, he who argues that everything
of necessity proceeds from the stars takes away all merit and, in
consequence, all blame: also he takes away Grace, and therefore Glory. For
uprightness of character suffers prejudice by this error, since the blame of
the sinner redounds upon the stars, licence to sin without culpability is
conceded, and man is committed to the worship and adoration of the stars.
But as for the contention that men's characters are conditionally
varied by the disposition of the stars, it is so far true that is it not
contrary to reason or faith. For it is obvious that the disposition of a
body variously causes many variations in the humours and character of the
soul; for generally the soul imitates the complexions of the body, as it
said in the Six Principles. Wherefore the choleric are wrathful, the
sanguine are kindly, the melancholy are envious, and the phlegmatic are
slothful. But this is not absolute; for the soul is master of its body,
especially when it is helped by Grace. And we see many choleric who are
gently, and melancholy who are kindly. Therefore when the virtue of the
stars influences the formation and quality of a man's humours, it is agreed
that they have some influence over the character, but very distantly: for
the virtue of the lower nature has more effect on the quality of the humours
than has the virtue of the stars.
Wherefore S. Augustine (de Ciuitate Dei, V), where he resolves a
certain question of two brothers who fell ill and were cured simultaneously,
approves the reasoning of Hippocrates rather than that of an Astronomer. For
Hippocrates answered that it is owing to the similarity of their humours;
and the Astronomer answered that it was owing the identity of their
horoscopes. For the Physician's answer was better, since he adduced the more
powerful and immediate cause. Thus, therefore, it must be said that the
influence of the stars is to some degree conducive to the wickedness of
witches, if it be granted that there is any such influence over the bodies
that predisposes them to this manner of abomination rather than to any other
sort of works either vicious or virtuous: but this disposition must not be
said to be necessary, immediate, and sufficient, but remote and contingent.
Neither is that objection valid which is based on the book of the
Philosophers on the properties of the elements, where it says that kingdoms
are emptied and lands depopulated at the conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn;
and it is argued from this that such things are to be understood as being
outside the free-will of men, and that therefore the influence of the stars
has power over free-will. For it is answered that in this saying the
Philosopher does not mean to imply that men cannot resist the influence of
that constellation towards dissensions, but that they will not. For Ptolemy
in Almagest says: A wise man will be the master of the stars. For although,
since Saturn has a melancholy and bad influence and Jupiter a very good
influence, the conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn can dispose men to quarrels
and discords; yet, through free-will, men can resist that inclination, and
very easily with the help of God's grace.
And again it is no valid objection to quote S. John Damascene where
he says (Book II, chap. vi) that comets are often the sign of the death of
kings. For it will be answered that even if we follow the opinion of S. John
Damascene, which was, as is evident in the book referred to, contrary to the
opinion of the Philosophic Way, yet this is no proof of the inevitability of
human actions. For S. John considers that a comet is not a natural creation,
nor is it one of the stars set in the firmament; wherefore neither its
significance nor influence is natural. For he says that comets are not of
the stars which were created in the beginning, but that they are made for a
particular occasion, and then dissolved, by Divine command. This then is the
opinion of S. John Damascene. But God by such a sign foretells the death of
kings rather than of other men, both because from this may arise the
confusion of a kingdom. And the Angels are more careful to watch over kings
for the general good; and kings are born and die under the ministry of
Angels.
And there is no difficulty in the opinion of the Philosophers, who
say that a comet is a hot and dry conglomeration, generated in the higher
part of space near the fire, and that a conjoined globe of that hot and dry
vapour assumes the likeness of a star. But unincorporated parts of that
vapour stretch in long extremities joined to that globe, and are a sort of
adjunct to it. And according to this view, not of itself but by accident, it
predicts death which proceeds from hot and dry infirmities. And since for
the most part the rich are fed on things of a hot and dry nature, therefore
at such times many of the rich die; among which the death of kings and
princes is the most notable. And this view is not far from the view of S.
John Damascene, when carefully considered, except as regards the operation
and co-operation of the Angels, which not even the philosophers can ignore.
For indeed when the vapours in their dryness and heat have nothing to do
with the generation of a comet, even then, for reasons already set out, a
comet may be formed by the operation of an Angel.
In this way the star which portended the death of the learned S.
Thomas was not one of the stars set in the firmament, but was formed by an
Angel from some convenient material, and, having performed it office, was
again dissolved.
From this we see that, whichever of those opinions we follow, the
stars have no inherent influence over the free-will, or, consequently, over
the malice and character of men.
It is to be noted also that Astronomers often foretell the truth,
and that their judgements are for the most part effective on one province or
one nation. And the reason is that they take their judgements from the
stars, which, according to the more probable view, have a greater, though
not an inevitable, influence over the actions of mankind in general, that
is, over one nation or province, than over one individual person; and this
because the greater part of one nation more closely obeys the natural
disposition of the body than does one single man. But this is mentioned
incidentally.
And the second of the three ways by which we vindicate the Catholic
standpoint is by refuting the errors of those who cast Horoscopes and
Mathematicians who worship the goddess of fortune. Of these S. Isidore
(Ethics, VIII. 9) says that those who cast Horoscopes are so called from
their examination of the stars at nativity, and are commonly called
Mathematicians; and in the same Book, chapter 2, he says that Fortune has
her name from fortuitousness. and is a sort of goddess who mocks human
affairs in a haphazard and fortuitous manner. Wherefore she is called blind,
since she runs here and there with no consideration for desert, and comes
indifferently to good and bad. So much for Isidore. But to believe that
there is such a goddess, or that the harm done to bodies and creatures which
is ascribed to witchcraft does not actually proceed from witchcraft, but
from that same goddess of Fortune, is sheer idolatry: and also to assert
that witches themselves were born for that very purpose that they might
perform such deeds in the world is similarly alien to the Faith, and indeed
to the general teaching of the Philosophers. Anyone who pleases may refer to
S. Thomas in the 3rd book of his Summa of the Faith against the Gentiles.
question 87, etc., and he will find much to this effect.
Nevertheless one point must not be omitted, for the sake of those
who perhaps have not great quantity of books. It is there noted that three
things are to be considered in man, which are directed by three celestial
causes, namely, the act of the will, the act of the intellect, and the act
of the body. The first of these is governed directly and soley by God, the
second by an Angel, and the third by a celestial body. For choice and will
are directly governed by God for good works, as the Scripture says in
Proverbs xxi: The heart of the king is in the hand of the Lord; he turneth
it whithersoever he will. And it says “the heart of the king” to signify
that, as the great cannot oppose His will, so are others even less able to
do so. Also S. Paul says: God who causeth us to wish and to perform that
which is good.
The human understanding is governed by God through the mediation of
an Angel. And those bodily actions, either exterior or interior, which are
natural to man, are regulated by God through the mediation of the Angels and
the celestial bodies. For blessed Dionysius (de Diuin. nom., IV) says that
the celestial bodies are the causes of that which happens in this world;
though he makes no implication of fatality.
And since man is governed as to his body by the celestial bodies, as
to his intellect by the Angels, and as to his will by God, it may happen
that if he rejects God's inspiration towards goodness, and the guidance of
his bodily affections to those things toward which the influence of the
stars inclines him, that so his will and understanding become entangled in
malice and error.
However, it is not possible for anyone to be influenced by the stars
to enter upon that sort of error in which the witches are ensnared, such as
bloodshed, theft or robbery, or even the perpetration of the worst
incontinences; and this is true of other natural phenomena.
Also, as William of Paris says in his De Universo, it is proved by
experience that if a harlot tries to plant an olive it does not become
fruitful, whereas if it is planted by a chaste woman it is fruitful. And a
doctor in healing, a farmer in planting, or a soldier in fighting can do
more with the help of the influence of the stars than another who possesses
the same skill can do.
Our third way is taken from the refutation of the belief in Fate.
And here it is to be noted that a belief in Fate is in one way quite
Catholic, but in another way entirely heretical. For Fate may be understood
after the manner of certain Gentiles and Mathematicians, who thought that
the different characters of men were inevitably caused by the force of the
position of the stars, so that a wizard was predestined to be such, even if
he were of a good character, because the disposition of the stars under
which he was conceived or born caused him to be such as he was. And that
force they called by the name of Fate.
But that opinion is not only false, but heretical and altogether
detestable on account of the deprivation which it must entail, as was shown
above in the refutation of the first error. For by it would be removed all
reason for merit or blame, for grace and glory, and God would be made the
author of our evil, and more such incongruities. Therefore such conception
of Fate must be altogether rejected, since there is no such thing. And
touching this belief S. Gregory says in his Homily on the Epiphany: Far be
it from the hearts of the faithful to say that there is any Fate.
And although, on account of the same incongruity which is detected
in both, this opinion may seem to be the same as that concerning the
Astrologers, they are yet different inasmuch as they disagree concerning the
force of the stars and the influx of the seven Planets.
But Fate may be considered to be a sort of second disposition, or an
ordination of second causes for the production of foreseen Divine effects.
And in this way Fate is truly something. For the providence of God
accomplishes His effects through mediating cause, in such matters are
subject to second causes; though this is not so in the case of some other
matters, such as the creation of souls, glorification, and the acquisition
of grace.
Also the Angels may co-operate in the infusion of Grace by
enlightening and guiding the understanding and the capability of the will,
and so a certain arrangement of results may be said to be one and the same
of Providence or even Fate. For it is considered in this way; that there is
in God a quality which may be called Providence, or it may be said that He
has ordained intermediary causes for the realization of some of His
purposes; and to this extent Fate is a rational fact. And in this way
Boethius speaks of Fate (de Consolatione IV): Fate is an inherent
disposition in things mobile, by which Providence binds things to that which
It has ordained.
Nevertheless the learned Saints refused to use this name, on account
of those who twisted its meaning to force of the position of the stars.
Wherefore S. Augustine (de Ciuitate Dei, V) says: If anyone attributed human
affairs to Fate, meaning by Fate the Will and Power of God, let him keep his
opinion but amend his tongue.
It is clear, then, that what has been said provides a sufficient
answer to the question whether all things, including works of witchcraft,
are subject to Fate. For if Fate is said to be the ordainment of second
cause of foreseen Divine results, that is, when God wills to effect His
purposes through second causes; to that extent they are subject to Fate,
that is, to second causes so ordained by God; and the influence of the stars
is one of these second causes. But those things which come directly from
God, such as the Creation of things, the Glorification of things substantial
and spiritual, and other things of this sort, are not subject to such Fate.
And Boethius, in the book we have quoted, supports this view when he says
that those things which are near to the primal Deity are beyond the
influence of the decrees of Fate. Therefore the works of witches, being
outside the common cause and order of nature, are not subject to these
second causes. That is to say, that as regards their origin they are not
subject to willy-nilly Fate, but to other causes.
Witchcraft is not caused by the Powers that Move the Stars
It follows that, just as witchcraft cannot be caused in the manner
that has been suggested, so also it is not caused by the separate Essences
which are the Powers that move the stars; although this was believed to be
the case by Avicenna and his school, for the following reasons. For they
argued those are separate Essences of a higher power than our souls; and the
soul itself can sometimes, by the force of imagination, or merely through
fear, effect a change in its own body. For example, a man walking on a plank
place at a great height easily falls, but in his fear he imagines that he
will fall; but if the plank were placed on the ground he would not fall, for
he would have no reason to fear falling. So by the mere apprehension of the
soul the body grows hot in the case of the concupiscent and wrathful, and
cold in the case of the fearful. It can also, by strongly imagining and
fearing such things, be affected with illnesses, such as fever and leprosy.
And as with its own body, so it can influence another body either for health
or sickness; and to this is ascribed the cause of bewitchment, of which we
have spoken above.
And since according to that view the deeds of witches have to be
attributed to the Powers that move the stars, if not precisely to the stars
themselves; therefore we must add to what we have already said on this
subject, that this also is impossible. For the Powers that move the stars
are good and intelligent Essences, not only by nature but also by will, as
appears from their working for the good of the whole universe. But that
creature by whose aid witchcraft is done, although it may be good in nature,
cannot be good by will. Therefore it is impossible to hold the same
judgement of both these Essences.
And that such an Essence cannot be good in respect of will is proved
as follows. For it is no part of a well-disposed intelligence to extend
patronage to those who act against virtue; and of such sort are the actions
of witches. For it will be shown in the Second Part that they commit
murders, fornications, and sacrifices of children and animals, and for their
evil deeds are called witches. Therefore the Intelligence by whose aid such
witchcraft is performed cannot be well-disposed towards virtue; although it
may be good in its original nature, since all things are so, as is evident
to anyone who thinks about it. Also it is no part of a good Intelligence to
be the familiar spirit of criminals, and to extend patronage to them and not
to the virtuous. For they are criminals who use witchcraft, and they are
known by their works.
Now the natural function of the Essences that move the stars is to
influence any creature for good, although it often happens that it becomes
corrupted by come accident. Therefore those Essences cannot be the original
cause of witches.
Besides, it is the part of a good spirit to lead men to that which
is good in human nature, and of good repute; therefore to entice men away
from such, and to betray them into evil things, belongs to an evilly-
disposed spirit. And by the wiles of such a spirit men make no headway in
those things which are worthy, such as the sciences and virtues, but rather
in that which is evil, such as the knowledge of theft and a thousand other
crimes; therefore the origin is not in these separate Essences, but in some
Power evilly disposed toward virtue.
Besides, that cannot be understood to be a well-disposed spirit in
the commission of crimes. But this is what happens in the deeds of witches;
for, as will be shown by their performances, they abjure the Faith, and slay
innocent children. For the separate Essences which move the stars do not, on
account of their goodness, provide help in these works if witchcraft.
In conclusion, then; this kind of works can no more arise from the
Movers of the stars than from the stars themselves. And since they must
originate from some Power allied to some creature, and that Power cannot be
good in its will, although it may be naturally good, and that the devils
themselves answer to this description, it follows that it is by their power
that such things are done.
Unless, indeed, anyone should bring forward the trifling objection
that witchcraft originates in human malice, and that it is effected by
curses, and the placings of images in a certain place, the stars being
favourable. For example, a certain witch placed her image and said to a
woman, “I will make you blind and lame”; and it happened so. But it happened
because the woman from her nativity was destined by the stars for such an
affliction; and if such words and practices had been used against anyone
else, they would not have been effective. And to this I shall answer in
detail; first, that such witchcrafts cannot be caused by human malice;
secondly, that they cannot be caused by magic words or images, whatever
stars may be in concurrence.
Witchcraft does not operate from Human Malice alone.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
And first to prove that witches' works cannot arise from human
malice, however great. For a man's malice may be either habitual, inasmuch
as by frequent practice he acquires a habit that inclines him to commit sin,
not from ignorance but from weakness; in which case he is held to sin from
wickedness. Or it may be actual malice, by which is meant the deliberate
choice of evil, which is called the sin against the Holy Ghost. But in
neither case can he, without the help of some higher Power, work such spells
as the mutation of the elements, or the harming of the bodies both of men
and beasts. And this is proved first as to the cause, and secondly as to the
effect of witchcraft.
For a man cannot effect such works without malice, that is, a
weakening of his nature, and still less when his nature has already been
weakened; as is clear, since his active virtue is already diminished. But
man, through all sorts of sin and wickedness, becomes weakened in his
natural goodness. Both reason and authority prove this. For Dionysius (de
Diuin. Nom. IV) says: Sin is the effect of natural habit; and he speaks of
the sin of guilt. Wherefore no one who is conscious of sin commits it,
unless he does so out of deliberate revolt.
I answer thus. The sin of guilt stands in the same relation to the
good of nature as does the good of grace to the sin of nature. But by grace
is diminished natural sin, which is as a tinder prone to guilt; therefore
much more is natural good diminished by guilt. And it is not valid to put
forward the objection that a bewitchment is sometimes caused by an old woman
evilly looking at a child, by which the child is changed and bewitched. For,
as has already been shown, this can only happen to children because of their
tender complexion. But here we speak of the bodies of all sorts of men and
beasts, and even the elements and hailstorms. If anyone wishes to inquire
further, he may refer to S. Thomas in his questions concerning Evil: Whether
sin can corrupt the whole natural good, etc.
And now as regards the effects of witchcraft. From the effects we
arrive at a knowledge of the cause. Now these effects, as they concerns us,
are outside the order of created nature as known to us, and are done through
the power of some creature unknown to us, although they are not miracles,
which are things done outside the order of the whole of created nature. As
for miracles, they are wrought by His power Who is above the whole order of
the entire natural creation, Which is the Blessed God; as it is said: Thou
are He Who alone workest great marvels. So also the works of witches are
said to be miraculous only inasmuch as they are done by some cause unknown
to us, and outside the order of created nature as known to us. From which it
follows that the corporeal virtue of a man cannot extend itself to the
causation of such works; for it has always this quality, that the cause with
the natural effect is, in the case of man, recognized naturally and without
wonder.
And that the works of witches can in some way be called miraculous,
in so far as they exceed human knowledge, is clear from their very nature;
for they are not done naturally. It is shown also by all the Doctors,
especially S. Augustine in Book LXXXIII, where he says that by magic arts
many miracles are wrought similar to those miracles which are done by the
servants of God. And again in the same book he says that Magicians do
miracles by private contract, good Christians by public justice, and bad
Christians by the signs of public justice. And all this is explained as
follows. For there is a Divine justice in the whole universe, just as there
is a public law in the State. But the virtue of any creature has to do with
the universe ,as that of the private individual has to do with the State.
Therefore inasmuch as good Christians work miracles by Divine justice, they
are said to work them by public justice. But the Magician, since he works
through a pact entered into with the devil, is said to work by private
contract; for he works by means of the devil, who by his natural power can
do things outside the order of created nature as known to us, through the
virtue of a creature unknown to us, and it will be for us a miracle,
although not actually so, since he cannot work outside of the whole of
created nature, and through all the virtues of creatures unknown to us. For
in this way only God is said to work miracles. As it said: Thou are God Who
alone workest great marvels. But bad Christians work through the signs of
public justice, as by invoking the Name of Christ, or by exhibiting certain
sacraments. If anyone pleases, he can refer to S. Thomas in the first part
of the questions, III, art. 4. He can also study the conclusions in the
Second Part of this work, Chapter VI.
That Witchcraft is not exercised and wrought by Voices and Words under a
favouring Influence of the Stars.
Neither does witchcraft proceed from words uttered over images by
men under favourable constellations. For the intellect of a man is of such a
nature that its knowledge springs from things, and phantasms must be
rationally examined. It is not in his nature, simply by though or by the
instrinsic operation of his intellect, to cause things to happen just be
expressing them in words. For if there were men who had such power, they
would not be of the same nature as we, and could only equivocally be called
men.
But it is said that they effect these things by words when the stars
of the nativity are favourable; from which it would follow that they would
be able to act by the power of words only under certain conditions, and that
they would be powerless without the help of the stars of their victim's
nativity. But this is clearly false from what has been said before
concerning Astromancers, casters of Horoscopes and Fortune-tellers.
Besides, words express the conception of the mind; and the stars
cannot influence the understanding, neither can the Powers that move them,
unless they wish on their own account, and apart from the motion of the
stars, to enlighten the understanding; and this would only happen in regard
to good works, for not enlightenment but darkness is given to the
understanding for the performance of evil works; and such is the function
not of good, but of evil spirits. Therefore it is clear that if their words
are in any way effective, it is not by virtue of any star, but by virtue of
some Intelligence, which may be naturally good, but cannot be good in
respect of will, since it always works for evil; and such is the devil, as
has been shown above.
Again, it has been shown above that there are two kinds of images.
Those of the Astrologers and Mages are ordained not for corruption, but for
the obtaining of some private good. But the images of witches are quite
different, since always they are secretly placed somewhere by the command of
the devil for the hurt of the creature; and they who walk or sleep over them
are harmed, as the witches themselves confess. Wherefore whatever they
effect is done by means of devils, and is not due to the influence of the
stars.
To the arguments. For the first, we must understand the words of S.
Augustine, that the cause of man's depravity lies in man's will, meaning the
cause which produces the effect; which is properly said to be the cause. It
is not so, however, with the cause which permits the effect, or arranges or
advises or suggests it, in which sense the devil is said to be the cause of
sin and depravity; God only permitting it that good may come of evil. As S.
Augustine says: The devil provides the inner suggestion, and persuades both
inwardly and outwardly by more active stimulation. But he instructs those
who are entirely in his power, as are witches, whom there is no need to
tempt from within, but only from without, etc.
And through this we come to the second argument, that everyone is,
by direct understanding, the cause of his own wickedness. And concerning
this it is to be said that, though it would be contrary to the doctrine of
free-will to believe that a man may be influenced by direct command, it is
not to say that he is influenced by suggestion.
Thirdly, impulses to good or evil can be caused to be suggested by
the influence of the stars, and the impulse is received as a natural
inclination to human virtue or vice. But the works of witches are outside
the common order of nature, and therefore they cannot be subject to those
influences.
The fourth argument is equally clear. For though the stars are a
cause of human acts, witchcraft is not properly a human act.
For the fifth argument, that the Powers that move the stars can
influence souls. If that is understood directly, they do so influence them
by enlightening them towards goodness, but not to witchcraft, as has been
shown above. But if it is understood mediately, then through the medium of
the stars they exert an indirect and suggestive influence.
Sixthly, there are two reasons why devils molest men at certain
phases of the Moon. First, that they may bring disrepute on a creature of
God, namely, the Moon, as S. Jerome and S. John Chrysostom say. Secondly,
because they cannot, as has been said above, operate except through the
medium of the natural powers. Therefore they study the aptitudes of bodies
for receiving an impression; and because, as Aristotle says, the brain is
the most humid of all the parts of the body, therefore it chiefly is subject
to the operation of the Moon, which itself has power to incite humours.
Moreover, the animal forces are perfected in the brain, and therefore the
devils disturb a man's fancy according to certain phases of the Moon, when
the brain is ripe for such influences.
And there are two reasons why the devils are present as counsellors
in certain constellations. First, that they may lead men into the error of
thinking that there is some divinity in the stars. Secondly, because they
think that under the influence of some constellations corporeal matter is
more apt for the deeds that they counsel.
And as to what S. Augustine says in de Ciuitate Dei, XXXVI: Devils
are attracted by various kinds of stones, herbs, trees, animals, songs, and
instruments of music, not as animals are attracted by food, but as spirits
by signs, as if these things were exhibited to them as a sign of Divine
honour, for which they are themselves eager.
But it is often objected that devils can be hindered by herbs and
music from molesting men; as it is alleged in the argument from Saul and the
music of the harp. And hence an attempt is made to argue that some men can
work witchcraft through certain herbs and occult causes, without the help of
devils, buy only of the influence of the stars, which have more direct power
over matter corporeal for corporeal effects than over the devils for effects
of witchcraft.
Now, though this must be answered more widely, it is to be noted
that herbs and music cannot by their own natural virtue entirely shut out
the molestation which the devil can inflict upon men, with the permission of
God and the Angels. Yet they can mitigate that molestation; and this can
even be of so slight a nature that they can entirely remove it. But they
would do this, not by acting against the devil himself, since he is a
separate spirit against whom nothing corporeal can naturally act, but by
acting against the actual molestation of the devil. For every cause that has
limited power can produce a more intense effect on a suitable than upon an
unsuitable material. See Aristotle De Anima. They who act do so upon a
predisposed patient. Now the devil is an agent of limited power; therefore
he can inflict a fiercer affliction on a man disposed to that affliction or
to that which the devil means to inflict, than upon a man of a contrary
disposition. For example, the devil can induce a fiercer passion of
melancholy in a man disposed to that humour than in a man of the contrary
disposition.
Moreover, it is certain that herbs and music can change the
disposition of the body, and consequently if the emotions. This is evident
in the case of herbs, since some incline a man to joy, some to sadness, and
so with others. It is evident also in the case of music, as Aristotle shows
(Politics, VIII), where he says that different harmonies can produce
different passions in a man. Boethius also mentions this in his Music, and
the author of the Birth of Knowledge, where he speaks of the usefulness of
music, and says that it is of value in the cure or alleviation of various
infirmities. And thus, other things being equal, it may help to weaken the
affliction.
But I do not see how herbs or music can cause a man to be of such a
disposition that he can in no way be molested by the devil. Even if such a
thing were permissible, the devil, moving only in local vapour of the
spirit, can grievously affect men supernaturally. But herbs and harmonies
cannot of their own natural virtue cause in man a disposition by which the
devil is prevented from creating the aforesaid commotion. Nevertheless it
sometimes happens that the devil is permitted to inflict only so small a
vexation on a man that, through some strong contrary disposition, it may be
totally removed; and then some herbs or harmonies can so dispose a man's
body to the contrary that the vexation is totally removed. For example, the
devil may at times vex a man with the affliction of sadness; but so weakly
that herbs or harmonies which are capable of causing a swelling and
uplifting of the spirits, which are contrary emotions to sadness, can
totally remove that sadness.
Moreover, S. Augustine, in his Second Book On the Christian
Doctrine, condemns amulets and certain other things of which he there writes
much, attributing their virtue to magic art, since thy can have no natural
virtue of their own. And this is clear from what he says. To this sort
belong all amulets and charms which are condemned by the School of
Physicians, which condemns very clearly their use, in that they have no
efficacy of their own natural virtue.
And as for that concerning I Kings xvi: that Saul, who was vexed by
a devil, was alleviated when David played his harp before him, and that the
devil departed, etc. It must be known that it is quite true that by the
playing of the harp, and the natural virtue of that harmony, the affliction
of Saul was to some extent relieved, inasmuch as that music did somewhat
calm hs sense through hearing; through which calming he was made less prone
to that vexation. But the reason why the evil spirit departed when David
played the harp was because of the might of the Cross, which is clearly
enough shown by the gloss, where it says: David was learned in music,
skilful in the different notes and harmonic modulations. He shows the
essential unity by playing each day in various modes. David repressed the
evil spirit by the harp, not because there was so much virtue in the harp,
but it was made in the sign of a cross, being a cross of wood with the
strings stretched across it. And even at that time the devils fled from
this.
Question VI Concerning Witches who copulate with Devils. Why is it that
Women are chiefly addicted to Evil superstitions?
There is also, concerning witches who copulate with devils, much
difficulty in considering the methods by which such abominations are
consummated. On the part of the devil: first, of what element the body is
made that he assumes; secondly, whether the act is always accompanied by the
injection of semen received from another; thirdly, as to time and place,
whether he commits this act more frequently at one time than at another;
fourthly, whether the act is invisible to any who may be standing by. And on
the part of the women, it has to be inquired whether only they who were
themselves conceived in this filthy manner are often visited by devils; or
secondly, whether it is those who were offered to devils by midwives at the
time of their birth; and thirdly, whether the actual venereal delectation of
such is of a weaker sort. But we cannot here reply to all these questions,
both because we are only engaged in a general study, and because in the
second part of this work they are all singly explained by their operations,
as will appear in the fourth chapter, where mention is made of each separate
method. Therefore, let us now chiefly consider women; and first, why this
kind of perfidy is found more in so fragile a sex than in men. And our
inquiry will first be general, as to the general conditions of women;
secondly, particular, as to which sort of women are found to be given to
superstition and witchcraft; and thirdly, specifically with regard to
midwives, who surpass all others in wickedness.
Why Superstition is chiefly found in Women.
As for the first question, why a greater number of witches is found
in the fragile feminine sex than among men; it is indeed a fact that it were
idle to contradict, since it is accredited by actual experience, apart from
the verbal testimony of credibly witnesses. And without in any way
detracting from a sex in which God has always taken great glory that His
might should be spread abroad, let us say that various men have assigned
various reasons for this fact, which nevertheless agree in principle.
Wherefore it is good, for the admonition of women, to speak of this matter;
and it has often been proved by experience that they are eager to hear of
it, so long as it is set forth with discretion.
For some learned men propound this reason; that there are three
things in nature, the Tongue, an Ecclesiastic, and a Woman, which know no
moderation in goodness or vice; and when they exceed the bounds of their
condition they reach the greatest heights and the lowest depths of goodness
and vice. When they are governed by a good spirit, they are most excellent
in virtue; but when they are governed by an evil spirit, they indulge the
worst possible vices.
This is clear in the case of the tongue, since by its ministry most
of the kingdoms have been brought into the faith of Christ; and the Holy
Ghost appeared over the Apostles of Christ in tongues of fire. Other learned
preachers also have had as it were the tongues of dogs, licking wounds and
sores of the dying Lazarus. As it is said: With the tongues of dogs ye save
your souls from the enemy.
For this reason S. Dominic, the leader and father of the Order of
Preachers, is represented in the figure of a barking to dog with a lighted
torch in his mouth, that even to this day he may by his barking keep off the
heretic wolves from the flock of Christ's sheep.
It is also a matter of common experience that the tongue of one
prudent man can subdue the wrangling of a multitude; wherefore not unjustly
Solomon sings much in their praise, in Proverbs x.: In the lips of him that
hath understanding wisdom is found. And again, The tongue of the just is as
choice silver: the heart of the wicked is little worth. And again, The lips
of the righteous feed many; but fools die for want of wisdom. For this cause
he adds in chapter xvi, The preparations of the heart belong to man; but the
answer of the tongue is from the Lord.
But concerning an evil tongue you will find in Ecclesiasticus
xxviii: A backbiting tongue hath disquieted many, and driven them from
nation to nation: strong cities hath it pulled down, and overthrown the
houses of great men. And by a backbiting tongue it means a third party who
rashly or spitefully interferes between two contending parties.
Secondly, concerning Ecclesiastics, that is to say, clerics and
religious of either sex, S. John Chrysostom speaks on the text, He cast out
them that bought and sold from the temple. From the priesthood arises
everything good, and everything evil. S. Jerome in his epistle to Nepotian
says: Avoid as you would the plague a trading priest, who has risen from
poverty to riches, from a low to a high estate. And Blessed Bernard in his
23rd Homily On the Psalms says of clerics: If one should arise as an open
heretic, let him be cast out and put to silence; if he is a violent enemy,
let all good men flee from him. But how are we to know which ones to cast
out or to flee from? For they are confusedly friendly and hostile, peaceable
and quarrelsome, neighbourly and utterly selfish.
And in another place: Our bishops are become spearmen, and our
pastors shearers. And by bishops here is meant those proud Abbots who impose
heavy labours on their inferiors, which they would not themselves touch with
their little finger. And S. Gregory says concerning pastors: No one does
more harm in the Church than he who, having the name or order of sanctity,
lives in sin; for no one dares to accuse him of sin, and therefore the sin
is widely spread, since the sinner is honoured for the sanctity of his
order. Blessed Augustine also speaks of monks to Vincent the Donatist: I
freely confess to your charity before the Lord our God, which is the witness
of my soul from the time I began to serve God, what great difficulty I have
experienced in the fact that it is impossible to find either worse of better
men than those who grace or disgrace the monasteries.
Now the wickedness of women is spoken of in Ecclesiasticus xxv:
There is no head above the head of a serpent: and there is no wrath above
the wrath of a woman. I had rather dwell with a lion and a dragon than to
keep house with a wicked woman. And among much which in that place precedes
and follows about a wicked woman, he concludes: All wickedness is but little
to the wickedness of a woman. Wherefore S. John Chrysostom says on the text,
It is not good to marry (S. Matthew xix): What else is woman but a foe to
friendship, an unescapable punishment, a necessary evil, a natural
temptation, a desirable calamity, a domestic danger, a delectable detriment,
an evil of nature, painted with fair colours! Therefore if it be a sin to
divorce her when she ought to be kept, it is indeed a necessary torture; for
either we commit adultery by divorcing her, or we must endure daily strife.
Cicero in his second book of The Rhetorics says: The many lusts of men lead
them into one sin, but the lust of women leads them into all sins; for the
root of all woman's vices is avarice. And Seneca says in his Tragedies: A
woman either loves or hates; there is no third grade. And the tears of woman
are a deception, for they may spring from true grief, or they may be a
snare. When a woman thinks alone, she thinks evil.
But for good women there is so much praise, that we read that they
have brought beatitude to men, and have saved nations, lands, and cities; as
is clear in the case of Judith, Debbora, and Esther. See also I Corinthians
vii: If a woman hath a husband that believeth not, let her not leave him.
For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the believing wife. And
Ecclesiasticus xxvi: Blessed is the man who has a virtuous wife, for the
number of his days shell be doubled. And throughout that chapter much high
praise is spoken of the excellence of good women; as also in the last
chapter of Proverbs concerning a virtuous woman.
And all this is made clear also in the New Testament concerning
women and virgins and other holy women who have by faith led nations and
kingdoms away from the worship of idols to the Christian religion. Anyone
who looks at Vincent of Beauvais (in Spe. Histo., XXVI. 9) will find
marvellous things of the conversion of Hungary by the most Christian Gilia,
and of the Franks by Clotilda, the wife of Clovis. Wherefore in many
vituperations that we read against women, the word woman is used to mean the
lust of the flesh. As it is said: I have found a woman more bitter than
death, and good woman subject to carnal lust.
Other again have propounded other reasons why there are more
superstitious women found than men. And the first is, that they are more
credulous; and since the chief aim of the devil is to corrupt faith,
therefore he rather attacks them. See Ecclesiasticus xix: He that is quick
to believe is light-minded, and shall be diminished. The second reason is,
that women are naturally more impressionable, and more ready to receive the
influence of a disembodied spirit; and that when they use this quality well
they are very good, but when they use it ill they are very evil.
The third reason is that they have slippery tongues, and are unable
to conceal from the fellow-women those things which by evil arts they know;
and, since they are weak, they find an easy and secret manner of vindicating
themselves by witchcraft. See Ecclesiasticus as quoted above: I had rather
dwell with a lion and a dragon than to keep house with a wicked woman. All
wickedness is but little to the wickedness of a woman. And to this may be
added that, as they are very impressionable, they act accordingly.
There are also others who bring forward yet other reasons, of which
preachers should be very careful how they make use. For it is true that in
the Old Testament the Scriptures have much that is evil to say about women,
and this because of the first temptress, Eve, and her imitators; yet
afterwards in the New Testament we find a change of name, as from Eva to Ave
(as S. Jerome says), and the whole sin of Eve taken away by the benediction
of Mary. Therefore preachers should always say as much praise of them as
possible.
But because in these times this perfidy is more often found in women
than in men, as we learn by actual experience, if anyone is curious as to
the reason, we may add to what has already been said the following: that
since they are feebler both in mind and body, it is not surprising that they
should come more under the spell of witchcraft.
For as regards intellect, or the understanding of spiritual things,
they seem to be of a different nature from men; a fact which is vouched for
by the logic of the authorities, backed by various examples from the
Scriptures. Terence says: Women are intellectually like children. And
Lactantius (Institutiones, III): No woman understood philosophy except
Temeste. And Proverbs xi, as it were describing a woman, says: As a jewel of
gold in a swine's snout, so is a fair woman which is without discretion.
But the natural reason is that she is more carnal than a man, as is
clear from her many carnal abominations. And it should be noted that there
was a defect in the formation of the first woman, since she was formed from
a bent rib, that is, a rib of the breast, which is bent as it were in a
contrary direction to a man. And since through this defect she is an
imperfect animal, she always deceives. For Cato says: When a woman weeps she
weaves snares. And again: When a woman weeps, she labours to deceive a man.
And this is shown by Samson's wife, who coaxed him to tell her the riddle he
had propounded to the Philistines, and told them the answer, and so deceived
him. And it is clear in the case of the first woman that she had little
faith; for when the serpent asked why they did not eat of every tree in
Paradise, she answered: Of every tree, etc. - lest perchance we die. Thereby
she showed that she doubted, and had little in the word of God. And all this
is indicated by the etymology of the word; for Femina comes from Fe and
Minus, since she is ever weaker to hold and preserve the faith. And this as
regards faith is of her very nature; although both by grace and nature faith
never failed in the Blessed Virgin, even at the time of Christ's Passion,
when it failed in all men.
Therefore a wicked woman is by her nature quicker to waver in her
faith, and consequently quicker to abjure the faith, which is the root of
witchcraft.
And as to her other mental quality, that is, her natural will; when
she hates someone whom she formerly loved, then she seethes with anger and
impatience in her whole soul, just as the tides of the sea are always
heaving and boiling. Many authorities allude to this cause. Ecclesiasticus
xxv: There is no wrath above the wrath of a woman. And Seneca (Tragedies,
VIII): No might of the flames or the swollen winds, no deadly weapon, is so
much to be feared as the lust and hatred of a woman who has been divorced
from the marriage bed.
This is shown too in the woman who falsely accused Joseph, and
caused him to be imprisoned because he would not consent to the crime of
adultery with her (Genesis xxx). And truly the most powerful cause which
contributes to the increase of witches is the woeful rivalry between married
folk and unmarried women and men. This is so even among holy women, so what
must it be among the others? For you see in Genesis xxi. how impatient and
envious Sarah was of Hagar when she conceived: How jealous Rachel was of
Leah because she had no children (Genesis xxx): and Hannah, who was barren,
of the fruitful Peninnah (I. Kings i): and how Miriam (Numbers xii) murmured
and spoke ill of Moses, and was therefore stricken with leprosy: and how
Martha was jealous of Mary Magdalen, because she was busy and Mary was
sitting down (S. Luke x). To this point is Ecclesiasticus xxxvii: Neither
consult with a woman touching her of whom she is jealous. Meaning that it is
useless to consult with her, since there is always jealousy, that is, envy,
in a wicked woman. And if women behave thus to each other, how much more
will they do so to men.
Valerius Maximus tells how, when Phoroneus, the king of the Greeks,
was dying, he said to his brother Leontius that there would have been
nothing lacking to him of complete happiness if a wife had always been
lacking to him. And when Leontius asked how a wife could stand in the way of
happiness, he answered that all married men well knew. And when the
philosopher Socrates was asked if one should marry a wife, he answered: If
you do not, you are lonely, your family dies out, and a stranger inherits;
if you do, you suffer perpetual anxiety, querelous complaints, reproaches
concerning the marriage portion, the heavy displeasure of your relations,
the garrulousness of a mother-in-law, cuckoldom, and no certain arrival of
an heir. This he said as one who knew. For S. Jerome in his Contra
Iouinianum says: This Socrates had two wives, whom he endured with much
patience, but could not be rid of their contumelies and clamorous
vituperations. So one day when they were complaining against him, he went
out of the house to escape their plaguing, and sat down before the house;
and the women then threw filthy water over him. But the philosopher was not
disturbed by this, saying, “I knew the rain would come after the thunder.”
There is also a story of a man whose wife was drowned in a river,
who, when he was searching for the body to take it out of the water, walked
up the stream. And when he was asked why, since heavy bodies do not rise but
fall, he was searching against the current of the river, he answered: “When
that woman was alive she always, both in word and deed, went contrary to my
commands; therefore I am searching in the contrary direction in case even
now she is dead she may preserve her contrary disposition.”
And indeed, just as through the first defect in their intelligence
that are more prone to abjure the faith; so through their second defect of
inordinate affections and passions they search for, brood over, and inflict
various vengeances, either by witchcraft, or by some other means. Wherefore
it is no wonder that so great a number of witches exist in this sex.
Women also have weak memories; and it is a natural vice in them not
to be disciplined, but to follow their own impulses without any sense of
what is due; this is her whole study, and all that she keeps in her memory.
So Theophrastus says: If you hand over the whole management of the house to
her, but reserve some minute detail to your own judgement, she will think
that you are displaying a great want of faith in her, and will stir up a
strife; and unless you quickly take counsel, she will prepare poison for
you, and consult seers and soothsayers; and will become a witch.
But as to domination by women, hear what Cicero says in the
Paradoxes. Can he be called a free man whose wife governs him, imposes laws
on him, orders him, and forbids him to do what he wishes, so that he cannot
and dare not deny her anything that she asks? I should call him not only a
slave, but the vilest of slaves, even if he comes from the noblest family.
And Seneca, in the character of the raging Medea, says: Why do you cease to
follow your happy impulse; how great is that part of vengeance in which you
rejoice? Where he adduces many proofs that a woman will not be governed, but
will follow her own impulse even to her own destruction. In the same way we
read of many woman who have killed themselves either for love or sorrow
because they were unable to work their vengeance.
S. Jerome, writing of Daniel, tells a story of Laodice, wife of
Antiochus king of Syria; how, being jealous lest he should love his other
wife, Berenice, more than her, she first caused Berenice and her daughter by
Antiochus to be slain, and then poisoned herself. And why? Because she would
not be governed, and would follow her own impulse. Therefore, S. John
Chrysostom says not without reason: O evil worse than all evil, a wicked
woman, whether she be poor or rich. For if she be the wife of a rich man,
she does not cease night and day to excite her husband with hot words, to
use evil blandishments and violent importunations. And if she have a poor
husband she does not cease to stir him also to anger and strife. And if she
be a widow, she takes it upon herself everywhere to look down on everybody,
and is inflamed to all boldness by the spirit of pride.
If we inquire, we find that nearly all the kingdoms of the world
have been overthrown by women. Troy, which was a prosperous kingdom, was,
for the rape of one woman, Helen, destroyed, and many thousands of Greeks
slain. The kingdom of the Jews suffered much misfortune and destruction
through the accursed Jezebel, and her daughter Athaliah, queen of Judah, who
caused her son's sons to be killed, that on their death she might reign
herself; yet each of them was slain. The kingdom of the Romans endured much
evil through Cleopatra, Queen of Egypt, that worst of women. And so with
others. Therefore it is no wonder if the world now suffers through the
malice of women.
And now let us examine the carnal desires of the body itself, whence
has arise unconscionable harm to human life. Justly we may say with Cato of
Utica: If the world could be rid of women, we should not be without God in
our intercourse. For truly, without the wickedness of women, to say nothing
of witchcraft, the world would still remain proof against innumerable
dangers. Hear what Valerius said to Rufinus: You do not know that woman is
the Chimaera, but it is good that you should know it; for that monster was
of three forms; its face was that of a radiant and noble lion, it had the
filthy belly of a goat, and it was armed with the virulent tail of a viper.
And he means that a woman is beautiful to look upon, contaminating to the
touch, and deadly to keep.
Let us consider another property of hers, the voice. For as she is a
liar by nature, so in her speech she stings while she delights us. Wherefore
her voice is like the song of the Sirens, who with their sweet melody entice
the passers-by and kill them. For they kill them by emptying their purses,
consuming their strength, and causing them to forsake God. Again Valerius
says to Rufinus: When she speaks it is a delight which flavours the sin; the
flower of love is a rose, because under its blossom there are hidden many
thorns. See Proverbs v, 3-4: Her mouth is smoother than oil; that is, her
speech is afterwards as bitter as absinthium. [Her throat is smoother than
oil. But her end is as bitter as wormwood.]
Let us consider also her gait, posture, and habit, in which is
vanity of vanities. There is no man in the world who studies so hard to
please the good God as even an ordinary woman studies by her vanities to
please men. An example of this is to be found in the life of Pelagia, a
worldly woman who was wont to go about Antioch tired and adorned most
extravagantly. A holy father, named Nonnus, saw her and began to weep,
saying to his companions, that never in all his life had he used such
diligence to please God; and much more he added to this effect, which is
preserved in his orations.
It is this which is lamented in Ecclesiastes vii, and which the
Church even now laments on account of the great multitude of witches. And I
have found a woman more bitter than death, who is the hunter's snare, and
her heart is a net, and her hands are bands. He that pleaseth God shall
escape from her; but he that is a sinner shall be caught by her. More bitter
than death, that is, than the devil: Apocalypse vi, 8, His name was Death.
For though the devil tempted Eve to sin, yet Eve seduced Adam. And as the
sin of Eve would not have brought death to our soul and body unless the sin
had afterwards passed on to Adam, to which he was tempted by Eve, not by the
devil, therefore she is more bitter than death.
More bitter than death, again, because that is natural and destroys
only the body; but the sin which arose from woman destroys the soul by
depriving it of grace, and delivers the body up to the punishment of sin.
More bitter than death, again, because bodily death is an open and
terrible enemy, but woman is a wheedling and secret enemy.
And that she is more perilous than a snare does not speak of the
snare of hunters, but of devils. For men are caught not only trough their
carnal desires, when they see and hear women: for S. Bernard says: Their
face is a burning wind, and their voice the hissing of serpents: but they
also cast wicked spells on countless men and animals. And when it is said
that her heart is a net, it speaks of the inscrutable malice which reigns in
their hearts. And her hands are as bands for binding; for when they place
their hands on a creature to bewitch it, then with the help of the devil,
they perform their design.
To conclude. All witchcraft comes from carnal lust, which is in
women insatiable. See Proverbs xxx: There are three things that are never
satisfied, yea, a fourth thing which says not, It is enough; that is, the
mouth of the womb. Wherefore for the sake of fulfilling their lusts they
consort even with devils. More such reasons could be brought forward, but to
the understanding it is sufficiently clear that it is no matter for wonder
that there are more women than men found infected with the heresy of
witchcraft. And in consequence of this, it is better called the heresy of
witches than of wizards, since the name is taken from the more powerful
party. And blessed be the Highest Who has so far preserved the male sex from
so great a crime: for since He was willing to be born and to suffer for us,
therefore He has granted to men the privilege.
What sort of Women are found to be above all Others Superstitious and
Witches.
As to our second inquiry, what sort of women more than others are
found to be superstitious and infected with witchcraft; it must be said, as
was shown in the preceding inquiry, that three general vices appear to have
special dominion over wicked women, namely, infidelity, ambition, and lust.
Therefore they are more than others inclined towards witchcraft, who more
than others are given to these vices. Again, since of these vices the last
chiefly predominates, women being insatiable, etc., it follows that those
among ambitious women are more deeply infected who are more hot to satisfy
their filthy lusts; and such are adulteresses, fornicatresses, and the
concubines of the Great.
Now there are, as it is said in the Papal Bull, seven methods by
which they infect with witchcraft the venereal act and the conception of the
womb: First, by inclining the minds of men to inordinate passion; second, by
obstructing their generative force; third, by removing the members
accomodated to that act; fourth, by changing men into beasts by their magic
art; fifth, by destroying the generative force in women; sixth, by procuring
abortion; seventh, by offering children to devils, besides other animals and
fruits of the earth with which they work much harm. And all these will be
considered later; but for present let us give our minds to the injuries
towards men.
And first concerning those who are bewitched into an inordinate love
or hatred, this is a matter of a sort that it is difficult to discuss before
the general intelligence. Yet it must be granted that it is a fact. For S.
Thomas (IV, 34), treating of obstructions caused by witches, shows that God
allows the devil greater power against men's venereal acts than against
their other actions; and gives this reason, that this is likely to be so,
since those women are chiefly apt to be witches who are most disposed to
such acts.
For he says that, since the first corruption of sin by which man
became the slave of the devil came to us through the act of generation,
therefore greater power is allowed by God to the devil in this act than in
all others. Also the power of witches is more apparent in serpents, as it is
said, than in other animals, because through the means of a serpent the
devil tempted woman. For this reason also, as is shown afterwards, although
matrimony is a work of God, as being instituted by Him, yet it is sometimes
wrecked by the work of the devil: not indeed through main force, since then
he might be though stronger than God, but with the permission of God, by
causing some temporary or permanent impediment in the conjugal act.
And touching this we may say what is known by experience; that these
women satisfy their filthy lists not only in themselves, but even in the
mighty ones of the age, of whatever state and condition; causing by all
sorts of witchcraft the death of their souls through the excessive
infatuation of carnal love, in such a way that for no shame or persuasion
can they desist from such acts. And through such men, since witches will not
permit any harm to come to them either from themselves or from others once
they have them in their power, there arises the great danger of the time,
namely, the extermination of the Faith. And in this way do witches every day
increase.
And would that this were not true according to experience. But
indeed such hatred is aroused by witchcraft between those joined in the
sacrament of matrimony, and such freezing up of the generative forces, that
men are unable to perform the necessary action for begetting offspring. But
since love and hate exist in the soul, which even the devil cannot enter,
lest these things should seem incredibly to anyone, they must be inquired
into; and by meeting argument with argument the matter will be made clear.
Question VII Whether Witches can Sway the Minds of Men to Love or Hatred.
It is asked whether devils, through the medium of witches, can
change or incite the minds of men to inordinate love or hatred; and it is
argued that, following the previous conclusions, they cannot do so. For
there are three things in man: will, understanding, and body. The first is
ruled by God (for, The heart of the king is in the hand of the Lord); the
second is enlightened by an Angel; and the body is governed by the motions
of the stars. And as the devils cannot effect changes in the body, even less
have they power to incite love or hatred in the soul. The consequence is
clear; that though they have more power over things corporeal than over
things spiritual, they cannot change even the body, as has been often
proved. For they cannot induce any substantial or accidental form, except is
as it were their artificer. In this connexion is quoted what has been said
before; that whoever believes that any creature can be changed for the
better or worse or transformed into another kind or likeness, except by the
Creator of all things, is worse than a pagan and a heretic.
Besides, everything that acts with design knows its own effect. If,
therefore, the devil could change the minds of men to hatred or love, he
would also be able to see the inner thoughts of the heart; but this is
contrary to what is said in the Book of Ecclesiastic Dogma: The devil cannot
see our inner thoughts. And again in the same place: Not all our evil
thoughts are from the devil, but sometimes they arise from our own choice.
Besides, love and hatred are a matter of the will, which is rooted
in the soul; therefore they cannot by any cunning be caused by the devil.
The conclusion holds that He alone (as S. Augustine says) is able to enter
into the soul, Who created it.
Besides, it is not valid to argue that because he can influence the
inner emotions, therefore he can govern the will. For the emotions are
stronger than physical strength; and the devil can effect nothing in a
physical way, such as the formation of flesh and blood; therefore he can
effect nothing through the emotions.
But against this. The devil is said to tempt men not only visibly
but also invisibly; but this would not be true unless he were able to exert
some influence over the inner mind. Besides, S. John Damascene says: All
evil and all filthiness is devised by the devil. And Dionysius, de Divin.
Nom. IV: The multitude of devils is the cause of all evil, etc.
Answer. First, one sort of cause is to be distinguished from
another: secondly, we shall show how the devil can affect the inner powers
of the mind, that is the emotions; and thirdly, we shall draw the fit
conclusion. And as to the first, it is to be considered that the cause of
anything can be understood in two ways; either as direct, or as indirect.
For when something cause a disposition to some effect, it is said to be an
occasional and indirect cause of that effect. In this way it may be said
that he who chops wood is the cause of the actual fire. And similarly we may
say that the devil is the cause of all our sins; for he incited the first
man to sin, from whose sin it has been handed down to the whole human race
to have an inclination towards sin. And in this way are to be understood the
words of S. John Damascene and Dionysius.
But a direct cause is one that directly causes an effect; and in
this sense the devil is not the cause of all sin. For all sins are not
committed at the instigation of the devil, but some are of our own choosing.
For Origen says: Even if the devil were not, men would still lust after food
and venery and such things. And from these inordinate lusts much may result,
unless such appetites be reasonably restrained. But to restrain such
ungoverned desire is the part of man's free-will, over which even the devil
has no power.
And because this distinction is not sufficient to explain how the
devil at times produces a frantic infatuation of love, it is further to be
noted that though he cannot cause that inordinate love by directly
compelling a man's will, yet he can do so by means of persuasion. And this
again in two ways, either visibly or invisibly. Visibly, when he appears to
witches in the form of a man, and speaks to them materially, persuading them
to sin. So he tempted our first parents in Paradise in the form of a
serpent; and so he tempted Christ in the wilderness, appearing to Him in
visible form.
But it is not to be thought that this is the only way he influences
a man; for in that case no sin would proceed from the devil's instruction,
except such as were suggested by him in visible form. Therefore it must be
said that even invisibly he instigates man to sin. And this he does in two
ways, either by persuasion or by disposition. By persuasion, he presents
something to the understanding as being a good thing. And this he can do in
three ways; for he presents it either to the intellect, or to the inner
perceptions, or to the outer. And as for the intellect; the human intellect
can be helped by a good Angel to understand a thing by means of
enlightenment, as Dionysius says; and to understand a thing, according to
Aristotle, is to suffer something: therefore the devil can impress some form
upon the intellect, by which the act of understanding is called forth.
And it may be argued that the devil can do this by his natural
power, which is not, as had been shown, diminished. It is to be said,
however, that he cannot do this by means of enlightenment, but by
persuasion. For the intellect of man is of that condition that, the more it
is enlightened, the more it knows the truth, and the more it can defend
itself from deception. And because the devil intends his deception to be
permanent, therefore no persuasion that he uses can be called enlightenment:
although it may be called revelation, in that when he invisibly uses
persuasion, by means of some impression he plants something on the inner or
outer sense. And by this the reasoning intellect is persuaded to perform
some action.
But as to how he is enabled to create an impression on the inner
sense, it is to be noted that the bodily nature is naturally born to be
moved locally by the spiritual; which is clear from the case of our own
bodies, which are moved by souls; and the same is the case with the stars.
But it is not by nature adapted to be directly subject to influences, by
which we mean outside influences, not those with which it is informed.
Wherefore the concurrence of some bodily agent is necessary, as is proved in
the 7th book of the Metaphysics. Corporeal matter naturally obeys a good or
bad angel as to the local motion; and it is due to this that devils can
through motion collect semen, and employ it for the production of wonderful
results. This was how it happened that Pharao's magicians produced serpents
and actual animals, when corresponding active and passive agents were
brought together. Therefore there is nothing to prevent the devils from
effecting anything that appertains to the local motion of corporeal matter,
unless God prevent it.
And now let us examine how the devil can through local motion excite
the fancy and inner sensory perceptions of a man by apparitions and
impulsive actions. It is to be noted that Aristotle (De Somno et Uigilia)
assigns the cause of apparitions in dreams through local motion to the fact
that, when an animal sleeps the blood flows to the inmost seat of the
senses, from which descend motions or impressions which remain from past
impressions preserved in the mind or inner perception; and these are Fancy
or Imagination, which are the same thing according to S. Thomas, as will be
shown.
For fancy or imagination is as it were the treasury of ideas
received through the senses. And through this it happens that devils stir up
the inner perceptions, that is the power of conserving images, that they
appear to be a new impression at that moment received from exterior things.
It is true that all do not agree to this; but if anyone wishes to
occupy himself with this question, he must consider the number and the
office of the inner perceptions. According to Avicenna, in his book On the
Mind, these are five: namely, Common Sense, Fancy, Imagination, Thought, and
Memory. But S. Thomas, in the First Part of Question 79, says that they are
only four, since Fancy and Imagination are the same thing. For fear of
prolixity I omit much more that has variously been said on this subject.
Only this must be said; that fancy is the treasury of ideas, but
memory appears to be something different. For fancy is the treasury or
repository of ideas received through the senses; but memory is the treasury
of instincts, which are not received through the senses. For when a man sees
a wolf, he runs away, not because of its ugly colour or appearance, which
are ideas received through the outer senses and conserved in his fancy; but
he runs away because the wolf is his natural enemy. And this he knows
through some instinct or fear, which is apart from thought, which recognized
the wolf as hostile, but a dog as friendly. But the repository of those
instincts is memory. And reception and retention are two different things in
animal nature; for those who are of a humid disposition receive readily, but
retain badly; and the contrary is the case of those with a dry humour.
To return to the question. The apparitions that come in dreams to
sleepers proceed from the ideas retained in the repository of their mind,
through a natural local motion caused by the flow of blood to the first and
inmost seat of their faculties of perception; and we speak of an instrinsic
local motion in the head and the cells of the brain.
And this can also happen through a similar local motion created by
devils. Also such things happen not only to the sleeping, but even to those
who are awake. For in these also the devils can stir up and excite the inner
perceptions and humours, so that ideas retained in the repositories of their
minds are drawn out and made apparent to the faculties of fancy and
imagination, so that such men imagine these things to be true. And this is
called interior temptation.
And it is no wonder that the devil can do this by his own natural
power; since any man by himself, being awake and having the use of his
reason, can voluntarily draw from his repositories the images he has
retained in them; in such a way that he can summon to himself the images of
whatsoever things he pleases. And this being granted, it is easy to
understand the matter of excessive infatuation in love.
Now there are two ways in which devils can, as has been said, raise
up this kind of images. Sometimes they work without enchaining the human
reason, as has been said in the matter of temptation, and the example of
voluntary imagination. But sometimes the use of reason is entirely chained
up; and this may be exemplified by certain naturally defective persons, and
by madmen and drunkards. Therefore it is no wonder that devils can, with
God's permission, chain up the reason; and such men are called delirious,
because their senses have been snatched away by the devil. And this they do
in two ways, either with or without the help of witches. For Aristotle, in
the work we have quoted, says that anyone who lives in passion is moved by
only a little thing, as a lover by the remotest likeness of his love, and
similarly with one who feels hatred. Therefore devils, who have learned from
men's acts to which passions they are chiefly subject, incite them to this
sort of inordinate love or hatred, impressing their purpose on men's
imagination the more strongly and effectively, as they can do so the more
easily. And this is the more easy for a lover to summon up the image of his
love from his memory, and retain it pleasurably in his thoughts.
But they work by witchcraft when they do these things through and at
the instance of witches, by reason of a pact entered into with them. But it
is not possible to treat of such matters in detail, on account of the great
number of instances both among the clergy and among the laity. For how many
adulterers have put away the most beautiful wives to lust after the vilest
of women!
We know of an old woman who, according to the common account of the
brothers in that monastery even up to this day, in this manner not only
bewitched three successive Abbots, but even killed them, and in the same way
drove the fourth out of his mind. For she herself publicly confessed it, and
does not fear to say: I did so and I do so, and they are not able to keep
from loving me because they have eaten so much of my dung - measuring off a
certain length on her arm. I confess, moreover, that since we had no case to
prosecute her or bring her to trial, she survives to this day.
It will be remembered that it was said that the devil invisibly
lures a man to sin, not only by means of persuasion, as has been said, but
also by the means of disposition. Although this is not very pertinent, yet
be it said that by a similar admonition of the disposition and humours of
men, he renders some more disposed to anger, or concupiscence, or other
passions. For it is manifest that a man who has a body so disposed is more
prone to concupiscence and anger and such passions; and when they are
aroused, he is more apt to surrender to them. But because it is difficult to
quote precedents, therefore an easier method must be found of declaring them
for the admonition of the people. And in the Second Part of this book we
treat of the remedies by which men so bewitched can be set free.
The Method of Preaching to the People about Infatuate Love.
Concerning what has been said above, a preacher asks this question:
Is it a Catholic view to maintain that witches can infect the minds of men
with an inordinate love of strange women, and so inflame their hearts that
by no shame or punishment, by no words or actions can they be forced to
desist from such love; and that similarly they can stir up such hatred
between married couples that they are unable in any way to perform the
procreant functions of marriage; so that, indeed, in the untimely silence of
night, they cover great distances in search of mistresses and irregular
lovers?
As to this matter, he may, if he wishes, find some arguments in the
preceding question. Otherwise, it need only be said that there are
difficulties in those questions on account of love and hate. For these
passions invade the will, which is in its own act always free, and not to be
coerced by and creature except God, Who can govern it. From which it is
clear that neither the devil nor a witch working by his power can force a
man's will to love or to hate. Again, since the will, like the
understanding, exists subjectively in the soul, and He alone can enter into
the soul Who created it, therefore this question presents many difficulties
in the matter of unravelling the truth of it.
But notwithstanding this, we must speak first of infatuation and
hatred, and secondly about the bewitching of the generative power. And as to
the first, although the devil cannot directly operate upon the understanding
and will of man, yet, according to all the learned Theologians in the 2nd
Book of Sentences, on the subject of the power of the devil, he can act upon
the body, or upon the faculties belonging to or allied to the body, whether
they be the inner or outer perceptions. This is authoritatively and
reasonably proved in the preceding question, if one cares to look; but if
not, there is the authority of Job ii: The Lord said unto Satan, Behold, he
is in thine hand. That is, Job is in his power. But this was only in regard
to the body, for He would not give his soul into his power. Wherefore He
said: Only save thou his life; that is, keep it unharmed. And that power He
gave him over his body, He gave also over all the faculties allied to the
body, which are the four or five outer and inner perceptions, namely Common
Sense, Fancy or Imagination, Thought, and Memory.
If no other instance can be given, let us take an example from pigs
and sheep. For pigs know by instinct their way home. And by natural instinct
sheep distinguish a wolf from a dog, knowing one to be the enemy and the
other the friend of their nature.
Consequently, since all our reasoned knowledge comes from the senses
(for Aristotle in the 2nd book On the Mind says that an intelligent man must
take notice of phantasms), therefore the devil can affect the inner fancy,
and darken the understanding. And this is not to act immediately upon the
mind, but through the medium of phantasms. Because, also, nothing is loved
until it is known.
As many examples as are needed could be taken from gold, which the
miser loves because he knows its power, etc. Therefore when the
understanding is darkened, the will also is darkened in its affectations.
Moreover, the devil can effect this either with or without the help of a
witch; and such things can even happen through mere want of foresight. But
we shall give examples of each kind. For, as it is said in S. James i: Every
man is tempted when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when
lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin, when it is finished, bringeth
forth death. Again, when Schechem saw Dinah going out to see the daughters
of the land, he loved her, and seized her, and lay with her, and his soul
clave unto her (Genesis xxxiv). And according to the gloss: When the infirm
mind forsakes its own business, and takes heed, like Dinah, of that of other
people, it is led astray by habit, and becomes one with the sinners.
Secondly, that this lust can arise apart from witchcraft, and simply
through the temptation of the devil, is shown as follows. For we read in II.
Samuel xiii that Ammon desperately loved his own sister Tamar, and yearned
greatly for her, so that he grew ill for love for her. But no one would fall
into so great and foul a crime unless he were totally corrupt, and
grievously tempted by the devil. Wherefore the gloss says: This is a warning
to us, and was permitted by God that we should always be on guard lest vice
should get the mastery over us, and the prince of sin, who promises a false
peace to those who are in danger, finding us ready should slay us unaware.
Mention is made of this sort of passion in the Book of the Holy
Fathers, where it says that, however far they withdrew themselves from all
carnal lusts, yet they were sometimes tempted by the love of women more than
could possibly be believed. Wherefore in II. Corinthians xii the Apostle
says: There was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to
buffet me. On which the gloss says: It was given to me to be tempted by
lust. But he who is tempted and does not yield is no sinner, but it is a
matter for the exercise of virtue. And by temptation is understood that of
the devil, not that of the flesh, which is always venial in a little sin.
The preacher could find many examples if he pleased.
The third point, that infatuate love proceeds from the evil works of
the devil, has been discussed above; and we speak of this temptation.
It may be asked how it is possible to tell whether such inordinate
love proceeds not from the devil but only from a witch. And the answer is
that there are many ways. First, if the man tempted has a beautiful and
honest wife, or the converse in the case of a woman, etc. Secondly, if the
judgement of the reason is so chained up that by no blows or words or deeds,
or even by shame, can he be made to desist from that lust. And thirdly, in
especial, when he cannot contain himself, but that he is at times
unexpectedly, and in spite of the roughness of the journey, forced to be
carried through great distances (as anyone can learn from the confessions of
such men), both by day and by night. For as S. John Chrysostom says on
Matthew xx concerning the ass upon which Christ rode: When the devil
possesses the will of a man with sin, he carries him at his will where he
pleases. Giving the example of a ship in the sea without a rudder, which the
winds carry about at their pleasure; and of a man firmly sitting a horse;
and a King having dominion over a tyrant. And fourthly, it is shown by the
fact that they are sometimes suddenly and unexpectedly carried away, and at
times transformed, so that nothing can prevent it. It is shown also by the
hideousness of their very appearance.
And before we proceed to the further question of witches, touching
the powers of generation, which follows, we must first resolve the
arguments.
Here Follow the Resolutions of the Arguments.
But for the answer to the arguments: for the first, that the will of
man is ruled by God, just as his understanding is by a good Angel, the
solution is clear. For the intellect is enlightened by a good Angel only to
the knowledge of the truth, from which proceeds the love of that which is
good, for the True and the Actual are the same thing. So also the intellect
can be darkened by a bad angel in the knowledge of what appear to be true;
and this through a confusion of the ideas and images received and stored by
the perceptions, from which comes an inordinate love of the apparently good,
such as bodily delectation, which such men seek after.
As to the second argument, that the devil cannot effect physical
changes in the body; this is in part true, and in part not, and this is with
reference to three sorts of mutation. For the devil cannot change the body
in such a way that its whole shape and appearance is altered (which is
rather to be called a new production than a change) without the help of some
agent, or with the permission of God. But if we speak of a change in
quality, as in the matter of sickness and health, as has been shown before,
he can inflict upon the body various diseases, even to taking away the
reason, and so can cause inordinate hatred and love.
And a third kind of mutation can be added, which is when a good or
bad angel enters into the body, in the same way that we say that God alone
is able to enter into the soul, that is, the essence of life. But when we
speak of an angel, especially a bad angel, entering the body, as in the case
of an obsession, he does not enter beyond the limits of the essence of the
body; for in this way only God the Creator can enter, Who gave it to be as
it were the intrinsic operation of life. But the devil is said to enter the
body when he effects something about the body: for when he works, there he
is, as S. John Damascene says. And then he works within the bounds of
corporeal matter, but not within the very essence of the body.
For this it appears that the body has two properties, matter and
spirit. And this is like the distinction between the apparent and the real.
Therefore when devils enter the body, they enter the power belonging to the
bodily organs, and can so create impressions on those powers. And so it
happens that through such operations and impressions a phantasm is projected
before the understanding, such as the seeing of colours, as it is said in
the 3rd book de Anima. And so this impression penetrates also to the will.
For the will takes its conception of what is good from the intellect,
according as the intellect accepts something as good either in truth or in
appearance.
As for the third argument: a knowledge of the thoughts of the heart
may come about in two ways, either from seeing their efforts or by reading
them actually in the intellect. In the first way they can be known not only
by an angel, but even by man, although it will be shown that an angel has
more skill in this matter. For sometimes the thoughts are made evident, not
only by some external action, but even by a change in the countenance. And
doctors also can discern some affections of the mind through the pulse.
Wherefore S. Augustine says (de Diuin. Daem.) that sometimes it is very easy
to tell a man's disposition, not only from his words, but from his very
thoughts, which are signs of the soul expressed in the body; although in his
book of Retractions he says that no definite rule can be laid down how this
is done; and I think that he is reluctant to admit that the devil can know
the inner thoughts of the heart.
From another point of view, the thoughts of the intellect and the
affectations of the will can be known only by God. For the will of a
rational creature is subject only to God, and He alone can work in it Who is
its first cause and ultimate end. Therefore that which is in the will, or
depends only on the will, is known only to God. Moreover, it is manifest
what depends only on the will, if one considers things by their resultant
actions. For when a man has the quality of knowledge, and the understanding
that comes from it, he uses it when he wills.
It is proved, then, from what has been said, that a spirit cannot
enter the soul, therefore he cannot, naturally, see what is in the mind,
especially what is in the inner depths of the soul. Wherefore, when it is
argued that the devil cannot see the thoughts of the heart, and therefore
cannot move the hearts of men to love or hatred, it is answered that he does
learn men's thoughts through their visible effects, and is more skilful in
this matter than man; and so by subtle ways he can move men to love and
hatred, by creating phantasms and darkening the intellect.
And this must be said by way of comfort to relieve the apprehensions
of the virtuous: that when the sensible exterior and bodily change which
accompanied men's thoughts is so vague and indeterminate that the devil
cannot by it arrive at any certain knowledge of the thoughts, especially
when the virtuous at times take a little leisure from study and good works,
he molests them then chiefly in dreams; as is known by experience. But when
the physical effect of thought is strong and determinate, the devil can know
by a man's appearance whether his thoughts are turned towards envy or
luxury. But we find that it must be left an open question whether he can by
this means have certain knowledge in respect of all circumstances, as such
and such; although it is true that he can know such circumstances from their
subsequent results.
And fourthly: although to enter the soul belongs only to God, yet it
is possible for a good or bad angel to enter the body and the faculties
allied to the body, in the manner which has been shown above. And in this
way hatred and love can be aroused in such a man. For the other argument,
that the powers of the spirit are greater than the physical powers, which
themselves cannot be changed by the devil, in so far as they can be hastened
or retarded in the flesh and bone. But he does this, not for the sake of
impeding or stimulating the inner or outer perceptions, but for his own
gain; since he derives his chief benefit by the deception of the senses and
the delusion of the intellect.
Question VIII Whether Witches can Hebetate the Powers of Generation or
Obstruct the Venereal Act.
Now the fact that adulterous drabs and whores are chiefly given to
witchcraft is substantiated by the spells which are cast by witches upon the
act of generation. And to make the truth more clear, we will consider the
arguments of those who are in disagreement with us on this matter. And first
it is argued that such a bewitching is not possible, because if it were it
would apply equally to those who are married; and if this were conceded,
then, since matrimony is God's work and witchcraft is the devil's, the
devil's work would be stronger than God's. But if it is allowed that it can
only affect fornicators and the unmarried, this involves a return to the
opinion that witchcraft does not really exist, but only in men's
imagination; and this was refuted in the First Question. Or else some reason
will be found why it should affect the unmarried and not the married; and
the only possible reason is that matrimony is God's work. And since,
according to the Theologians, this reason is not valid, there still remains
the argument that it would make the devil's work stronger than God's; and
since it would be unseemly to make such an assertion, it is also unseemly to
maintain that the venereal act can be obstructed by witchcraft.
Again, the devil cannot obstruct the other natural actions, such as
eating, walking and standing, as is apparent from the fact that, if he
could, he could destroy the whole world.
Besides, since the venereal act is common to all women, if it were
obstructed it would be so with reference to all women; but this is not so,
and therefore the first argument is good. For the facts prove that it is not
so; for when a man says that he has been bewitched, he is still quite
capable as regards other women, though not with her with whom he is unable
to copulate; and the reason for this is that he does not wish to, and
therefore cannot effect anything in the matter.
On the contrary and true side is the chapter in the Decretals (If by
sortilege, etc.): as is also the opinion of all the Theologians and
Canonists, where they treat of the obstruction to marriage caused by
witchcraft.
There is also another reason: that since the devil is more powerful
than man, and a man can obstruct the generative powers by means of frigid
herbs or anything else that can be thought of, therefore much more can the
devil do this, since he has greater knowledge and cunning.
Answer. The truth is sufficiently evident from two matters which
have already been argued, although the method of obstruction has not been
specifically declared. For it has been shown that witchcraft does not exist
only in men's imaginations, and not in fact; but that truly and actually in
numerable bewitchments can happen, with the permission of God. It has been
shown, too, that God permits it more in the case of the generative powers,
because of their greater corruption, than in the case of other human
actions. But concerning the method by which such obstruction is procured, it
is to be noted that it does not affect only the generative powers, but also
the powers of the imagination or fancy.
And as to this, Peter of Palude (III, 34) notes five methods. For he
says that the devil, being a spirit, has power over a corporeal creature to
cause or prevent a local motion. Therefore he can prevent bodies from
approaching each other, either directly or indirectly, by interposing
himself in some bodily shape. In this way it happened to the young man who
was betrothed to an idol and nevertheless married a young maiden, and was
consequently unable to copulate with her. Secondly, he can excite a man to
that act, or freeze his desire for it, by the virtue of secret things of
which he best knows the power. Thirdly, he can also disturb a man's
perception and imagination as to make the woman appear loathsome to him:
since he can, as had been said, influence the imagination. Fourthly, he can
directly prevent the erection of that member which is adapted to
fructification, just as he can prevent local motion. Fifthly, he can prevent
the flow of the vital essence to the members in which lie the motive power;
by closing as it were the seminary ducts, so that it does not descend to the
generative channels, or falls back from them, or does not project from them,
or in any of many ways fails in its function.
And he continues in agreement with what has been treated of above by
other Doctors. For God allows the devil more latitude in respect of this
act, through which sin was first spread abroad, than of other human acts.
Similarly, serpents are more subject to magic spells than are other animals.
And a little later he says: It is the same in the case of a woman, for the
devil can so darken her understanding that she considers her husband so
loathsome that not for all the world would she allow him to lie with her.
Later he wishes to find the reason why more men than women are
bewitched in respect of that action; and he says that such obstruction
generally occurs in the matter of erection, which can more easily happen to
men; and therefore more men than women are bewitched. It might also be said
that, the greater part of witches being women, they lust more for men than
for women. Also they act in the despite of married women, finding every
opportunity for adultery when the husband is able to copulate with other
women but not with his own wife; and similarly the wife also has to seek
other lovers.
He adds also that God allows the devil to afflict sinners more
bitterly than the just. Wherefore the Angel said to Tobias: He gives the
devil power over those who are given up to lust. But he has power also
against the just sometimes, as in the case of Job, but not in respect of the
genital functions. Wherefore they ought to devote themselves to confession
and other good works, lest the iron remain in the wound, and it be in vain
to apply remedies. So much for Peter. But the method of removing such
effects will be shown in the Second Part of this work.
Some Incidental Doubts on the subject of Copulation prevented by Evil Spells
are made Clear.
But incidentally, if it is asked why this function is sometimes
obstructed in respect of one woman but not of another, the answer, according
to S. Bonaventura, is this. Either the enchantress of witch afflicts in this
way those persons upon whom the devil has determined; or it is because God
will not permit it to be inflicted on certain persons. For the hidden
purpose of God in this is obscure, as is shown in the case of the wife of
Tobias. And he adds:
If it is asked how the devil does this, it is to be said that he
obstructs the genital power, not intrinsically by harming the organ, but
extrinsically by rendering it useless. Therefore, since it is an artificial
and not a natural obstruction, he can make a man impotent towards one woman
but not towards others: by taking away the inflammation of his lust for her,
but not for other women, either through his own power, or through some herb
or stone, or some occult natural means. And this agrees with the words of
Peter of Palude.
Besides, since impotency in this act is sometimes due to coldness of
nature, or some natural defect, it is asked how it is possible to
distinguish whether it is due to witchcraft of not. Hostiensis gives the
answer in his Summa (but this must not be publicly preached): When the
member is in no way stirred, and can never perform the act of coition, this
is a sign of frigidity of nature; but when it is stirred and becomes erect,
but yet cannot perform, it is a sign of witchcraft.
It is to be noted also that impotence of the member to perform the
act is not the only bewitchment; but sometimes the woman is caused to be
unable to conceive, or else she miscarries.
Note, moreover, that according to what is aid down by the Canons,
whoever through desire of vengeance or for hatred does anything to a man or
a woman to prevent them from begetting or conceiving must be considered a
homicide. And note, further, that the Canon speaks of loose lovers who, to
save their mistresses from shame, use contraceptives, such as potions, or
herbs that contravene nature, without any help from devils. And such
penitents are to be punished as homicides. But witches who do such things by
witchcraft are by law punishable by the extreme penalty, as had been touched
on above in the First Question.
And for a solution of the arguments; when it is objected that these
things cannot happen to those joined together in matrimony, it is further to
be noted that, even if the truth in this matter had not already been made
sufficiently plain, yet these things can truly and actually happen just as
much to those who are married as to those who are not. And the prudent
reader who has plenty of books, will refer to the Theologians and the
Canonists, especially where they speak of the impotent and bewitched. He
will find them in agreement in condemning two errors: especially with regard
to married people who seem to think that such bewitchment cannot happen to
those who are joined in matrimony, advancing the reason that the devil
cannot destroy the works of God.
And the first error which they condemn is that of those who say that
there is no witchcraft in the world, but only in the imagination of men who,
through their ignorance of hidden causes which no man yet understands,
ascribe certain natural effects to witchcraft, as though they were effected
not by hidden causes, but by devils working either by themselves or in
conjunction with witches. And although all other Doctors condemn this error
as a pure falsehood, yet S. Thomas impugns it more vigorously and
stigmatizes it as actual heresy, saying that this error proceeds from the
root of infidelity. And since infidelity in a Christian is accounted heresy,
therefore such deserve to be suspected as heretics. And this matter was
touched on in the First Question, though it was not there declared so
plainly. For if anyone considers the other sayings of S. Thomas in other
places, he will find the reasons why he affirms that such an error proceeds
from the root of infidelity.
For in his questions concerning Sin, where he treats of devils, and
in his first question, whether devils have bodies that naturally belong to
them, among many other matters he makes mention of those who referred every
physical effect to the virtue of the stars; to which they said that the
hidden causes of terrestrial effects were subject. And he says: It must be
considered that the Peripatetics,the followers of Aristotle, held that
devils did not really exist; but that those things which are attributed to
devils proceeded from the power of the stars and other natural phenomena.
Wherefore S. Augustine says (de Ciuitate Dei, X), that it was the opinion of
Porphyry that from herbs and animals, and certain sounds and voice, and from
figures and figments observed in the motion of the stars, powers
corresponding to the stars were fabricated on earth by men in order to
explain various natural effect. And the error of these is plain, since they
referred everything to hidden causes in the stars, holding that devils were
only fabricated by the imagination of men.
But this opinion is clearly proved to be false by S. Thomas in the
same work; for some works of devils are found which can in no way proceed
from any natural cause. For example, when one who is possessed by devil
speaks in an unknown language; and many other devil's works are found, both
in the Rhapsodic and the Necromantic arts, which can in no way proceed
except from some Intelligence, which may be naturally good but is evil in
its intention. And therefore, because of these incongruities, other
Philosophers were compelled to admit that there were devils. Yet they
afterwards fell into various errors, some thinking that the souls of men,
when they left their bodies, became devils. For this reason many Soothsayers
have killed children, that they might have their souls as their co-
operators; and many other errors are recounted.
From this it is clear that not without reason does the Holy Doctor
say that such an opinion proceeds from the root of infidelity. And anyone
who wishes may read S. Augustine (de Ciuitate Dei, VIII, IX) on the various
errors of infidels concerning the nature of devils. And indeed the common
opinion of all Doctors, quoted in the above-mentioned work, against those
who err in this way by denying that there are any witches, is very weighty
in its meaning, even if it is expressed in few words. For they say that they
who maintain that there is no witchcraft in the world go contrary to the
opinion of all the Doctors, and of the Holy Scripture; and declare that
there are devils, and that devils have power over the bodies and
imaginations of men, with the permission of God. Wherefore, those who are
the instruments of the devils, at whose instance the devil at times do
mischief to a creature, they call witches.
Now in the Doctor's condemnation of this first error nothing is said
concerning those joined together in matrimony; but this is made clear in
their condemnation of the second error of believing that, though witchcraft
exists and abounds in the world, even against carnal copulation, yet, since
no such bewitchment can be considered to be permanent, it never annuls a
marriage that has already been contracted. Here is where they speak of those
joined in matrimony. Now in refuting this error (for we do so, even though
it is little to the point, for the sake of those who have not many books),
it is to be noted that they refute it by maintaining that it is against all
precedent, and contrary to all laws both ancient and modern.
Wherefore the Catholic Doctors make the following distinction, that
impotence caused by witchcraft is either temporary or permanent. And if it
is temporary, then it does not annul the marriage. Moreover, it is presumed
to be temporary of they are able to healed of the impediment within three
years from their cohabitation, having taken all possible pain, either
through the sacraments of the Church, or through other remedies, to be
cured. But if they are not then cured by any remedy, from that time it is
presumed to be permanent. And in that case it either precedes both the
contracting of a marriage, and annuls one that is not yet contracted; or
else it follows the contract of marriage but precedes its consummation, and
then also, according to some, it annuls the previous contract. (For it is
said in Book XXXII, quest. 1. cap. 1 that the confirmation of a marriage
consists in its carnal office.) Or else it is subsequent to the consummation
of the marriage, and then the matrimonial bond is not annulled. Much is
noted there concerning impotence by Hostiensis, and Godfrey, and the Doctors
and Theologians.
To the arguments. As to the first, it is made sufficiently clear
from what has been said. For as to the argument that God's works can be
destroyed by the devil's works, if witchcraft has power against those who
are married, it has no force; rather does the opposite appear, since the
devil can do nothing without God's permission. For he does not destroy by
main force like a tyrant, but through some extrinsic art, as is proved
above. And the second argument is also made quite clear, why God allows this
obstruction more in the case of the venereal act than of other acts. But the
devil has power also over other acts, when God permits. Wherefore it is not
sound to argue that he could destroy the whole world. And the third
objection is similarly answered by what has been said.
Question IX Whether Witches may work some Prestidigatory Illusion so that
the Male Organ appears to be entirely removed and separate from the Body.
Here is declared the truth about diabolic operations with regard to
the male organ. And to make plain the facts in this matter, it is asked
whether witches can with the help of devils really and actually remove the
member, or whether they only do so apparently by some glamour or illusion.
And that they can actually do so is argued a fortiori; for since devils can
do greater things than this, as killing them or carrying them from place to
place - as was shown above in the cases of Job and Tobias - therefore they
can also truly and actually remove men's members.
Again, an argument is taken from the gloss on the visitations of bad
Angels, in the Psalms: God punishes by means of bad Angels, as He often
punished the People of Israel with various diseases, truly and actually
visited upon their bodies. Therefore the member is equally subject to such
visitations.
It may be said that this is done with the Divine permission. And in
that case, it has already been said that God allows more power of witchcraft
over the genital functions, on account of the first corruption of sin which
came to us from the act of generation, so also He allows greater power over
the actual genital organ, even to its removal.
And again, it was a greater thing to turn Lot's wife into a pillar
of salt than it is to take away the male organ; and that (Genesis xix) was a
real and actual, not an apparent, metamorphosis (for it is said that that
pillar is still to be seen), And this was done by a bad Angel; just as the
good Angels struck the men of Sodom with blindness, so that they could not
find the door of the house. And so it was with the other punishments of the
men of Gomorrah. The gloss, indeed, affirms that Lot's wife was herself
tainted with that vice, and therefore she was punished.
And again, whoever can create a natural shape can also take it away.
But devils have created many natural shapes, as is clear from Pharao's
magicians, who with the help of devils made frogs and serpents. Also S.
Augustine, in Book LXXXIII, says that those things which are visibly done by
the lower powers of the air cannot be considered to be mere illusions; but
even men are able, by some skilful incision, to remove the male organ;
therefore devils can do invisibly what others do visibly.
But on the contrary side, S. Augustine (de Ciuitate Dei, XVIII)
says: It is not to be believed that, through the art or power of devils,
man's body can be changed into the likeness of a beast; therefore it is
equally impossible that that should be removed which is essential to the
truth of the human body, Also he says (de Trinitate, III): It must not be
thought that this substance of visible matter is subject to the will of
those fallen angels; for it is subject only to God.
Answer. There is no doubt that certain witches can do marvellous
things with regard to male organs, for this agrees with what has been seen
and heard by many, and with the general account of what has been known
concerning that member through the senses of sight and touch. And as to how
this thing is possible, it is to be said that it can be done in two ways,
either actually and in fact, as the first arguments have said, or through
some prestige or glamour. But when it is performed by witches, it is only a
matter of glamour; although it is no illusion in the opinion of the
sufferer. For his imagination can really and actually believe that something
is not present, since by none of his exterior sense, such as sight or touch,
can he perceive that it is present.
From this it may be said that there is a true abstraction of the
member in imagination, although not in fact; and several things are to be
noted as to how this happens. And first as to two methods by which it can be
done. It is no wonder that the devil can deceive the outer human senses,
since, as has been treated of above, he can illude the inner senses, by
bringing to actual perception ideas that are stored in the imagination.
Moreover, he deceives men in their natural functions, causing that which is
visible to be invisible to them, and that which is tangible to be
intangible, and the audible inaudible, and so with the other senses. But
such things are not true in actual fact, since they are caused through some
defect introduced in the sense, such as the eyes or the ears, or the touch,
by reason of which defect a man's judgement is deceived.
And we can illustrate this from certain natural phenomena. For sweet
wine appears bitter on the tongue of the fevered, his taste being deceived
not by the actual fact, but through his disease. So also in the case under
consideration, the deception is not due to fact, since the member is still
actually in its place; but it is an illusion of the sense with regard to it.
Again, as has been said above concerning the generative powers, the
devil can obstruct that action by imposing some other body of the same
colour and appearance, in such a way that some smoothly fashioned body in
the colour of flesh is interposed between the sight and touch, and between
the true body of the sufferer, so that it seems to him that he can see and
feel nothing but a smooth body with its surface interrupted by no genital
organ. See the sayings of S. Thomas (2 dist. 8. artic. 5) concerning
glamours and illusions, and also in the second of the second, 91, and in his
questions concerning Sin; where he frequently quotes that of S. Augustine in
Book LXXXIII: This evil of the devil creeps in through all the sensual
approaches; he gives himself to figures, he adapts himself to colours, he
abides in sounds, he lurks in smells, he infuses himself into flavours.
Besides, it is to be considered that such an illusion of the sight
and touch can be caused not only by the interposition of some smooth
unmembered body, but also by the summoning to the fancy or imagination of
certain forms and ideas latent in the mind, in such a way that a thing is
imagined as being perceived then for the first time. For, as was shown in
the preceding question, devils can by their own power change bodies locally;
and just as the disposition or humour can be affected in this way, so can
the natural functions. I speak of things which appear natural to the
imagination or senses. For Aristotle in the de Somno et Uigila says,
assigning the cause of apparitions in dreams, that when an animal sleeps
much blood flows to the inner consciousness, and thence come ideas or
impressions derived from actual previous experiences stored in the mind. It
has already been defined how thus certain appearance convey the impressions
of new experiences. And since this can happen naturally, much more can the
devil call to the imagination the appearance of a smooth body unprovided
with the virile member, in such a way that the sense believe it to be an
actual fact.
Secondly, some other methods are to be noted which are easier to
understand and to explain. For, according to S. Isidore (Etym. VIII, 9), a
glamour is nothing but a certain delusion of the senses, and especially of
the eyes. And for this reason it is also called a prestige, from prestringo,
since the sight of the eyes is so fettered that things seem to be other than
they are. And Alexander of Hales, Part 2, says that a prestige, properly
understood, is an illusion of the devil, which is not caused by any change
in matter, but only exists in the mind of him who is deluded, either as to
his inner or outer perceptions.
Wherefore, in a manner of speaking, we may say even of human
prestidigitatory art, that it can be effected in three ways. For the first,
it can be done without devils, since it is artificially done by the agility
of men who show things and conceal them, as in the case of the tricks of
conjurers and ventriloquists. The second method is also without the help of
devils; as when men can use some natural virtue in natural bodies or
minerals so as to impart to such objects some other appearance quite
different from their true appearance. Wherefore, according to S. Thomas (I,
114, 4), and several others, men, by the smoke of certain smouldering or
lighted herbs, can make rods appear to be serpents.
The third method of delusion is effected with the help of devils,
the permission of God being granted. For it is clear that devils have, of
their nature, some power over certain earthly matters, which they exercise
upon them, when God permits, so that things appear to be other than they
are.
And as to this third method, it is to be noted that the devil has
fives ways in which he can delude anyone so that he thinks a thing to be
other than it is. First, by an artificial tricks, as has been said; for that
which a man can do by art, the devil can do even better. Second, by a
natural method, by the application, as has been said, and interposition of
some substance so as to hide the true body, or by confusing it in man's
fancy. The third way is when in an assumed body he presents himself as being
something which he is not; as witness the story which S. Gregory tells in
his First Dialogue of a Nun, who ate a lettuce, which, however, as the devil
confessed, was not a lettuce, but the devil in the form of a lettuce, or in
the lettuce itself. Or as when he appeared to S. Antony in a lump of gold
which he found in the desert. Or as when he touches a real man, and makes
him appear like a brute animal, as will shortly be explained. The fourth
method is when he confuses the organ of sight, so that a clear thing seems
hazy, or the converse, or when an old woman appears to be a young girl. For
even after weeping the light appears different from what it was before. His
fifth method is by working in the imaginative power, and, by a disturbance
of the humours, effecting a transmutation in the forms perceived by the
senses, as has been treated of before, so that the senses then perceive as
it were fresh and new images. And accordingly, by the last three of these
methods, and even by the second, the devil can cast a glamour over the
senses of a man. Wherefore there is no difficulty in his concealing the
virile member by some prestige or glamour. And a manifest proof or example
of this, which was revealed to us in our Inquisitorial capacity, will be set
forth later, where more is recounted of these and other matters in the
Second Part of this Treatise.
How a Bewitchment can be Distinguished from a Natural Defect.
An incidental question, with certain other difficulties, follows.
Peter's member has been taken off, and he does not know whether it is by
witchcraft or in some other way by the devil's power, with the permission of
God. Are there any ways of determining or distinguishing between these? It
can be answered as follows. First, that those to whom such things most
commonly happen are adulterers or fornicators. For when they fail to respond
to the demand of their mistress, or if they wish to desert them and attach
themselves to other women, then their mistress, out of vengeance, through
some other power causes their members to be taken off. Secondly, it can be
distinguished by the fact that it is not permanent. For if it is not due to
witchcraft, then the loss is not permanent, but it will be restored some
time.
But here there arises another doubt, whether it is due to the nature
of the witchcraft that it is not permanent. It is answered that it can be
permanent, and last until death, just as the Canonists and Theologians judge
concerning the impediment of witchcraft in matrimony, that the temporary can
become permanent. For Godfrey says in his Summa: A bewitchment cannot always
be removed by him who caused it, either because he is dead, or because he
does not know how to remove it, or because the charm has been lost.
Wherefore we may say in the same way that the charm which has been worked on
Peter will be permanent if the witch who did it cannot heal him.
For there are three degrees of witches. For some both heal and harm;
some harm, but cannot heal; and some seem able only to heal, that is, to
take away injuries, as will be shown later. For thus it happened to us: Two
witches were quarreling, and while they were taunting each other one said: I
am not so wicked as you, for I know how to heal those whom I injure. The
charm will also be permanent if, before it has been healed, the witch
departs, either by changing her dwelling or by dying. For S. Thomas also
says: Any charm may be permanent when it is such as can have no human
remedy; or if it has a remedy, it is not known to men, or unlawful; although
God can find a remedy through a holy Angel who can coerce the devil, if not
the witch.
However, the chief remedy against witchcraft is the sacrament of
Penitence. For bodily infirmity often proceeds from sin. And how the charms
or witches can be removed will be shown in the Second Part of this Treatise,
and in the Second QUestion, chapter VI, where other different matters are
treated of and explained.
Solutions of the Arguments.
For the first, it is clear that there is no doubt but that, just as,
with God's permission, they can kill men, so also can devils taken off that
member, as well as others, truly and actually. But then the devils do not
work through the medium of witches, concerning which mention has already
been made. And from this the answer to the second argument is also made
clear. But this is to be said: that God allows more power of witchcraft over
the genital forces because, etc.; and therefore even allows that that member
should be truly and actually taken off. But it is not valid to say that this
always happens. For it would not be after the manner of witchcraft for it to
happen so; and even the witches, when they do such works, do not pretend
that they have not the power to restore the member when they wish to and
know how to do so. From which it is clear that it is not actually taken off,
but only by a glamour. As for the third, concerning the metamorphosis of
Lot's wife, we say that this was actual, and not a glamour. And as to the
fourth, that devils can create certain substantial shapes, and therefore can
also remove them: it is to be said with regard to Pharaoh's magicians that
they made true serpents; and that devils can, with the help of another
agent, produce certain effects on imperfect creatures which they cannot on
men, who are God's chief care. For it is said: Does God care for oxen? They
can, nevertheless, with the permission of God, do to men true and actual
harm, as also they can create a glamour of harm, and by this the answer to
the last argument is made clear.
Question X Whether Witches can by some Glamour Change Men into Beasts.
Here we declare the truth as to whether and how witches transform
men into beasts. And it is argued that this is not possible, from the
following passage of Episcopus (XXVI, 5): Whoever believes that it is
possible for any creature to be changed for the better or for the worse, or
to be transformed into any other shape or likeness, except by the Creator
Himself, Who made all things, is without doubt an infidel, and worse than a
pagan.
And we will quote the arguments of S. Thomas in the 2nd Book of
Sentences, VIII: Whether devils can affect the bodily sense by the delusion
of a glamour. There he argues first that they cannot. For though that shape
of a beast which is seen must be somewhere, it cannot exist only in the
senses; for the sense perceive no shape that is not received from actual
matter, and there is no actual beast there; and he adduces the authority of
the Canon. And again, that which seems to be, cannot really be; as in the
case of a woman who seems to be a beast, for two substantial shapes cannot
exist at one and the same time in the same matter. Therefore, since that
shape of a beast which appears cannot exist anywhere, no glamour or illusion
can exist in the eye of the beholder; for the sight must have some object in
which it terminates.
And if it is argued that the shape exists in the surrounding
atmosphere, this is not possible; both because the atmosphere is not capable
of taking any shape or form, and also because the air around that person is
not always constant, and cannot be so on account of its fluid nature,
especially when it is moved. And again because in that case such a
transformation would be visible to everyone; but this is not so, because the
devils seem to be unable to deceive the sight of Holy Men in the least.
Besides, the sense of sight, or the faculty of vision, is a passive
faculty, and every passive faculty is set in motion by the active agent that
corresponds to it. Now the active agent corresponding to sight is twofold:
one is the origin of the act, or the object; the other is the carrier, or
medium. But that apparent shape cannot be the object of the sense, neither
can it be the medium through which it is carried. First, it cannot be the
object, since it cannot be taken hold of by anything, as was shown in the
foregoing argument, since it does not exist in the senses received from an
object, neither is it in the actual object, nor even in the air, as in a
carrying medium, as was treated of above in the third argument.
Besides, if the devil moves the inner consciousness, he does so
either by projecting himself into the cognitive faculty, or by changing it.
But he does not do so by projecting himself; for he would either have to
assume a body, and even so could not penetrate into the inner organ of
imagination; for two bodies cannot be at the same time in the same place; or
he would assume a phantasmal body; and this again would be impossible, since
no phantasm is quite without substance.
Similarly also he cannot do it by changing the cognition. For he
would either change it by alteration, which he does not seem able to do,
since all alteration is caused by active qualities, in which the devils are
lacking; or he would change it by transformation or local motion; and this
does not seem feasible for two reasons. First, because a transformation or
an organ cannot be effect without a sense of pain. Secondly, because in this
case the devil would only make things of a known shape appear; but S.
Augustine says that he creates shapes of this sort, both known and unknown.
Therefore it seems that the devils can in no way deceive the imagination or
senses of a man.
But against this, S. Augustine says (de Ciuitate Dei, XVIII) that
the transmutations of men into brute animals, said to be done by the art of
devils, are not actual but only apparent. But this would not be possible if
devils were not able to transmute the human senses. The authority of S.
Augustine is again to the point in Book LXXXIII, which has already been
quoted: This evil of the devil creeps in through all the sensual approaches,
etc.
Answer. If the reader wishes to refer to the method of
transmutation, he will find in the Second Part of this work, chapter VI,
various methods. But proceeding for the present in a scholastic manner, let
us say in agreement with the opinions of the three Doctors, that the devil
can deceive the human fancy so that a man really seems to be an animal. The
last of those opinions, which is that of S. Thomas, is more subtle than the
rest. But the first is that of S. Antoninus in the first part of his Summa,
V, 5, where he declares that the devil at times works to deceive a man's
fancy, especially by an illusion of the senses; and he proves this by
natural reasoning, by the authority of the Canon, and by a great number of
examples.
And at first as follows: Our bodies naturally are subject to and
obey the angelic nature as regards local motion. But the bad angels,
although the have lost grace, have not lost their natural power, as has
often been said before. And since the faculty of fancy or imagination is
corporeal, that is, allied to a physical organ, it also is naturally subject
to devils, so that they can transmute it, causing various phantasies, by the
flow of the thoughts and perceptions to the original image received by them.
So says S. Antoninus, and adds that it is proved by the following Canon
(Episcopus, XXVI, 5): It must not be omitted that certain wicked women,
perverted by Satan and seduced by the illusions and phantasms of devils,
believe and profess that they ride in the night hours on certain beasts with
Diana, the heathen goddess, or with Herodias, and with a countless number of
women, and that in the untimely silence of night they travel over great
distances of land. And later: Wherefore priests ought to preach to the
people of God that they should know this to be altogether false, and that
when such phantasms afflict the minds of the faithful, it is not of God, but
of an evil spirit. For Satan himself transforms himself into the shape and
likeness of different persons, and in dreams deluding the mind which he
holds captive, leads it through devious ways.
Indeed the meaning of this Canon has been treated of in the First
Question, as to the four things which are to be preached. But it would be to
misunderstand its meaning to maintain that witches cannot be so transported,
when they wish and God does not prevent it; for very often men who are not
witches are unwillingly transported bodily over great distances of land.
But that these transmutations can be effected in both ways will be
shown by the aforesaid Summa, and in the chapter where S. Augustine relates
that it is read in the books of the Gentiles that a certain sorceress named
Circe changed the companions of Ulysses into beasts; but that this was due
to some glamour or illusion, rather than an actual accomplishment, by
altering the fancies of men; and this is clearly proved by several examples.
For we read in the Lives of the Fathers, that a certain girl would
not consent to a young man who was begging her to commit a shameful act with
him. And the young man, being angry because of this, caused a certain Jew to
work a charm against her, by which she was changed into a filly. But this
metamorphosis was not an actual fact, but an illusion of the devil, who
changed the fancy and sense of the girl herself, and of those who looked at
her, so that she seemed to be a filly, who was really a girl. For when she
was led to the Blessed Macarius, the devil could not so work as to deceive
his senses as he had those of other people, on account of his sanctity; for
to him she seemed a true girl, not a filly. And at length by his prayer she
was set free from that illusion, and it is said that this had happened to
her because she did not give her mind to holy things, or attend the
Sacraments as she ought; therefore the devil had power over her, although
she was in other respects honest.
Therefore the devil can, by moving the inner perceptions and
humours, effect changes in the actions and faculties, physical, mental, and
emotional, working by means of any physical organ soever; and this accords
with S. Thomas, I, 91. And of this sort we may believe to have been the acts
of Simon Magus in the incantations which are narrated of him. But the devil
can do none of these things without the permission of God, Who with His good
Angels often restrains the wickedness of him who seeks to deceive and hurt
us. Wherefore S. Augustine, speaking of witches, says: These are they who,
with the permission of God, stir up the elements, and confuse the minds of
those who do not trust in God (XXVI, 5).
Also devils can by witchcraft cause a man to be unable to see his
wife rightly, and the converse. And this comes from an affectation of the
fancy, so that she is represented to him as an odious and horrible thing.
The devil also suggests representations of loathsome things to the fancy of
both the waking and the sleeping, to deceive them and lead them to son. But
because sin does not consist in the imagination but in the will, therefore
man does not sin in these fancies suggested by the devil, and these various
transformations, unless of his own will he consents to sin.
The second opinion of the modern Doctors is to the same effect, when
they declare what is glamour, and how many ways the devil can cause such
illusions. Here we refer to what has already been said concerning the
arguments of S. Antoninus, which there is no need to repeat.
The third opinion is that of S. Thomas, and is an answer to the
argument where it is asked, Wherein lies the existence of the shape of a
beast that is seen; in the senses, or in reality, or in the surrounding air?
And his opinion is that the apparent shape of a beast only exists in the
inner perception, which, through the force of imagination, sees it in some
way as an exterior object. And the devil has two ways of effecting such a
result.
In one way we may say that the forms of animals which are conserved
in the treasury of the imagination pass by the operation of the devil into
the organs of inner senses; and in this way it happens in dreams, as has
been declared above. And so, when these forms are impressed on the organs of
the outer senses, such as sight, they appear as if they were present as
outer objects, and could actually be touched.
The other way results from a change in the inner organs of
perception, through which the judgement is deceived; as is shown in the case
of him who has his taste corrupted, so that everything sweet seems bitter;
and this is not very different from the first method. Moreover, even men can
accomplish this by the virtue of certain natural things, as when in the
vapour of a certain smoke the beams of a house appear to be serpents; and
many other instances of this are found, as had been mentioned above.
Solutions of the Arguments.
As to the first argument, that text is often quoted, but it is badly
understood. For as to where it speaks of transformation into another shape
or likeness, it has been made clear how this can be done by prestidigitatory
art. And as to where it says that no creature can be made by the power of
the devil, this is manifestly true if Made is understood to mean Created.
But if the word Made is taken to refer to natural production, it is certain
that devils can make some imperfect creatures. And S. Thomas shows how this
may be done. For he says that all transmutations of bodily matters which can
be effected by the forces of nature, in which the essential thing is the
semen which is found in the elements of this world, on land or in the waters
(as serpents and frogs and such things deposit their semen), can be effected
by the work of devils who have acquired such semen. So also it is when
anything is changed into serpents or frogs, which can be generated by
putrefaction.
But those transmutations of bodily matters which cannot be effected
by the forces of nature can in no way be truly effected by the work of the
devils. For when the body of a man is changed into the body of a beast, or a
dead body is brought to life, such things only seem to happen, and are a
glamour or illusion; or else the devil appears before men in an assumed
body.
These arguments are substantiated. For Blessed Albertus in his book
On Animals, where he examines whether devils, or let us even say witches,
can really make animals, says that they can, with God's permission, make
imperfect animals. But they cannot do so in an instant, as God does, but by
means of some motion, however sudden, as is clear in the case of witches.
And touching the passage in Exodus vii, where Pharao called his wise men, he
says: The devils run throughout the world and collect various germs, and by
using them can evolve various species. And the gloss thereon says: When
witches attempt to effect anything by the invocation of devils, they run
about the world and bring the semen of those things which are in question,
and by its means, with the permission of God, they produce new species. But
this has been spoken of above.
Another difficulty may arise, whether such devils' works are to be
deemed miraculous. The answer was made clear in the preceding arguments,
that even the devils can perform certain miracles to which their natural
powers are adapted. And although such things are true in fact, they are not
done with a view to the knowledge of the truth; and in this sense the works
of Antichrist may be said to be deceptions, since they are done with a view
to the seduction of men.
The answer to the other argument, that concerning the shape, is also
clear. The shape of a beast which is seen does not exist in the air, but
only in the perception of the senses, as has been demonstrated above from
the opinion of S. Thomas.
For the argument that every passive is set in motion by its
corresponding active, this is granted. But when it is inferred that the
shape which is seen cannot be the original object which sets in motion the
act of sight, since it arises from none of the sense, it is answered that it
does not arise, since it originates from some sensible image conserved in
the imagination, which the devil can draw out and present to the imagination
or power of perception, as has been said above.
For the last argument, it is to be said that the devil does not, as
has been shown, change the perceptive and imaginative powers by projecting
himself into them, but by transmuting them; not indeed by altering them,
except in respect of local motion. For he cannot of himself induce new
appearances, as has been said. But he changes them by transmutation, that
is, local motion. And this again he does, not by dividing the substance of
the organ of perception, since that would result in a sense of pain, but by
a movement of the perceptions and humours.
But it may be further objected as follows: that according to this
the devil cannot present to a man the appearance of anything new in respect
of things seen. It is to be said that a new thing can be understood in two
ways. In once way it may be entirely new both in itself and its beginnings;
and in this sense the devil cannot present anything new to a man's sense of
vision: for he cannot cause one who is born blind to imagine colours, or a
deaf man to imagine sounds. In another sense, a thing may be new as to the
composition of its whole; as we may say that it is an imaginatively new
thing if a man imagines that he sees mountain of gold, which he never saw;
for he has seen gold, and he has seen a mountain, and can by some natural
operation imagine the phantasm of a mountain of gold. And in this way the
devil can present a new thing to the imagination.
What is to be Thought of Wolves which sometimes Seize and Eat Men and
Children out of their Cradles: whether this also is a Glamour caused by
Witches.
There is incidentally a question concerning wolves, which sometimes
snatch men and children out of their houses and eat them, and run about with
such astuteness that by no skill or strength can they be hurt or captured.
It is to be said that this sometimes has a natural cause, but is sometimes
due to a glamour, when it is effected by witches. And as to the first,
Blessed Albertus in his book On Animals says that it can arise from five
causes. Sometimes on account of great famine, when stags and other beasts
have come near to men. Sometimes on account of the fierceness of their
strength, as in the case of dogs in cold regions. But this is nothing to the
point; and we say that such things are caused by an illusion of devils, when
God punishes some nation for sin. See Leviticus xxvi: If ye do not my
commandments, I will send the beasts of the field against you, who shall
consume you and your flocks. And again Deuteronomy xxxii: I will also send
the teeth of beast upon them, etc.
As to the question whether they are true wolves, or devils appearing
in that shape, we say that they are true wolves, but are possessed by
devils; and they are so roused up in two ways. It may happen without the
operation of witches: and so it was in the case of the two-and-forty boys
who were devoured by two bears coming out of the woods, because they mocked
the prophet Elisaus, saying, Go up, thou bald head, etc. Also in the case of
the lion which slew the prophet who would not perform the commandment of God
(III. Kings xiii). And it is told that a Bishop of Vienna ordered the minor
Litanies to be solemnly chanted on certain days before the Feast of the
Ascension, because wolves were entering the city and publicly devouring men.
But in another way it may be an illusion caused by witches. For
William of Paris tells of a certain man who thought that he was turned into
a wolf, and at certain times went hiding among the caves. For there he went
at a certain time, and though he remained there all the time stationary, he
believed that he was a wolf which went about devouring children; and though
the devil, having possessed a wolf, was really doing this, he erroneously
thought that he was prowling about in his sleep. And he was for so long thus
out of his senses that he was at last found lying in the wood raving. The
devil delights in such things, and caused the illusion of the pagans who
believed that men and old women were changed into beasts. From this it is
seen that such things only happen by the permission of God along and through
the operation of devils, and not through any natural defect; since by no art
or strength can such wolves be injured or captured. In this connexion also
Vincent of Beauvais (in Spec. Hist., VI, 40) tells that in Gaul, before the
Incarnation of Christ, and before the Punic War, a wolf snatched a sentry's
sword out of its sheath.
Question XI That Witches who are Midwives in Various Ways Kill the Child
Conceived in the Womb, and Procure an Abortion; or if they do not this Offer
New-born Children to Devils.
Here is set forth the truth concerning four horrible crimes which
devils commit against infants, both in the mother's womb and afterwards. And
since the devils do these things through the medium of women, and not men,
this form of homicide is associated rather with women than with men, And the
following are the methods by which it is done.
The Canonists treat more fully than the Theologians of the
obstructions due to witchcraft; and they say that is is witchcraft, not only
when anyone is unable to perform the carnal act, of which we have spoken
above; but also when a woman is prevented from conceiving, or is made to
miscarry after she has conceived. A third and fourth method of witchcraft is
when they have failed to procure an abortion, and then either devour the
child or offer it to a devil.
There is no doubt concerning the first two methods, since, without
the help of devils, a man can by natural means, such as herbs, savin for
example, or other emmenagogues, procure that a woman cannot generate or
conceive, as has bee mentioned above. But with the other two methods it is
different; for they are effected by witches. And there is no need to bring
forward the arguments, since very evident instances and examples will more
readily show the truth of this matter.
The former of these two abominations is the fact that certain
witches, against the instinct of human nature, and indeed against the nature
of all beasts, with the possible exception of wolves, are in the habit of
devouring and eating infant children. And concerning this, the Inquisitor of
Como, who has been mentioned before, has told us the following: that he was
summoned by the inhabitants of the County of Barby to hold an inquisition,
because a certain man had missed his child from its cradle, and finding a
congress of women in the night-time, swore that he saw them kill his child
and drink its blood and devour it. Also, in one single year, which is the
year now last passed, he says that forty-one witches were burned, certain
others taking flight to the Lord Archduke of Austria, Sigismund. For
confirmation of this there are certain writings of John Nider in his
Formicarius, of whom, as of those events which he recounts, the memory is
still fresh in men's minds; wherefore it is apparent that such things are
not incredible. We must add that in all these matters witch midwives cause
yet greater injuries, as penitent witches have often told to us and to
others, saying: No one does more harm to the Catholic Faith than midwives.
For when they do not kill children, then, as if for some other purpose, they
take them out of the room and, raising them up in the air, offer them to
devils. But the method which they observe in crimes of this sort will be
shown in the Second Part, which we must soon approach. But first one more
question must be inquired into, namely, that of the Divine permission. For
it was said at the beginning that three things are necessary for the
effecting of witchcraft: the devil, a witch, and the Divine permission.
Question XII Whether the Permission of Almighty God is an Accompaniment of
Witchcraft.
Now we must consider the Divine permission itself, touching which
four things are asked. First, whether it is necessary that this permission
should accompany a work of witchcraft. Secondly, that God in His justice
permits a creature naturally sinful to perpetrate witchcraft and other
horrid crimes, the other two necessary concomitants being presupposed.
Thirdly, that the crime of witchcraft exceeds all other evils which God
permits to be done. Fourthly, in what way this matter should be preached to
the people.
Concerning the third postulate of this First Part, namely, the
Divine permission, it is asked: Whether it is as Catholic to affirm the
Divine permission in these works of witches, as it is quite heretical to
contradict such an affirmation? And it is argued that it is not heretical to
maintain that God does not permit so great power to the devil in this sort
of witchcraft. For it is Catholic, and not heretical, to refute such things
as appear to be to the disparagement of the Creator. And it is submitted
that it is Catholic to maintain that the devil is not allowed such power of
injuring men, since to hold the opposite opinion seems to be a disparagement
of the Creator. For it would then follow that not everything is subject to
the Divine providence, since the all-wise Provider keeps away, as far as
possible, all defect and evil from those for whom He cares. And if the works
of witchcraft are permitted by God, they are not kept away by Him: and if He
does not keep them away, the God Himself is not a wise Provider, and all
things are not subject to His providence. But since this is false, therefore
it is false that God permits witchcraft.
And again, to permit a thing to happen presupposes in him who
permits it that either he can prevent it from happening if he wishes, or he
cannot prevent it even if he wishes; and neither of these suppositions can
apply to God. For in the first case, such a man would be thought spiteful,
and in the second case impotent. Then it is incidentally asked: As to that
bewitchment that happened to Peter, if God could have prevented it, and did
not do so, then God is either despiteful or He does not care for all; but if
He could not have prevented it even if He wished, the He is not omnipotent.
But since it is not possible to maintain the opinion that God does not care
for all, and the rest, therefore it cannot be said that witchcraft is done
with the permission of God.
Besides, he who is responsible to himself and is the master of his
own actions is not subject to the permission or providence of any governor.
But men were made responsible to themselves by God, according to
Ecclesiasticus xv: God made man from the beginning, and left him in the hand
of his counsel. In particular, the sins which men do are left in their own
counsel, according to their hearts' desire. Therefore not all evils are
subject to Divine permission.
Yet again, S. Augustine says in the Enchiridion, as does also
Aristotle in the ninth book of Metaphysics: It is better not to know certain
vile things than to know them, but all that is good is to be ascribed to
God. Therefore God does not prevent the very vile works of witchcraft,
whether He permits or not. See also S. Paul in I. Corinthians ix: Doth God
take care of oxen? And the same holds good of the other irrational beasts.
Wherefore God takes no care whether they are bewitched or not, since they
are not subject to His permission, which proceeds from His providence.
Again, that which happens of necessity has no need of provident
permission or prudence. This is clearly shown in Aristotle's Ethics, Book
II: Prudence is a right reasoning concerning things which happen and are
subject to counsel and choice. But several effects of witchcraft happen of
necessity; as when for some reason, or owing to the influence of stars,
diseases come, or any other things which we judge to be witchcraft.
Therefore they are not always subject to Divine permission.
And again, if men are bewitched by Divine permission, then it is
asked: Why does this happen to one more than to another? If it be said that
it is because of sin, which abounds more in one than in another, this does
not seem valid; for then the greater sinners would be the more bewitched,
but this is manifestly not so, since they are less punished in this world.
As it is said: Well is it for the liars. But, if this argument were good,
they also would be bewitched. Finally, it is clear from the fact that
innocent children and other just men suffer most from witchcraft.
But against these arguments: it is submitted that God permits evil
to be done, though He does not wish it; and this is for the perfecting of
the universe. See Dionysius, de Diuin. Nom. III: Evil will be for all time,
even to the perfecting of the universe. And S. Augustine in the Enchiridion:
In all things good and evil consists the admirable beauty of the universe.
So that what is said to be evil is well ordained, and kept in its due place
commends more highly that which is good; for good things are more pleasing
and laudable when compared with bad. S. Thomas also refutes the opinion of
those who say that, although God has no wish for evil (since no creature
seeks for evil, either in its natural, or its animal, or in its intellectual
appetite, which is the will, whose object is good), yet He is willing that
evil should exist and be done. This he says to be false; since God neither
wishes evil to be done, nor wishes it not to be done, but is willing to
allow evil to be done; and this is good for the perfecting of the universe.
And why it is erroneous to say that God wishes evil to be and to be
done, for the good of the universe, he says is for the following reason.
Nothing is to be judged good except what is good in itself and not by
accident. As the virtuous man is judge good in his intellectual nature, not
in his animal nature. But evil is not of itself ordained for good, but by
accident. For against the intention of those who do evil, good results. In
this way, against the intention of witches, or against the intention of
tyrants, was it that through their persecutions the patience of the martyrs
shone out clearly.
Answer. This question is as difficult to understand as it is
profitable to elucidate. For there is among the arguments, not so much of
Laymen as of certain Wise men, this in common; that they do not believe that
such horrible witchcraft as had been spoken of is permitted by God; being
ignorant of the causes of this Divine permission. And by reason of this
ignorance, since witches are not put down with the vengeance that is due to
them, they seem now to be depopulating the whole of Christianity. Therefore
that both learned and unlearned may be satisfied in each way, according to
the opinion of the Theologians, we make our answer by the discussion of two
difficulties. And first, that he world is so subject to the Divine
providence that He Himself provides for all. Secondly, that in His justice
He permits the prevalence of sin, which consists of guilt, punishment, and
loss, by reason of His two first permissions, namely, the fall of the Angels
and that of our first parents. From which also it will be clear that
obstinately to disbelieve this smacks of heresy, since such a man implicates
himself in the errors of the infidels.
And as for the first, it is to be noted that, presupposing that
which pertains to the providence of God (see Wisdom xiv: Thy providence, O
Father, governeth all things), we ought also to maintain that all things are
subject to His providence, and that also He immediately provides for all
things. And to make this clear, let us first refute a certain contrary
error. For taking the text in Job xxii: Thick clouds are a covering to him
that He seeth not us; and He walketh in the circuit of heaven: some have
thought that the doctrine pf S. Thomas, I, 22, means that only incorruptible
things are subject to Divine providence, such as the separate Essences, and
the stars, with also the species of lower things, which are also
incorruptible; but they said that the individuals of the species, being
corruptible, were not so subject. Wherefore they said that all lower things
which are in the world are subject to Divine providence in the universal,
but not in the particular or individual sense. But to others this opinion
did not seem tenable, since God cares for the other animals just as He does
for men. Therefore the Rabbi Moses, wishing to hold a middle course, agreed
with their opinion in saying that all corruptible things are not
individually entirely subject to Divine governance, but only in a universal
sense, as has been said before; but he excepted men from the generality of
corruptible things, because of the splendid nature of their intellect, which
is comparable with the of the separate Essences. And so, according to his
opinion, whatever witchcraft happens to men comes from the Divine
permission; but not such as happens to the animals or to the other fruits of
the earth.
Now though this opinion is nearer to the truth than that which
altogether denies the providence of God in worldly matters, maintaining that
the world was made by chance, as did Democritus and the Epicureans, yet it
is not without great fallacy. For it must be said that everything is subject
to Divine providence, not only in the general, but also in the particular
sense; and that the bewitching not only of men, but also of animals and the
fruits of the earth, comes from Divine and provident permission. And this is
plainly true; the providence and ordinance of things to some end extend just
so far as the causality of them itself extends. To take an example from
things that are subject to some master; they are so far subject to his
providence as they are themselves under his control. But the causality which
is of God is the original agent, and extends itself to all beings, not only
in a general but also in an individual sense, and not only to things
incorruptible. Therefore, since all things must be of God, so all things are
cared for by Him, that is, are ordained to some end.
This point is touched by S. Paul in Romans xiii: All things which
are from God were ordained by Him. Which is to say that, just as all things
come from God, so also are all things ordained by Him, and are consequently
subject to His providence. For the providence of God is to be understood as
nothing else than the reason, that is, the cause of the ordering of things
to a purpose. Therefore, in so far as all things are a part of one purpose,
so also are they subject to the providence of God. And God knows all things,
not only in the mass generally, but also in the individual particularly. Now
the knowledge which God has of things created is to be compared with a
craftsman's knowledge of his work: therefore, just as all his work is
subject to the order and providence of a craftsman, so are all things
subject to the order and providence of God.
But this does not provide a satisfactory explanation of the fact
that God in justice permits evil and witchcraft to be in the world, although
He is Himself the provider and governor of all things; for it would seem
that, if this is conceded, He ought to keep away all evil from those for
whom He cares. For we see among men that a wise provider does all that he
can to keep away all defect and harm from those who are his care; therefore
why does not God, in the same way, keep away all evil? It must be noted that
a particular and an universal controller or provider are two very different
matters. For the particular controller must of necessity keep away all the
harm he can, since he is not able to extract good out of evil. But God is
the universal controller of the whole world, and can extract much good from
particular evils; as through the persecution of the tyrants came the
patience of the martyrs, and through the works of witches come the purgation
or proving of the faith of the just, as will be shown. Therefore it is not
God's purpose to prevent all evil, lest the universe should lack the cause
of much good. Wherefore S. Augustine says in the Enchiridion: So merciful is
Almighty God, that He would not allow any evil to be in His works unless He
were so omnipotent and good that He can bring good even out of evil.
And we have an example of this in the actions of natural things. For
although the corruptions and defects which occur in natural things are
contrary to the purpose of that particular thing (as when a thief is hanged,
or when animals are killed for human food), they are yet in accordance with
the universal purpose of nature (as that man's life and property should be
kept intact); and thus the universal good is preserved. For it is necessary
for the conservation of the species that the death of one should be the
preservation of another. For lions are kept alive by the slaughter of other
animals.
It is explained with regard to the Divine Permission, that God would not
make a Creature to be Naturally without Sin.
Secondly, God in His justice permits the prevalence of evil, both
that of sin and that of pain, and especially now that the world is cooling
and declining to its end; and this we shall prove from two propositions
which must be postulated. First, that God would not - or let us rather say,
with the fear of God, that (humanly speaking) it is impossible that any
creature, man or Angel, can be of such a nature that it cannot sin. And
secondly, that it is just in God to permit man to sin, or to be tempted.
These two propositions being granted, and since it is a part of the Divine
providence that every creature shall be left to its own nature, it must be
said that, according to the premises, it is impossible that God does not
permit witchcraft to be committed with the help of devils.
And that it was not possible to communicate to a creature a natural
incapacity for sin, is shown by S. Thomas (II, 23, art. 1). For if this
quality were communicable to any creature, God would have communicated it;
for He has, at least in kind, communicated all other graces and perfections
to His creatures that are communicable. Such is the personal union of two
natures in Christ, the Maternity and Virginity of Immaculate MARY, the
blessed companionship of the elect, and many other things. But we read that
this quality was not given to any creature, either man or Angel; for it is
said: Even in His Angels He found sin. Therefore it is certain that God will
not communicate to man a natural incapacity for sin, although man may win to
this through grace.
Again, if this were communicable, and were not communicated, the
universe would not be perfect. And its perfections consists in the fact that
all communicable good qualities of creatures are communicated in kind.
Neither is it valid to argue that God, being omnipotent, and having
made men and Angels in His likeness, could also have caused his creatures to
be by nature impeccable: or even that He would make that condition of Grace,
which is the cause of confirmation in goodness, an essential part of the
nature of Angels and men, so that through their natural origin and natural
condition they would be so confirmed in goodness that they would not be able
to sin.
For the first argument will not hold. Since, although God is all-
powerful and all-good, yet he will not bestow this quality of impeccability;
not because of any imperfection in His power, but because of the
imperfection of the creature; and this imperfection lies chiefly in the fact
that no creature, man or Angel, is capable of receiving this quality. And
for this reason: that, being a creature, its being depends upon its Creator,
just as an effect depends on the cause of its being. And to create is to
make something out of nothing, and this, if left to itself, perishes, but
endures so long as it preserves the influence of its cause. You may take, if
you wish, an example from a candle, which burns only so long as it has wax.
This being so, it is to be noted that God created man, and left him in the
hand of his own counsel (Ecclesiasticus xvii). And so also He created the
Angels in the beginning of Creation. And this was done for the sake of Free-
will, the property of which is to do or to omit doing, to recede or not to
recede from its cause. And since to recede from God, from free-will, is to
sin, therefore it was impossible for man or Angel to receive, and God did
not will to give, such a natural quality that he should at the same time be
endowed with free-will and also be incapable of sin.
Another imperfection by reason of which this quality cannot be
communicated to man or Angel is that it implies a contradiction; and since a
contradiction is by its nature impossible, we say that God will not do this
thing. Or rather we should say that His creatures cannot receive such a
quality. For example, it is impossible that anything can be at one and the
same time alive and dead. And so it would imply this contradiction: that a
man should have free-will, by which he would be able to depart from his
Creator, and that he should also be unable to sin. But if he were unable to
sin, he would be unable to depart from his Creator. For this is sin: to
despise the incommutable good and cleave to things that are variable. But to
despise or not to despise is a matter of free-will.
The second argument also is not valid. For if the confirmation of
grace were so essential a part of the original creation that it became a
natural quality of the creature to be unable to sin, then his inability to
sin would arise, not from any exterior cause or from grace, but from his own
very nature; and then he would be God, which is absurd. S. Thomas treats of
this in his above solution of the last argument, when he says that whenever
there happens to any creature something that can only be cause by a superior
influence, the lower nature cannot itself cause that effect without the co-
operation of the higher nature. For example, a gas becomes ignited by fire;
but it could not of its own nature light itself without fire.
I say, therefore, that since the confirmation of a rational creature
comes only through grace, which is a sort of spiritual light or image of the
light of Creation, it is impossible for any creature to have, of its own
nature, that confirmation of grace, unless it be made one with the Divine
nature; that is, unless it be of the same nature as God, which is altogether
impossible. Let us conclude by saying that the inability to sin belongs by
nature to God alone. For He does not depart from His nature, Who gives to
all things their being, neither can He depart from the righteousness of His
goodness; for this belongs to Him through the character of His nature. But
for all others who have this quality that they cannot sin, it is conferred
upon them through the confirmation in goodness by grace; by which the sons
of God are made free from sin, and they who in any way consort with the
Divine nature.
Question XIII Herein is set forth the Question, concerning the Two Divine
Permissions which God justly allows, namely, that the Devil, the Author or
all Evil, should Sin, and that our First Parents should Fall, from which
Origins the Works of Witches are justly suffered to take place.
The second question and proposition is that God justly permitted
certain Angels to sin in deed, which He could not have allowed unless they
were capable of sin; and that in like manner He preserved certain creatures
through grace, without their having previously suffered temptation; and that
He justly allows man both to be tempted and to sin. And all this is clearly
shown as follows. For it is a part of Divine providence that each single
thing should be left to its own nature, and not be altogether impeded in its
natural works. For, as Dionysius says (de Diuin. Nom., IV), Providence is
not a destroyer, but a preserver of nature. This being so, it is manifest
that, just as the good of the race is better than the good of the individual
(Aristotle, Ethics, I), so also the good of the universe takes precedence
over the good of any particular creature. Therefore we must add that, if men
were prevented from sinning, many steps to perfection would be removed. For
that nature would be removed which has it in its power to sin or not to sin;
but it has already been shown that this is a natural property of man's
nature.
And let it be answered that, if there had been no sin, but immediate
confirmation, then there would never have appeared what debt of grace in
good works is due to God, and what the power of sin has been able to effect,
and many other things without which the universe would suffer great loss.
For it behoved that Satan should sin, not through some outside suggestion,
but that he should find in himself the occasion of sin. And this he did when
he wished to be equal to God. Now this is to be understood neither simply
and directly, nor indirectly, but only with a reservation; and this is
declared according to the authority of Esaias xiv: I will ascend above the
heights of the clouds; I will be like the Most High. For it must not be
understood simply and directly, because in that case he would have had a
limited and erring understanding, in seeking something which was impossible
for him. For he knew that he was a creature created by God, and therefore he
knew that it was impossible for him to become equal to his Creator. Neither,
again, must it be understood indirectly; for since the whole transparence of
the air consists in its subjection to the sun's rays; therefore nothing
which would be contrary to the good of its nature could be sought for by an
Angel. But he sought for equality with God, not absolutely, but with a
reservation, which was as follows. The nature of God has two qualities, that
of blessedness and goodness, and the fact that all the blessedness and
goodness of His creatures issues from Him. Therefore the Angel, seeing that
the dignity of his own nature transcended that of the other creatures,
wished and asked that the blessedness and goodness of all the inferior
creatures should be derived from him. And he sought this in his own natural
capacity, that just as he was the first to be endowed in nature with those
qualities, so the other creatures should receive them from the nobility of
his nature. And he sought this of God, in perfect willingness to remain
subject to God so long as he had that power granted to him. Therefore he did
not wish to be made equal with God absolutely, but only with a reservation.
It is further to be noted that, wishing to bring his desire to the
point of action, he suddenly made it known to others; and the understanding
of the other Angels of his desire, and their perverse consenting to it, was
also sudden. Therefore the sin of the First Angel exceeded and preceded the
sins of the others in respect of the magnitude of his guilt and causality,
but not in respect of duration. See Apocalypse xii. The dragon falling from
heaven drew with him the third part of the stars. And he lives in the form
of Leviathan, and is king over all the children or pride. And, according to
Aristotle (Metaph., V), he is called king of princes, inasmuch as he moves
those who are subject to him according to his will and command. Therefore
his sin was the occasion of sin in others, since he first, not having been
tempted from outside, was the external temptation of others.
And that all these things happened instantaneously may be
exemplified by physical things; for the ignition of a gas, the sight of the
flame, and the impression formed by that sight all happen at one and the
same time.
I have put this matter at some length; for in the consideration of
that stupendous Divine permission in the case of the most noble creatures
with regard to the one sin of ambition, it will be easier to admit
particular permissions in the case of the works of witches, which are in
some certain circumstances even greater sins. For in certain circumstances
the sins of witches are greater than that of the Angel or of our first
parents, as will be shown in the Second Part.
Now the fact that the providence of God permitted the first man to
be tempted and to sin is sufficiently clear from what has been said
concerning the transgression of the Angels. For both man and the Angel were
created to the same end, and left with free-will, in order that they might
receive the reward of blessedness not without merit. Therefore, just as the
Angel was not preserved from his fall, in order that the power of sin on the
one side and the power of the confirmation of grace on the other side might
work together for the glory of the universe, so also ought it to be
considered in the case of man.
Wherefore S. Thomas (II, 23, art. 2) says: That by which God is
glorified ought not to be hindered from within. But God is glorified in sin,
when He pardons in mercy and when He punishes in justice; therefore it
behoves Him not to hinder sin. Let us, then, return to a brief
recapitulation of our proposition, namely, that by the just providence of
God man is permitted to sin for many reasons. First, that the power of God
may be shown, Who alone is unchanging while every creature is variable.
Secondly, that the wisdom of God may be declared, Who can bring good out of
evil, which could not be unless God had allowed the creature to sin.
Thirdly, that the mercy of God may be made manifest, by which Christ through
His death liberated man who was lost. Fourthly, that the justice of God may
be shown, which not only rewards the good, but also punishes the wicked.
Fifthly, that the condition of man may not be worse than that of other
creatures, all of whom God so governs that He allows them to act after their
own nature; wherefore it behoved Him to leave man to his own judgement.
Sixthly, for the glory of men; that is, the glory of the just man who could
transgress but has not. And seventhly, for the adorning of the universe; for
as there is a threefold evil in sin, namely, guilty, pain, and loss, so is
the universe adorned by the corresponding threefold good, namely,
righteousness, pleasure, and usefulness. For righteousness is adorned by
guilt, pleasure by pain, and all usefullness by loss. And by this the answer
to the arguments is made plain.
Solutions to the Arguments.
According to the first argument it is heretical to maintain that the
devil is allowed power to injure men. But the opposite appears rather to be
true; for it is heretical to assert that God does not permit man, of his own
free-will, to sin when he wishes. And God permits much sin, by reason of His
power to hurt men in the punishment of the wicked for the adorning of the
universe. For it is said by S. Augustine in his Book of Soliloques: Thou,
Lord, hast commanded, and it is so, that the shame of guilt should never be
without the glory of punishment.
And that is not a valid proof of the argument which is taken from
the wise ruler who keeps away all defect and evil as far as he can. For it
is quite different with God, Who has an universal care, from one who has
only a particular care. For God, Whose care is universal, can bring good out
of evil, as is shown by what has been said.
For the second argument, it is clear that God's power as well as His
goodness and justice are manifest in His permission of sin. So when it is
argued that God either can or cannot prevent evil, the answer is that He can
prevent it, but that for the reasons already shown it does not behove Him to
do so.
Neither is it valid to object that He therefore wishes evil to be;
since He can prevent it but will not; for, as has been shown in the
arguments for the truth, God cannot wish evil to be. He neither wishes nor
does not wish it, but He permits it for the perfecting of the universe.
In the third argument S. Augustine and Aristotle are quoted on the
subject of human knowledge, saying that it is better for a man not to have
knowledge of that which is evil and vile for two reasons: first, that then
he will have less opportunity to think of evil, since we cannot understand
many things at the same time. And secondly, because knowledge of evil
sometimes perverts the will towards evil. But these arguments do not concern
God, Who without and detriment understands all the deeds of men and of
witches.
For the fourth argument: S. Paul excepts the care of God from oxen,
to show that a rational creature has through free-will command over its
actions, as has been said. Therefore God has a special providence over him,
that either blame or merit may be imputed to him, and he may receive either
punishment or reward; but that God does not in this way care for the
irrational beasts.
But to argue from that authority that the individuals of irrational
creation have no part in Divine providence would be heretical; for it would
be to maintain that all things are not subject to Divine providence, and
would be contrary to the praise which is spoken in Holy Scripture concerning
the Divine wisdom, which stretches mightily from end to end and disposes all
things well; and it would be the error of the Rabbi Moses as was shown in
the arguments for the truth.
For the fifth argument, man did not institute nature, but puts the
works of nature to the greatest use known to his skill and strength.
Therefore human providence does not extend to the inevitable phenomena of
nature, as that the sun will rise to-morrow. But God's providence does
extend to these things, since He is Himself the author of nature. Wherefore
also defects in nature, even if they arise out of the natural course of
things, are subject to Divine providence. And therefore Democritus and the
other natural philosophers were in error when they ascribed whatever
happened to the inferior creation to the mere chance of matter.
For the last argument: although every punishment is inflicted by God
for sin, yet the greatest sinners are not always afflicted with witchcraft.
And this may be because the devil does not wish to afflict and tempt those
whom he sees to belong to him by just title, or because he does not wish
them to be turned back to God. As it is said: Their plagues were multiplied,
and they turned them to God, etc. And that all punishment is inflicted by
God for sin is shown by what follows; for according to S. Jerome: Whatever
we suffer, we deserve for our sins.
Now it is declared that the sins of witches are more grievous than
those of the bad angels and our first parents. Wherefore, just as the
innocent are punished for the sins of their fathers, so are many blameless
people damned and bewitched for the sins of witches.
Question XIV The Enormity of Witches is Considered, and it is shown that
the Whole Matter should be rightly Set Forth and Declared.
Concerning the enormity of crimes, it is asked whether the crimes of
witches exceed, both in guilt, in pain, and in loss, all the evils which God
allows and has permitted from the beginning of the world up till now. And it
seems that they do not, especially as regards guilt. For the sin which a man
commits when he could easily avoid it is greater than the sin which another
man commits when he could not so easily avoid it. This is shown by S.
Augustine, de Ciuit. Dei: There is great wickedness in sinning when it is so
easy not to sin. But Adam, and others who have sinned when in a state of
perfection or even of grace, could more easily because of the help of grace
have avoided their sins — especially Adam who was created in grace — than
many witches, who have not shared in such gifts. Therefore the sins of such
are greater than all the crimes of witches.
And again in respect of punishment: the greatest punishment is due
to the greater blame. But Adam's sin was the most heavily punished, as is
plainly proved by the fact that both his guilt and his punishment are shown
in all his posterity by the inheritance of original sin. Therefore his sin
is greater than all other sins.
And again, the same is argued in respect of loss. For according to
S. Augustine: A thing is evil in that it takes away from the good; therefore
where there is the more good lost, there the greater evil has gone before.
But the sin of our first parent brought the greatest loss both to nature and
to grace, since it deprived us of innocence and immortality; and no
subsequent sin has brought such loss, therefore, etc.
But the contrary side: that which includes the most causes of evil
is the greater evil, and such are the sins of witches. For they can, with
God's permission, bring every evil upon that which is good by nature and in
form, as is declared in the Papal Bull. Besides, Adam sinned only in doing
that which was wrong in one of two ways; for it was forbidden, but was not
wrong in itself: but witches and other sinners sin in doing that which is
wrong in both ways, wrong in itself, and forbidden, such as murders and many
other forbidden things. Therefore their sins are heavier than other sins.
Besides, sin which comes from definite malice is heavier than sin
which comes from ignorance. But witches, out of great malice, despise the
Faith and the sacraments of the Faith, as many of them have confessed.
Answer. The evils which are perpetrated by modern witches exceed all
other sin which God has ever permitted to be done, as was said in the title
of this Question. And this can be shown in three ways, in so far as they are
sins involving perversity of character, though it is different with the sins
that contravene the other Theological virtues. First in general, by
comparing their works indifferently with any other worldly crimes. Secondly
in particular, by considering the species of the superstition and into what
pact they have entered with the devil. And thirdly, by comparing their sins
with the sins of the bad Angels and even with that of our first parents.
And first, sin is threefold, involving guilt, punishment, and loss.
Good also is correspondingly threefold, involving righteousness, felicity,
and use. And righteousness corresponds with the guilt, felicity with
punishment, and use with loss.
That the guilt of witches exceeds all other sins is apparent in this
way. For according to the teaching of S. Thomas (II, 22, art. 2), there is
in the matter of sin much that may be considered whereby the gravity or
lightness of the sin may be deduced; and the same sin may be found heavy in
one and light in another. For example, we can say that in fornication a
young man sins, but an old man is mad. Yet those sins are, simply speaking,
the heavier which are not only attended by the more extensive and more
powerful circumstances, but are in their nature and quantity of a more
essentially serious sort.
And so we can say that, though the sin of Adam was in some respects
heavier than all other sins, inasmuch as he fell to the instigation of a
smaller temptation, since it came only from within; and also because he
could more easily have resisted on account of the original justice in which
he was created: nevertheless in the form and quantity of sin, and in other
respects which aggravate the sin the more in that it is the cause of many
yet heavier sins, the sins of witches exceed all other sins. And this will
be made still clearer in two ways.
For one sin is said to be greater than another in one or other of
the following respects: in causality, as was the sin of Lucifer; in
generality, as Adam's sin; in hideousness, as was the sin of Judas; in the
difficulty of forgiving it, as is the sin against the Holy Ghost; in danger,
as in the sin of covetousness; in inclination, as is the sin of the flesh;
in the offending of the Divine Majesty, as is the sin of idolatry and
infidelity; in the difficulty of combating it, as the sin of pride; in
blindness of mind, as the sin of anger. Accordingly, after the sin of
Lucifer, the works of witches exceed all other sins, in hideousness since
they deny Him crucified, in inclination since the commit nastiness of the
flesh with devils, in blindness of mind since in a pure spirit of malignity
the rage and bring every injury upon the souls and bodies of men and beasts,
as has been shown from what has been said before.
And this, indeed, is indicated, according to S. Isidore, by the
word. For they are called witches (maleficae) on account of the enormity of
their crimes, as has been said above.
Our contention is also deduced from the following. There are two
gradations in sin, a turning away, and a change of heart. See our quotation
from S. Augustine: Sin is to reject the incommutable good, and to cleave to
things that are variable. And the turning away from God is as it were
formal, just as the change of heart is as it were material. Therefore the
more a man is separated from God by it, the heavier is the sin. And since
infidelity is the chief cause of man's separation from God, the infidelity
of witches stands out as the greatest of sins. And this is given the name of
Heresy, which is Apostasy from the Faith; and in this witches sin throughout
their whole lives.
For the sin of infidelity consists in opposing the Faith; and this
may come about in two ways, by opposing a faith which has not yet been
received, or by opposing it after it has been received. Of the first sort is
the infidelity of the Pagans or Gentiles. In the second way, the Christian
Faith may be denied in two ways: either by denying the prophecies concerning
it, or by denying the actual manifestation of its truth. And the first of
these is the infidelity of the Jews, and the second the infidelity of
Heretics.
It is clear from this that the heresy of witches is the most heinous
of the three degrees of infidelity; and this fact is proved both by reason
and authority. For it is said in II. S. Peter ii: It has been better for
them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known
it, to turn from it. And it is reasonable to suppose that, just as he who
does not perform what he has promised commits a greater sin than he who does
not perform what he never promised, so the infidelity of the heretics, who
while professing the faith of the Gospel fight against it by corrupting it,
is a greater sin than that of the Jews and Pagans.
And again, the Jews sin more greatly than the Pagans; for they
received the prophecy of the Christian Faith in the Old Law, which they
corrupt through badly interpreting it, which is not the case with the
Pagans. Therefore their infidelity is a greater sin than that of the
Gentiles, who never received the Faith of the Gospel. But concerning
Apostasy, S. Thomas says in the Second of the Second, question 12: Apostasy
means a turning away from God and religion, and this may happen according to
the different ways by which man is joined to God; that is, by faith, or by
the subjection of the will to obedience, or by religion and Holy Orders. S.
Raymund and Hostiensis say that Apostasy is a rash departure from the state
of faith or obedience or Religion. Now if that which precedes is removed,
that which follows from it is also removed; but the converse proposition is
not true. Therefore Apostasy from the Faith is a greater sin than the other
two forms of infidelity, since in its case a precedent Religion has been
removed.
But according to S. Raymund, a man is not to be judged an Apostate
or deserter, however far and long he may have strayed, unless he shows by
his subsequent life that he has not though of returning to the Faith. And
this would be shown in the case of a cleric if he were to marry a wife, or
commit some similar crime. In the same way it is an Apostasy of disobedience
when a man wilfully spurns the teaching of the Church and the Bishops. And
such a man must be convicted of his infamy, and be excommunicated.
Now when we speak of the Apostasy of witches, we mean the Apostasy
of perfidy; and this is so much the more heinous, in that it springs from a
pact made with the enemy of the Faith and the way of salvation. For witches
are bound to make this pact, which is exacted by that enemy either in part
or wholly. For we Inquisitors have found some witches who have denied all
the articles of Faith, and others who have denied only a certain number of
them; but they are all bound to deny true and sacramental confession. And
so, even the Apostasy of Julian does not seem to have been so great,
although in other respects he did more harm against the Church; but we
cannot speak of that here.
But it may be incidentally objected that it is possible that they
may keep the Faith in the thoughts of their hearts, which God alone, and not
even any Angel, can see into; but do reverence and obedience to the devil
only in outward form. The answer to this seems to be that there are two
degrees of the Apostasy of perfidy. One consists in outward acts of
infidelity, without the formation of any pact with the devil, as when one
lives in the lands of the infidels and conforms his life to that of the
Mohammedans. The other consists in a pact made with the devil by one who
lives in Christian lands, In the first case, men who keep the Faith in their
hearts but deny it in their outward acts, though they are not Apostates or
Heretics, are guilty of deadly sin. For in this way Solomon showed reverence
to the gods of his wives. And no one can be excused on the ground that he
does this through fear; for S. Augustine says: It is better to die of hunger
than to be fed by Idolaters. But however much witches may retain the Faith
in their hearts while denying it with their lips, they are still to be
judged Apostates, since they have made a treaty with death and a compact
with hell. Wherefore S. Thomas (II, 4), speaking of such magic works, and of
those who in any way seek help from devils, says: They are all Apostates
from the Faith, by reason of a pact made with the Devil, either in word,
when some invocation is used, or by some deed, even if there is no actual
sacrifice. For no man can serve two masters.
To the same effect writes Blessed Albertus Magnus, where he asks
whether the sin of Magicians and Astrologers is an Apostasy from the Faith.
And he answers: In such there is always Apostasy either of word or of deed.
For if any invocations are made, then there is an open pact made with the
devil, and it is plainly Apostasy in word. But if their magic is simply a
matter of action, then it is Apostasy in deed. And since in all these there
is abuse of the Faith, seeing that they look for from the devil what they
ought to look for from God, therefore they are always to be judged
Apostates. See how clearly they set forth two degrees of Apostasy,
understanding a third, namely, that of thought. And even if this last is
lacking, yet witches are judged to be Apostates in word and deed. Therefore,
as will be shown, they must be subject to the punishment of Heretics and
Apostates.
And there is in them a third enormity of crime, exceeding all other
heresies. For S. Augustine (XXVIII, 1 and 2) tells us that the whole life of
infidels is a sin; and the gloss on Romans xiv says that everything which
comes not of faith is sin. What then is to be thought of the whole life of
witches, that is, of all their other actions which are not pleasing to the
devil, such as fasting, attending church, communicating, and other things?
For in all these things they commit deadly sin, as is shown as follows. So
far have they fallen in sin that, although they have not lost all power of
amendment (since sin does not corrupt the whole good of their nature, and a
natural light yet remains in them); yet, because of their homage given to
the devil, and unless they be absolved from it, all their works, even when
they appear to be good, are rather of an evil nature. And this is not seen
to be the case with other infidels.
For according to S. Thomas in the Second of the Second, question 10,
Whether every action of an infidel is a sin; he says that the deeds of the
unfaithful which are, of themselves, good, such as fasting, almsgiving, and
deeds of that sort, are no merit to them because of their infidelity, which
is a most grievous sin. Yet sin does not corrupt the whole good of their
nature, and there remains in them a natural light. Therefore not ever deed
of theirs is mortal sin, but only those which proceed from their very
infidelity, or are related to it. For example, a Saracen fasts, to observe
the law of Mohammed as to fasting, and a Jew observes his Feast days; but in
such things he is guilty of mortal sin. And in this way is to be understood
the above dictum of S. Augustine, that the whole life of infidels is sin.
That Witches Deserve the heaviest Punishment above All the Criminals of the
World.
The crimes of witches, then, exceed the sins of all others; and we
now declare what punishment they deserve, whether as Heretics or as
Apostates. Now Heretics, according to S. Raymund, are punished in various
ways, as by excommunication, deposition, confiscation of their goods, and
death. The reader can be fully informed concerning all these by consulting
the law relating to the sentence of excommunication. Indeed even their
followers, protectors, patrons and defenders incur the heaviest penalties.
For, besides the punishment of excommunication inflicted upon them,
Heretics, together with their patrons, protectors and defenders, and with
their children to the second generation on the father's side, and to the
first degree on the mother's side, are admitted to no benefit or office of
the Church. And if a Heretic have Catholic children, for the heinousness of
his crime they are deprived of their paternal inheritance. And if a man be
convicted, and refuse to be converted and abjure his heresy, he must at once
be burned, if he is a layman. For if they who counterfeit money are
summarily put to death, how much more must they who counterfeit the Faith?
But if he is a cleric, after solemn degradation he is handed over to the
secular Court to be put to death. But if they return to the Faith, they are
to be imprisoned for life. But in practice they are treated more leniently
after recantation than they should be according to the judgement of the
Bishops and Inquisition, as will be shown in the Third Part, where the
various methods of sentencing such are treated of; that is to say, those who
are arrested and convicted and have recanted their error.
But to punish witches in these ways does not seem sufficient, since
they are not simple Heretics, but Apostates. More than this, in their very
apostasy they do not deny the Faith for any fear of men or for any delight
of the flesh, as has been said before; but, apart from their abnegation,
even give homage to the very devils by offering them their bodies and souls.
Is is clear enough from this that, however much they are penitent and return
to the Faith, they must not be punished like other Heretics with lifelong
imprisonment, but must be made to suffer the extreme penalty. And because of
the temporal injury which they do to men and beasts in various ways, the
laws demand this. Is is even equally culpable to learn as it is to teach
such iniquities, say the laws concerning Soothsayers. Then how much more
emphatically do they speak concerning witches, where they say that the
penalty for them is the confiscation of their goods and decapitation. The
laws also say much concerning those who by witchcraft provoke a woman to
lust, or, conversely, cohabit with beasts. But these matters were touched
upon on the First Question.
Question XV It is Shown that, on Account of the Sins of Witches, the
Innocent are often Bewitched, yea, Sometimes even for their Own Sins.
It is a fact that, by Divine permission, many innocent people suffer
loss and are punished by the aforesaid plagues, not for their own sins, but
for those of witches. And lest this should seem to any a paradox, S. Thomas
shows in the Second of the Second, quest. 8, that this is just in God. For
he divides the punishments of this life into three classes. First, one man
belongs to another; therefore, if a man be punished in his possessions, it
may be that another man suffers for this punishment. For, bodily speaking,
sons are a property of the father, and slaves and animals are the property
of their masters; and so the sons are sometimes punished for their parents.
Thus the son born to David from adultery quickly died; and the animals of
the Amalekites were bidden to be killed. Yet the reason for these things
remains a mystery.
Secondly, the sin of one may be passed on to another; and this in
two ways. By imitation, as children imitate the sins of their parents, and
slaves and dependents the sins of their masters, that they may sin more
boldly. In this way the sons inherit ill-gotten gain, and slaves share in
robberies and unjust feuds, in which they are often killed. And they who are
subject to Governors sin the more boldly when they see them sin, even if
they do not commit the same sins; wherefore they are justly punished.
Also the sin of one is passed on to another in the way of desert, as
when the sins of wicked subjects are passed on to a bad Governor, because
the sins of the subjects deserve a bad Governor. See Job: He makes
Hypocrites to reign on account of the sins of the people.
Sin, and consequently punishment, can also be passed on through some
consent or dissimulation. For when those in authority neglect to reprove
sin, then very often the good are punished with the wicked, as S. Augustine
says in the first book de Ciuitate Dei. An example was brought to our notice
as Inquisitors. A town was once rendered almost destitute by the death of
its citizens; and there was a rumour that a certain buried woman was
gradually eating the shroud in which she had been buried, and that the
plague could not cease until she had eaten the whole shroud and absorbed it
into her stomach. A council was held, and the Podesta with the Governor of
the city dug up the grave, and found half the shroud absorbed through the
mouth and throat into the stomach, and consumed. In horror at this sight,
the Podesta drew his sword and cut off her head and threw it out of the
grave, and at once the plague ceased. Now the sins of that old woman were,
by Divine permission, visited upon the innocent on account of the
dissimulation of what had happened before. For when an Inquisition was held
it was found that during a long time of her life she had been a Sorceress
and Enchantress. Another example is the punishment of a pestilence because
David numbered the people.
Thirdly, sin is passed on by Divine permission in commendation of
the unity of human society, that one man should take care for another by
refraining from sin; and also to make sin appear the more detestable, in
that the sin of one redounds upon all, as though all were one body. An
example is the sin of Achan in Joshua vii.
We can add to these two other methods: that the wicked are punished
sometimes by the good, and sometimes by other wicked men. For as Gratianus
says (XXIII, 5), sometimes God punishes the wicked through those who are
exercising their legitimate power at His command; and this in two ways:
sometimes with merit on the part of the punishers, as when He punished the
sins of the Canaanites through His people; sometimes with no merit on the
part of the punishers, but even to their own punishment, as when He punished
the tribe of Benjamin and destroyed it except for a few men. And sometimes
He punishes by His nations being aroused, either by command or permission,
but with no intention of obeying God, but rather greedy for their own gain,
and therefore to their own damnation; as He now punished His people by the
Turks, and did so more often by strange nations in the Old Law.
But it must be noted that for whatever cause a man be punished, if
he does not bear his pains patiently, then it becomes a scourge, not a
correction, but only of vengeance, that is, of punishment. See Deuteronomy
xxxii: A fire is kindled in min anger (that is, my punishment; for there is
no other anger in God), and shall burn unto the lowest hell (that is,
vengeance shall begin here and burn unto the last damnation, as S. Augustine
explains), And there is further authority concerning punishment in his
Fourth Distinction. But if men patiently bear their scourges, and are
patient in the state of grace, they take the place of a correction, as S.
Thomas says in his Fourth Book. And this is true even of one punished for
committing witchcraft, or of a witch, to a greater or less degree according
to the devotion of the sufferer and the quality of his crime.
But the natural death of the body, being the last terror, is not a
correction, since of its nature it partakes in the punishment for original
sin. Nevertheless, according to Scotus, when it is awaited with resignation
and devotion, and offered in its bitterness to God, it can in some way
become a correction. But violent death, whether a man deserves it or not, is
always a correction, if it is borne patiently and in grace. So much for
punishments inflicted on account of the sins of others.
But God also punishes men in this life for their own sins,
especially in the matter of bewitchment. For see Tobias vii: The devil has
power over those who follow their lusts. And this is clear from what we have
already said concerning the member and the genital powers, which God chiefly
allows to be bewitched.
However, for the purpose of preaching to the public it is to be
noted that, notwithstanding the aforesaid punishments which God inflicts on
men for their own and others' sins, the preacher should keep as his basic
principle and to the people this ruling of the law; which says, No one must
be punished without guilt, unless there is some cause for doing so. And this
ruling holds good in the Court of Heaven, that is, of God, just as it does
in the human Courts of Justice, whether secular or ecclesiastic.
The preacher may predicate this of the Court of Heaven. For the
punishment of God is of two kinds, spiritual and temporal. In the former,
punishment is never found without guilt. In the latter it is sometimes found
quite without guilt, but not without cause. The first, or spiritual
punishment, is of three kinds; the first being forfeiture of grace and a
consequent hardening in sin, which is never inflicted except for the
sufferer's own guilt. The second is the punishment of loss, that is,
deprivation of glory, which is never inflicted without personal guilt in
adults, or contracted guilt in children born from their parents' sin. The
third is the punishment of pain, that is, the torture of hell fire, and is
plainly due to guilt. Wherefore when it is said in Exodus xx: I am a jealous
God, visiting the sins of the fathers upon the children unto the third and
fourth generation: it is understood as speaking of the imitators of their
fathers' crimes, as Gratian has explained, Book I, quest. 4; where he also
gives other expositions.
Now with regard to God's second, or temporal punishment: first, it
may be, as has been said before, for the sin of another (but not without
cause), or for personal guilt only, without any other's sin. But if you wish
to know the causes for which God punishes, and even without any guilt of the
sufferer or of another man, you may refer to the five methods which the
Master expounds in Book IV, dist. 15, cap. 2. And you must take the three
first causes, for the other two refer to personal guilt.
For he says that for five causes God scourges man in this life, or
inflicts punishment. First, that God may be glorified; and this is when some
punishment or affliction is miraculously removed, as in the case of the man
born blind (S. John ix), or of the raising of Lazarus (S. John xi).
Secondly, if the first cause is absent, it is sent that merit may be
acquired through the exercise of patience, and also that inner hidden virtue
may be made manifest to others. Examples are Job i and Tobias ii.
Thirdly that virtue may be preserved through the humiliation of
castigation. S. Paul is an example, who says of himself in II. Corinthians
xii: There was given unto me a thorn in my flesh, the messenger of Satan.
And according to Remigius this thorn was the infirmity of carnal desire.
These are the cause that are without guilt in the sufferer.
Fourthly, that eternal damnation should begin in this life, that it
might be in some way shown what will be suffered in hell. Examples are Herod
(Acts xii) and Antiochus (II. Maccabees ix).
Fifthly, that man may be purified, by the expulsion and obliteration
of his guilt through scourges. Examples may be taken from Miriam, Aaron's
sister, who was stricken with leprosy, and from the Israelites wandering in
the wilderness, according to S. Jerome, XXIII, 4. Or it may be for the
correction of sin, as is exemplified by the case of David, who, after being
pardoned for his adultery, was driven from his kingdom, as is shown in II.
Kings, and is commented on by S. Gregory in his discourse on sin. It may, in
fact, be said that every punishment that we suffer proceeds from our own
sin, or at least from the original sin in which we were born, which is
itself the cause of all causes.
But as to the punishment of loss, meaning by that eternal damnation
which they will suffer in the future, no one doubts that all the damned will
be tortured with grevious pains. For just as grace is followed by the
blessed vision of the Kingdom of Heaven, so is mortal sin followed by
punishment in hell. And just as the degrees of blessedness in Heaven are
measured in accordance with the degrees of charity and grace in life, so the
degrees of punishment in hell are measured according to the degree of crime
in this life. See Deuteronomy xxv: The measure of punishment will be
according to the measure of sin. And this is so with all other sins, but
applies especially to witches. See Hebrews x: Of how much sorer punishment,
suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden underfoot the Son
of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was
sanctified, an unholy thing?
And such are the sins of witches, who deny the Faith, and work many
evil bewitchments through the most Holy Sacrament, as will be shown in the
Second Part.
Question XVI The Foregoing Truths are Set out in Particular, this by a
Comparison of the Works of Witches with Other Baleful Superstitions.
Now the foregoing truth concerning the enormity of witches' crimes
is proved by comparing them with the other practices of Magicians and
Diviners. For there are fourteen species of magic, springing from the three
kinds of Divination. The first of these three is open invocation of devils.
The second is no more than a silent consideration of the disposition and
movement of some thing, as of the stars, or the days, or the hours, and such
things. The third is the consideration of some human act for the purpose of
finding out something that is hidden, and is called by the name of
Sortilege.
And the species of the first form of Divination, that is, an open
invocation of devils, are the following: Sorcery, Oneiromancy, Necromancy,
Oracles, Geomancy, Hydromancy, Aeromancy, Pyromancy, and Soothsaying (see S.
Thomas, Second of the Second, quest. 95, 26, and 5). The species of the
second kind are Horoscopy, Haruspicy, Augury, Observation of Omens,
Cheiromancy and Spatulamancy.
The species of the third kind vary according to all those things
which are classed as Sortilege for the finding out of something hidden, such
as the consideration of pricks and straws, and figures in molten lead. And
S. Thomas speaks also of these in the above-quoted reference.
Now the sins of witches exceed all these crimes, as will be proved
in respect of the foregoing species. There can then be no question
concerning smaller crimes.
For let us consider the first species, in which those who are
skilled in sorcery and glamour deceive the human senses with certain
apparitions, so that corporeal matter seems to become different to the sight
and the touch, as was treated of above in the matter of the methods of
creating illusions. Witches are not content with such practices in respect
of the genital member, causing some prestidigitatory illusion of its
disappearance (although this disappearance is not an actual fact); but they
even frequently take away the generative power itself, so that a woman
cannot conceive, and a man cannot perform the act even when he still retains
his member. And without any illusion, they also cause abortion after
conception, often accompanied with many other ills. And they even appear in
various forms of beasts, as has been shown above.
Necromancy is the summoning of and speech with the dead, as is shown
by its etymology; for it is derived from the Greek word Nekros, meaning a
corpse, and Manteia, meaning divination. And they accomplish this by working
some spell over the blood of a man or some animal, knowing that the devil
delights in such sin, and loves blood and the pouring out of blood.
Wherefore, when they think that they call the dead from hell to answer their
questions, it is the devils in the likeness of the dead who appear and give
such answers. And of this sort was the art of that great Pythoness spoken of
in I. Kings xxviii, who raised up Samuel at the instance of Saul.
But let no one think that such practices are lawful because the
Scripture records that the soul of the just Prophet, summoned from Hades to
predict the event of Saul's coming war, appeared through the means of a
woman who was a witch. For, as S. Augustine says to Simplicianus: It is not
absurd to believe that it was permitted by some dispensation, not by the
(cut off)
Question XVII A Comparison of their Crimes under Fourteen Heads, with the
Sins of the Devils of all and every Kind.
So heinous are the crimes of witches that they even exceed the sins
and the fall of the bad Angels; and if this is true as to their guilt, how
should it not also be true of their punishments in hell? And it is not
difficult to prove this by various arguments with regard to their guilt. And
first, although the sin of Satan is unpardonable, this is not on account of
the greatness of his crime, having regard to the nature of the Angels, with
particular attention to the opinion of those who say that the Angels were
created only in a state of nature, and never in a state of grace. And since
the good of grace exceeds the good of nature, therefore the sins of those
who fall from a state of grace, as do the witches by denying the faith which
they received in baptism, exceed the sins of the Angels. And even if we say
that the Angels were created, but not confirmed, in grace; so also witches,
though they are not created in grace
(cut off)
Question XVIII Here follows the Method of Preaching against and
Controverting Five Arguments of Laymen and Lewd Folk, which seem to be
Variously Approved, that God does not Allow so Great Power to the Devil and
Witches as is involved in the Performance of such Mighty Works of
Witchcraft.
Finally, let the preacher br armed against certain arguments of
laymen, and even of some learned men, who deny, up to a certain point, that
there are witches. For, although they conceded the malice and power of the
devil to inflict such evils at his will, they deny that the Divine
permission is granted to him, and will not admit that God allows such things
to be done. And although they have no method in their argument, groping
blindly now this way and now that, it is yet necessary to reduce their
assertions to five arguments, from which all their cavillings proceed. And
the first is, that God does not permit the devil to rage against men wish
such great power.
The question put is whether the Divine permission must always
accompany an infliction caused by the devil through a witch. And give
arguments are submitted to prove that God does not permit it, and that
therefore there is no witchcraft in the world. And the first argument is
taken from God; the second from the devil; the third from the witch; the
fourth from the affliction ascribed to witchcraft; and the fifth from the
preachers and judges, on the assumption that they have so preached against
and punished witches that they would have no security in life.
And first as follows: God can punish men for their sins, and He
punishes with the sword, famine, and pestilence; as well as with various and
countless other infirmities to which human nature is subject. Wherefore,
there being no need for Him to add further punishments, He does not permit
witchcraft.
Secondly, if that which is said of the devil were true, namely, that
he can obstruct the generative forces so that a woman cannot conceive, or
that if she does conceive, he can cause an abortion; or, if there is no
abortion, he can cause the children to be killed after birth; in that case
he would be able to destroy the whole world; and it could also be said that
the devil's works were stronger than God's, since the Sacrament of matrimony
is a work of God.
Thirdly, they argue from man himself, that if there were any
witchcraft in the world, then some men would be more bewitched than others;
and that it is a false argument to say that men are bewitched for a
punishment of their sins, and therefore false to maintain that there is
witchcraft in the world. And they prove that it is false by arguing that, if
it were true, then the greater sinners would receive the greater punishment,
and that this is not the case; for sinners are less punished sometimes than
the just, as is seen in the case of innocent children who are alleged to be
bewitched.
Their fourth argument can be added to that which they adduce
concerning God; namely, that a thing which a man can prevent and does not
prevent, but allows it to be done, may be judged to proceed from his will.
But since God is All-Good, He cannot wish evil, and therefore cannot permit
evil to be done which He is able to prevent.
Again, taking their argument from the infliction itself, which is
alleged to be due to witchcraft; they submit that they are similar to
natural infirmities and defects, and may therefore by cause by a natural
defect. For it may happen through some natural defect that a man becomes
lame, or blind, or loses his reason, or even dies; wherefore such things
cannot confidently be ascribed to witches.
Lastly, they argue that preachers and judges have preached and
practised against witches in such a way that, if there were witches, their
lives would never be safe from them on account of the great hatred that
witches would have for them.
But the contrary arguments may be taken from the First Question,
where it treats of the third postulate of the First Part; and those points
may be propounded to the people which are most fitting. How God permits evil
to be, even though He does not wish it; but He permits it for the wonderful
perfecting of the universe, which may be considered in the fact that good
things are more highly commendable, are more pleasing and laudable, when
they are compared with bad things; and authority can be quoted in support of
this. Also that the depth of God's Divine wisdom, justice, and goodness
should be shown forth, whereas it would otherwise remain hidden.
For a brief settlement of this question there are various treatises
available on this subject for the information of the people, to the effect,
namely, that God justly permitted two Falls, that of the Angels and that of
our first parents; and since these were the greatest of all falls, it is no
matter for wonder if other smaller ones are permitted. But it is in their
consequences that those two Falls were the greatest, not in their
circumstances, in which last respect, as was shown in the last Question, the
sins of witches exceed those of the bad angels and our first parents. In the
same place it is shown how God justly permitted those first Falls, and
anyone is at liberty to collect and enlarge upon what is there said as much
as he wishes.
But we must answer their arguments. As to the first, that God
punishes quite enough by means of natural diseases, and by sword and famine,
we make a threefold answer. First, that God did not limit His power to the
processes of nature, or even to the influences of the stars, in such a way
that He cannot go beyond those limits; for He has often exceeded them in the
punishment of sins, by sending plagues and other afflictions beyond all the
influence of that stars; as when He punished the sin of pride in David, when
he numbered the people, by sending a pestilence upon the people.
Secondly, it agrees with the Divine wisdom that He should so govern
all things that He allows them to act at their own instigation.
Consequently, it is not His purpose to prevent altogether the malice of the
devil, but rather to permit it as far as He sees it to be for the ultimate
good of the universe; although it is true that the devil is continually held
in check by the good Angels, so that he may not do all the harm that he
wishes. Similarly He does not propose to restrain the human sins which are
possible to man through his free-will, such as the abnegation of the Faith,
and the devotion of himself to the devil, which things are in the power of
the human will. From these two premisses it follows that, when God is most
offended, He justly permits those evils which are chiefly sought for by
witches, and for which they deny the Faith, up to the extent of the devil's
power; and such is the ability to injure men, animals, and the fruits of the
earth.
Thirdly, God justly permits those evils which indirectly cause the
greatest uneasiness and torment to the devil; and of such a sort are those
evils which are done by witches through the power of devils. For the devil
is indirectly tormented very greatly when he sees that, against his will,
God uses all evil for the glory of His name, for the commendation of the
Faith, for the purgation of the elect, and for the acquisition of merit. For
it is certain that nothing can be more galling to the pride of the devil,
which he always rears up against God (as it is said: The pride of them that
hate Thee increases ever), than that God should convert his evil
machinations to His own glory. Therefore God justly permits all these
things.
Their second argument has been answered before; but there are two
points in it which must be answered in detail. In the first place, far from
its being true that the devil, or his works, as stronger than God, it is
apparent that his power is small, since he can do nothing without the Divine
permission. Therefore it may be said that the devil's power is small in
comparison with the Divine permission, although it is very great in
comparison with earthly powers, which it naturally excels, as is shown in
the often quoted text in Job xi: There is no power on earth to be compared
with him.
In the second place, we must answer the question with God permits
witchcraft to affect the generative powers more than any other human
function. This has been dealt with above, under the title, How witches can
obstruct the generative powers and the venereal act. For it is on account of
the shamefulness of that act, and because the original sin due to the guilt
of our first parents is inherited by means of that act. It is symbolized
also by the serpent, who was the first instrument of the devil.
To their third we answer that the devil has more intention and
desire to tempt the good than the wicked; although he does in fact tempt the
wicked more than the good, for the reason that the wicked have more aptitude
than the good to respond to his temptation. In the same way, he is more
eager to injure the good than the bad, but he finds it easier to injure the
wicked. And the reason for this is, according to S. Gregory, that the more
often a man gives way to the devil, the harder he makes it for himself to
struggle against him. But since it is the wicked who most often give way to
the devil, their temptations are the hardest and most frequent, as they have
not the shield of Faith with which to protect themselves. Concerning this
shield S. Paul speaks in Ephesians vi. Above all, taking the shield of
faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the
wicked. But on the other hand, he assails the good more bitterly than the
wicked. And the reason for this is that he already possesses the wicked, but
not the good; and therefore he tried the harder to draw into his power
through tribulation the just, who are not his, than the wicked, who are
already his. In the same way, an earthly prince more severely chastises
those who disobey his laws, or injure his kingdom, that those who do not set
themselves against him.
In answer to their fourth argument, in addition to what has already
been written on this subject, the preacher can expound the truth that God
permits evil to be done, but does not wish it to be done, by the five signs
of the Divine will, which are Precept, Prohibition, Advice, Operation, and
Permission. See S. Thomas, especially in his First Part, quest. 19, art. 12,
where this is very plainly set forth. For although there is only one will in
God, which is God Himself, just as His Essence is One; yet in respect of its
fulfilment, His will is shown and signified to us in many ways, as the Psalm
says: The mighty works of the Lord are fulfilled in all His wishes.
Wherefore there is a distinction between the actual essential Will of God
and its visible effects; even as the will, properly so called, is the will
of a man's good pleasure, but in a metaphorical sense it is the will
expressed by outward signs. For it is by signs and metaphors that we are
shown that God wishes this to be.
We may take an example from a human father who, while he has only
one will in himself, expresses that will in five ways, either by his own
agency, or through that of someone else. Through his own agency he expresses
it in two ways, either directly or indirectly. Directly, when he himself
does a thing; and then it is Operation. Indirectly, when he does not hinder
someone else from acting (see Aritotle's Physics, IV: Prohibition is
indirect causation), and this is called the sign of Permission. And the
human father signifies his will through the agency of someone else in three
ways. Either he orders someone to do something, or conversely forbids
something; and these are the signs of Precept and Prohibition. Or he
persuades and advises someone to do something; and this is the sign of
Advice. And just as the human will is manifested in these five ways, so is
God's will. For that God's will is shown by Precept, Prohibition, and Advice
is seen in S. Matthew vi: Thy will be done in earth as it is in heaven: that
is to say, may we on earth fulfil His Precepts, avoid His Prohibitions, and
follow His Advice. And in the same way, S. Augustine shows that Permission
and Operation are signs of God's will, where he says in the Enchiridion:
Nothing is done unless Almighty God wishes it to be done, either by
permitting it or by Himself doing it.
To return to the argument; it is perfectly true that when a man can
prevent a thing, and does not, that thing may be said to proceed from his
will. And the inference that God, being All-Good, cannot wish evil to be
done, is also true in respect of the actual Good Pleasure of God's Will, and
also in respect of four of the signs of His Will; for it is needless to say
that He cannot operate evil, or command evil to be done, or fail to be
opposed to evil, or advise evil; but He can, however, permit evil to be
done.
And if it is asked how it is possible to distinguish whether an
illness is caused by witchcraft or by some natural physical defect, we
answer that there are various methods. And the first is by means of the
judgement of doctors. See the words of S. Augustine On the Christian
Doctrine: To this class of superstition belong all charms and amulets
suspended or bound about the person, which the School of Medicine despises.
For example, doctors may perceive from the circumstances, such as the
patient's age, healthy complexion, and the reaction of his eyes, that his
disease does not result from any defect of the blood or the stomach, or any
other infirmity; and they therefore judge that it is not due to any natural
defect, but to some extrinsic cause. And since that extrinsic cause cannot
be any poisonous infection, which would be accompanied by ill humours in the
blood and stomach, they have sufficient reason to judge that it is due to
witchcraft.
And secondly, when the disease is incurable, so that the patient can
be relieved by no drugs, but rather seems to be aggravated by them.
Thirdly, the evil may come so suddenly upon a man that it can only
be ascribed to witchcraft. An example of how this happened to one man has
been made known to us. A certain well-born citizen of Spires had a wife who
was of such an obstinate disposition that, though he tried to please her in
every way, yet she refused in nearly every way to comply with his wishes,
and was always plaguing him with abusive taunts. It happened that, on going
into his house one day, and his wife railing against him as usual with
opprobrious words, he wished to go out of the house to escape from
quarrelling. But she quickly ran before him and locked the door by which he
wished to go out; and loudly swore that, unless he beat her, there was no
honesty or faithfulness in him. At these heavy words he stretched out his
hand, not intending to hurt her, and struck her lightly with his open palm
on the buttock; whereupon he suddenly fell to the ground and lost all his
senses, and lay in bed for many weeks afflicted with a most grievous
illness. Now it is obvious that this was not a natural illness, but was
caused by some witchcraft of the woman. And very many similar cases have
happened, and been made known to many.
There are some who can distinguish such illnesses by means of a
certain practice, which is as follows. They hold molten lead over the sick
man, and pour it into a bowl of water. And if the lead condenses into some
image, they judge that the sickness is due to witchcraft. And when such men
are asked whether the image so formed is caused by the work of devils, or is
due to some natural cause, they answer that it is due to the power of Saturn
over lead, the influence of that planet being in other respects evil, and
that the sun has a similar power over gold. But what should be thought of
this practice, and whether it is lawful or not, will be discussed in the
Second Part of this treatise. For the Canonists say that it is lawful that
vanity may be confounded by vanity; but the Theologians hold a directly
opposite view, saying that it is not right to do evil that good may come.
In their last argument they advance several objections. First, why
do not witches become rich? Secondly, why, having the favour of princes, do
they not co-operate for the destruction of all their enemies? Thirdly, why
are they unable to injure Preachers and others who persecute them?
For the first, it is to be said that witches are not generally rich
for this reason: that the devils like to show their contempt for the Creator
by buying witches for the lowest possible price. And also, lest they should
be conspicuous by their riches.
Secondly, they do not injure princes because they wish to retain, as
far as possible, their friendship. And if it is asked why they do not hurt
their enemies, it is answered that a good Angel, working on the other side,
prevents such witchcraft. Compare the passage in Daniel: The Prince of the
Persians withstood me for twenty-one days. See S. Thomas in the Second Book
of Sentences, where he debates whether there is any contest among the good
Angels, and of what sort.
Thirdly, it is said that they cannot injure Inquisitors and other
officials, because they dispense public justice. Many examples could be
adduced to prove this, but time does not permit it.
THE SECOND PART
TREATING ON THE METHODS BY WHICH THE WORKS OF WITCHCRAFT ARE WROUGHT AND
DIRECTED, AND HOW THEY MAY BE SUCCESSFULLY ANNULLED AND DISSOLVED
Question I Of those against whom the Power of Witches availeth not at all.
Chapter I Of the several Methods by which Devils through Witches Entice and
Allure the Innocent to the Increase of that Horrid Craft and Company.
Chapter II Of the Way whereby a Formal Pact with Evil is made.
Chapter III How they are Transported from Place to Place.
Chapter IV Here follows the Way whereby Witches copulate with those Devils
known as Incubi.
Chapter V Witches commonly perform their Spells through the Sacraments of
the Church. And how they Impair the Powers of Generation, and how they may
Cause other Ills to happen to God's Creatures of all kinds. But herein we
except the Question of the Influence of the Stars.
Chapter VI How Witches Impede and Prevent the Power of Procreation.
Chapter VII How, as it were, they Deprive Man of his Virile Member.
Chapter VIII Of the Manner whereby they Change Men into the Shapes of
Beasts.
Chapter IX How Devils may enter the Human Body and the Head without doing
any Hurt, when they cause such Metamorphosis by Means of Prestidigitation.
Chapter X Of the Method by which Devils through the Operations of Witches
sometimes actually possess men.
Chapter XI Of the Method by which they can Inflict Every Sort of Infirmity,
generally Ills of the Graver Kind.
Chapter XII Of the Way how in Particular they Afflict Men with Other Like
Infirmities.
Chapter XIII How Witch Midwives commit most Horrid Crimes when they either
Kill Children or Offer them to Devils in most Accursed Wise.
Chapter XIV Here followeth how Witches Injure Cattle in Various Ways.
Chapter XV How they Raise and Stir up Hailstorms and Tempests, and Cause
Lightning to Blast both Men and Beasts.
Chapter XVI Of Three Ways in which Men and Women may be Discovered to be
Addicted to Witchcraft: Divided into Three Heads: and First of the
Witchcraft of Archers.
Question II The Methods of Destroying and Curing Witchcraft
Introduction, wherein is Set Forth the Difficulty of this Question.
Chapter I The Remedies prescribed by the Holy Church against Incubus and
Succubus Devils.
Chapter II Remedies prescribed for Those who are Bewitched by the
Limitation of the Generative Power.
Chapter III Remedies prescribed for those who are Bewitched by being
Inflamed with Inordinate Love or Extraordinary Hatred.
Chapter IV Remedies presribed for those who by Prestidigitative Art have
lost their Virile Members or have seemingly been Transformed into the Shapes
of Beasts.
Chapter V Prescribed Remedies for those who are Obsessed owing to some
Spell.
Chapter VI Prescribed Remedies; to wit, the Lawful Exorcisms of the Church,
for all Sorts of Infirmities and Ills due to Witchcraft; and the Method of
Exorcising those who are Bewitched.
Chapter VII Remedies prescribed against Hailstorms, and for animals that
are Bewitched.
Chapter VIII Certain Remedies prescribed against those Dark and Horrid
Harms with which Devils may Afflict Men.
Question I Of those against whom the Power of Witches availeth not at all.
The second main part of this work deals with the method of procedure
adopted by witches for the performance of their witchcraft; and these are
distinguished under eighteen heads, proceeding from two chief difficulties.
The first of these two, dealt with in the beginning, concerns protective
remedies, by which a man is rendered immune from witchcraft: the second,
dealt with at the end, concerns curative remedies, by which those who are
bewitched can be cured. For, as Aristotle says (Physics, IV), prevention and
cure are related to one another, and are, accidentally, matters of
causation. In this way the whole foundation of this horrible heresy may be
made clear.
In the above two divisions, the following points will be principally
emphasized. First, the initiation of witches, and their profession of
sacrilege. Second, the progress of their method of working, and of their
horrible observances. Third, the preventive protections against their
witchcrafts. And because we are now dealing with matters relating to morals
and behaviour, and there is no need for a variety of arguments and
disquisitions, since those matters which now follow under their headings are
sufficiently discussed in the foregoing Questions; therefore we pray God
that the reader will not look for proofs in every case, since it is enough
to adduce examples that have been personally seen or heard, or are accepted
at the word of credible witnesses.
In the first of the points mentioned, two matters will be chiefly
examined: first, the various methods of enticement adopted by the devil
himself; second, the various ways in which witches profess their heresy. And
in the second of the main points, six matters will be examined in order,
relating to the procedure of witchcraft, and its cure. First, the practices
of witches with regard to themselves and their own bodies. Second, their
practices with regard to other men. Third, those relating to beasts. Fourth,
the mischief they do to the fruits of the earth. Fifth, those kinds of
witchcraft which are practised by men only and not by women. Sixth, the
question of removing witchcraft, and how those who are bewitched may be
cured. The First Question, therefore, is divided into eighteen heads, since
in so many ways are their observances varied and multiplied.
It is asked whether a man can be so blessed by the good Angels that
he cannot be bewitched by witches in any of the ways that follow. And it
seems that he cannot, for it has already been proved that even the blameless
and innocent and the just are often afflicted by devils, as was Job; and
many innocent children, as well as countless other just men, are seen to be
bewitched, although not to the same extent as sinners; for they are not
afflicted in the perdition of their souls, but only in their worldly goods
and their bodies. But the contrary is indicated by the confessions of
witches, namely, that they cannot injure everybody, but only those whom they
learn, through the information of devils, to be destitute of Divine help.
Answer. There are three classes of men blessed by God, whom that
detestable race cannot injure with their witchcraft. And the first are those
who administer public justice against them, or prosecute them in any public
official capacity. The second are those who, according to the traditional
and holy rites of the Church, make lawful use of the power and virtue which
the Church by her exorcisms furnishes in the aspersion of Holy Water, the
taking of consecrated salt, the carrying of blessed candles on the Day of
the Purification of Our Lady, of palm leaves upon Palm Sunday, and men who
thus fortify themselves are acting so that the powers of devils are
diminished; and of these we shall speak later. The third class are those
who, in various and infinite ways, are blessed by the Holy Angels.
The reason for this in the first class will be given and proved by
various examples. For since, as S. Paul says, all power if from God, and a
sword for the avenging of the wicked and the retribution of the good, it is
no wonder that devils are kept at bay when justice is being done to avenge
that horrible crime.
To the same effect the Doctors note that there are five ways in
which the devil's power is hindered, either wholly or in part. First, by a
limit fixed by God to his power, as is seen in Job i and ii. Another example
is the case of the man we read of in the Formicarius of Nider, who had
confessed to a judge that he had invoked the devil in order that he might
kill an enemy of his, or do him bodily harm, or strike him dead with
lightning. And he said: “When I had invoked the devil that I might commit
such a deed with his help, he answered me that he was unable to do any of
those things, because the man had good faith and diligently defended himself
with the sign of the cross; and that therefore he could not harm him in his
body, but the most he could do was to destroy an eleventh part of the fruit
of his lands.”
Secondly, it is hindered by the application of some exterior force,
as in the case of Balaam's ass, Numbers xxii. Thirdly, by some externally
performed miracle of power. And there are some who are blessed with an
unique privilege, as will be shown later in the case of the third class of
men who cannot be bewitched. Fourthly, by the good providence of God, Who
disposes each thing severally, and causes a good Angel to stand in the
devil's way, as when Asmodeus killed the seven husbands of the virgin Sara,
but did not kill Tobias.
Fifthly, it is sometimes due to the caution of the devil himself,
for at times he does not wish to do hurt, in order that worse may follow
from it. As, for example, when he could molest the excommunicated but does
not do so, as in the case of the excommunicated Corinthian (I. Corinthians
v), in order that he may weaken the faith of the Church in the power of such
banishment. Therefore we may similarly say that, even if the administrators
of public justice were not protected by Divine power, yet the devils often
of their own accord withdraw their support and guardianship from witches,
either because they fear their conversion, or because they desire and hasten
their damnation.
This fact is proved also by actual experience. For the aforesaid
Doctor affirms that witches have borne witness that it is a fact of their
own experience that, merely because they have been taken by officials of
public justice, they have immediately lost all their power of witchcraft.
For example, a judge named Peter, whom we have mentioned before, wished his
officials to arrest a certain witch called Stadlin; but their hands were
seized with so great a trembling, and such a nauseous stench came into their
nostrils, that they gave up hope of daring to touch the witch. And the judge
commanded them, saying: “You may safely arrest the wretch, for when he is
touched by the hand of public justice, he will lose all the power of his
iniquity.” And so the event proved; for he was taken and burned for many
witchcrafts perpetrated by him, which are mentioned here and there in this
work in their appropriate places.
And many more such experiences have happened to us Inquisitors in
the exercise of our inquisitorial office, which would turn the mind of the
reader to wonder if it were expedient to relate them. But since self-praise
is sordid and mean, it is better to pass them over in silence than to incur
the stigma of boastfulness and conceit. But we must except those which have
become so well known that they cannot be concealed.
Not long ago in the town of Ratisbon the magistrates had condemned a
witch to be burned, and were asked why it was that we Inquisitors were not
afflicted like other men with witchcraft. They answered that witches had
often tried to injure them, but could not. And, being asked the reason for
this, they answered that they did not know, unless it was because the devils
had warned them against doing so. For, they said, it would be impossible to
tell how many times they have pestered us by day and by night, now in the
form of apes, not of dogs or goats, disturbing us with their cries and
insults; fetching us from our beds at their blasphemous prayers, so that we
have stood outside the window of their prison, which was so high that no one
could reach it without the longest of ladders; and then they have seemed to
stick the pins with which their head-cloth was fastened violently into their
heads. But praise be to Almighty God, Who in His pity, and for no merit of
our own, has preserved us as unworthy public servants of the justice of the
Faith.
The reason in the case of the second class of men is self-evident.
For the exorcisms of the Church are for this very purpose, and are entirely
efficacious remedies for preserving oneself from the injuries of witches.
But if it is asked in what manner a man ought to use such
protections, we must speak first of those that are used without the uttering
of sacred words, and then of the actual sacred invocations. For in the first
place it is lawful in any decent habitation of men or beasts to sprinkle
Holy Water for the safety and securing of men and beasts, with the
invocation of the Most Holy Trinity and a Paternoster. For it is said in the
Office of Exorcism, that wherever it is sprinkled, all uncleanness is
purified, all harm is repelled, and no pestilent spirit can abide there,
etc. For the Lord saves both man and beast, according to the Prophet, each
in his degree.
Secondly, just as the first must necessarily be sprinkled, so in the
case of a Blessed Candle, although it is more appropriate to light it, the
wax of it may with advantage be sprinkled about dwelling-houses. And
thirdly, it is expedient to place or to burn consecrated herbs in those
rooms where they can best be consumed in some convenient place.
Now it happened in the city of Spires, in the same year that this
book was begun, that a certain devout woman held conversation with a
suspected witch, and, after the manner of women, they used abusive words to
each other. But in the night she wished to put her little suckling child in
its cradle, and remembered her encounter that day with the suspected witch.
So, fearing some danger to the child, she placed consecrated herbs under it,
sprinkled it with Holy Water, put a little Blessed Salt to its lips, signed
it with the Sign of the Cross, and diligently secured the cradle. About the
middle of the night she heard the child crying, and, as women do, wished to
embrace the child, and life the cradle on to her bed. She lifted the candle,
indeed, but could not embrace the child, because he was not there. The poor
woman, in terror, and bitterly weeping for the loss of her child, lit a
light, and found the child in a corner under a chair, crying but unhurt.
In this it may be seen what virtue there is in the exorcisms of the
Church against the snares of the devil. It is manifest that Almighty God, in
His mercy and wisdom which extend from end to end, watches over the deeds of
those wicked men; and that he gently directs the witchcraft of devils, so
that when they try to diminish and weaken the Faith, they on the contrary
strengthen it and make it more firmly rooted in the hearts of many. For the
faithful may derive much profit from these evils; when, by reason of devils'
works, the faith is made strong, God's mercy is seen, and His power
manifested, and men are led into His keeping and to the reverence of
Christ's Passion, and are enlightened by the ceremonies of the Church.
There lived in a town of Wiesenthal a certain Mayor who was
bewitched with the most terrible pains and bodily contortions; and he
discovered, not by means of other witches, but from his own experience, how
that witchcraft had been practised on him. For he said he was in the habit
of fortifying himself every Sunday with Blessed Salt and Holy Water, but
that he had neglected to do so on one occasion owing to the celebration of
somebody's marriage; and on that same day he was bewitched.
In Ratisbon a man was being tempted by the devil in the form of a
woman to copulate, and became greatly disturbed when the devil would not
desist. But it came into the poor man's mind that he ought to defend himself
by taking Blessed Salt, as he had heard in a sermon. So, he took some
Blessed Salt on entering the bath-room; and the woman looked fiercely at
him, and, cursing whatever devil had taught him to do this, suddenly
disappeared. For the devil can, with God's permission, present himself
either in the form of a witch, or by possessing the body of an actual witch.
There were also three companions walking along a road, and two of
them were struck by lightning. The third was terrified, when he heard voices
speaking in the air, “Let us strike him too.” But another voice answered,
“We cannot, for to-day he has heard the words ‘The Word was made Flesh.’”
And he understood that he had been saved because he had that day heard Mass,
and, at the end of the Mass, the Gospel of S. John: In the beginning was the
Word, etc.
Also sacred words bound to the body are marvellously protective, if
seven conditions for their use are observed. But these will be mentioned in
the last Question of this Second Part, where we speak of curative, as here
we speak of preventive measures. And those sacred words help not only to
protect, but also to cure those who are bewitched.
But the surest protection for places, men, or animals are the words
of the triumphal title of our Saviour, if they be written in four places in
the form of a cross: IESUS † NAZARENUS † REX † IUDAEORUM †. There may also
be added the name of MARY and of the Evangelists, or the words of S. John:
The Word was made Flesh.
But the third class of men which cannot be hurt by witches is the
most remarkable; for they are protected by a special Angelic guardianship,
both within and without. Within, by the inpouring of grace; without, by the
virtue of the stars, that is, by the protection of the Powers which move the
stars. And this class is divided into two sections of the Elect: for some
are protected against all sorts of witchcrafts, so that they can be hurt in
no way; and others are particularly rendered chaste by the good Angels with
regard to the generative functions, just as evil spirits by their
witchcrafts inflame the lusts of certain wicked men towards one woman, while
they make them cold towards another.
And their interior and exterior protection, by grace and by the
influence of the stars, is explained as follows. For though it is God
Himself Who pours grace into our souls, and no other creature has so great
power as to do this (as it is said: The Lord will give grace and glory);
yet, when God wished to bestow some especial grace, He does so in a
dispositive way through the agency of a good Angel, as S. Thomas teaches us
in a certain place in the Third Book of Sentences.
And this is the doctrine put forward by Dionysius in the fourth
chapter de Diuinus Nominibus: This is the fixed and unalterable law of
Divinity, that the High proceeds to the Low through a Medium; so that
whenever of good emanates to us from the fountain of all goodness, comes
through the ministry of the good Angels. And this is proved both by examples
and by argument. For although only the Divine power was the cause of the
Conception of the Word of God in the Most Blessed Virgin, through whom God
was made man; yet the mind of the Virgin was by the ministry of an Angel
much stimulated by the Salutation, and by the strengthening and information
of her understanding, and was thus predisposed to goodness. This truth can
also be reasoned as follows: It is the opinion of the above-mentioned Doctor
that there are three properties of man, the will, the understanding, and the
inner and outer powers belonging to the bodily members and organs. The first
God alone can influence: For the heart of the king is in the hand of the
Lord. A good Angel can influence the understanding towards a clearer
knowledge of the true and the good, so that in the second of his properties
both God and a good Angel can enlighten a man. Similarly in the third, a
good Angel can endow a man with good qualities, and a bad Angel can, with
God's permission, afflict him with evil temptations. However, it is in the
power of the human will either to accept such evil influences or to reject
them; and this a man can always do by invoking the grace of God.
As to the exterior protection which comes from God through the
Movers of the stars, the tradition is widespread, and conforms equally with
the Sacred Writings and with natural philosophy. For all the heavenly bodies
are moved by angelic powers which are called by Christ the Movers of the
stars, and by the Church the Powers of the heavens; and consequently all the
corporeal substances of this world are governed by the celestial influences,
as witness Aristotle, Metaphysics I. Therefore we can say that the
providence of God overlooks each on of His elect, but He subjects some of
them to the ills of this life for their correction, while He so protects
others that they can in no way be injured. And this gift they receive either
from the good Angels deputed by God for their protection, or from the
influence of the heavenly bodies or the Powers which move them.
It is further to be noted that some are protected against all
witchcrafts, and some against only a part of them. For some are particularly
purified by the good Angels in their genital functions, so that witches can
in no way bewitch them in respect of those functions. But it is in one sense
superfluous to write of these, although in another sense it is needful for
this reason: for those who are bewitched in their generative functions are
so deprived of the guardianship of Angels that they are either in mortal sin
always, or practise those impurities with too lustful a zest. In this
connexion it has been shown in the First Part of this work that God permits
greater powers of witchcraft against that function, not so much because of
its nastiness, as because it was this act that caused the corruption of our
first parents and, by its contagion, brought the inheritance of original sin
upon the whole human race.
But let us give a few examples of how a good Angel sometimes blesses
just and holy men, especially in the matter of the genital instincts. For
the following was the experience of the Abbot S. Serenus, as it is told by
Cassian in his Collations of the Fathers, in the first conference of the
Abbot Serenus. This man, he says, laboured to achieve an inward chastity of
heart and soul, by prayers both by night and day, by fasting and by vigils,
till he at last perceived that, by Divine grace, he had extinguished all the
surgings of carnal concupiscence. Finally, stirred by an even greater zeal
for chastity, he used all the above holy practices to pray the Almighty and
All-Good God to grant him that, by God's gift, the chastity which he felt in
his heart should be visibly conferred upon his body. Then an Angel of the
Lord came to him in a vision in the night, and seemed to open his belly and
take from his entrails a burning tumour of flesh, and then to replace all
his intestines as they had been; and said: Lo! the provocation of your flesh
is cut out, and know that this day you have obtained perpetual purity of
your body, according to the prayer which you prayed, so that you will never
again be pricked with that natural desire which is aroused even in babes and
sucklings.
Similarly S. Gregory, in the first book of his Dialogues, tells of
the Blessed Abbot Equitius. This man, he says, was in his youth greatly
troubled by the provocation of the flesh; but the very distress of his
temptation made him all the more zealous in his application to prayer. And
when he continuously prayed Almighty God for a remedy against this
affliction, an Angel appeared to him one night and seemed to make him an
eunuch, and it seemed to him in his vision that all feeling was taken away
from his genital organs; and from that time he was such a stranger to
temptation as if he had no sex in his body. Behold what benefit there was in
that purification; for he was so filled with virtue that, with the help of
Almighty God, just as he was before pre-eminent among, so he afterwards
became pre-eminent over women.
Again, in the Lives of the Fathers collected by that very holy man
S. Heraclides, in the book which he calls Paradise, he tells of a certain
holy Father, a monk named Helias. This man was moved by pity to collect
thirty women in a monastery, and began to rule over them. But after two
years, when he was thirty years old, he fled from the temptation of the
flesh into a hermitage, and fasting there for two days, prayed to God,
saying: “O Lord God, either slay me, or deliver me from this temptation.”
And in the evening a dream came to him, and he saw three Angels approach
him; and they asked him why he had fled from that monastery of virgins. But
when he did not dare to answer, for shame, the Angels said: If you are set
free from temptation, will you return to your cure of those women? And he
answered that he would willingly. They then extracted an oath to that effect
from him, and made him an eunuch. For one seemed to hold his hands, another
his feet, and the third to cut out his testicles with a knife; though this
was not really so, but only seemed to be. And when they asked if he felt
himself remedied, he answered that he was entirely delivered. So, on the
fifth day, he returned to the sorrowing women, and ruled over them for the
forty years that he continued to live, and never again felt a spark of that
first temptation.
No less a benefit do we read to have been conferred upon the Blessed
Thomas, a Doctor of our Order, whom his brothers imprisoned for entering
that Order; and, wishing to tempt him, they sent in to him a seductive and
sumptuously adorned harlot. But when the Doctor had looked at her, he ran to
the material fire, and snatching up a lighted torch, drove the engine of the
fire of lust out of his person; and, prostrating himself in a prayer for the
gift of chastity, went to sleep. Two Angels then appeared to him, saying:
Behold, at the bidding of God we gird you with a girdle of chastity, which
cannot be loosed by any other such temptation; neither can it be acquired by
the merits of human virtue, but is given as a gift by God alone. And he felt
himself girded, and was aware of the touch of the girdle, and cried out and
awaked. And thereafter he felt himself endowed with so great a gift of
chastity, that from that time he abhorred all the delights of the flesh, so
that he could not even speak to a woman except under compulsion, but was
strong in his perfect chastity. This we take from the Formicarius of Nider.
With the exception, therefore, of these three classes of men, no one
is secure from witches. For all others are liable to be bewitched, or to be
tempted and incited by some witchery, in the eighteen ways that are now to
be considered. For we must first describe these methods in their order, that
we may afterwards discuss more clearly the remedies by which those who are
bewitched can be relieved. And that the eighteen methods may be more clearly
shown, they are set forth under as many chapters as follows. First, we show
the various methods of initiation of witches, and how they entice innocent
girls to swell the numbers of their perfidious company. Second, how witches
profess their sacrilege, and the oath of allegiance to the devil which they
take. Third, how they are transported from place to place, either bodily or
in the spirit. Fourth, how they subject themselves to Incubi, who are
devils. Fifth, their general method of practising witchcraft through the
Sacraments of the Church, and in particular how, with the permission of God,
they can afflict all creatures except the Celestial Bodies. Sixth, their
method of obstructing the generative function. Seventh, how they can take
off the virile member by some art of illusion. Eighth, how they change men
into the shapes of beasts. Ninth, how devils can enter the mind without
hurting it, when they work some glamour or illusion. Tenth, how devils,
through the operation of witches, sometimes substantially inhabit men.
Eleventh, how they cause every sort of infirmity, and this in general.
Twelfth, of certain infirmities in particular. Thirteenth, how witch
midwives cause the greatest damage, either killing children or
sacrilegiously offering them to devils. Fourteenth, how they cause various
plagues to afflict animals. Fifteenth, how they raise hailstorms and
tempests, and thunder and lightning, to fall upon men and animals.
Sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth, the three ways in which men only,
and not women, are addicted to witchcraft. After these will follow the
question of the methods by which these sorts of witchcraft may be removed.
But let no one think that, because we have enumerated the various
methods by which various forms of witchcraft are inflicted, he will arrive
at a complete knowledge of these practices; for such knowledge would be of
little use, and might even be harmful. Not even the forbidden books of
Necromancy contain such knowledge; for witchcraft is not taught in books,
nor is it practised by the learned, but by the altogether uneducated; having
only one foundation, without the acknowledgement or practice of which it is
impossible for anyone to work witchcraft as a witch.
Moreover, the methods are enumerated here at the beginning, that
their deeds may not seem incredible, as they have often been though
hitherto, to the great damage of the Faith, and the increase of witches
themselves. But if anyone maintains that, since (as has been proved above)
some men are protected by the influence of the stars so that they can be
hurt by no witchcraft, it should also be attributed to the stars when anyone
is bewitched, as if it were a matter of predestination whether a man can be
immune from or subject to witchcraft, such a man does not rightly understand
the meaning of the Doctors; and this in various respects.
And first, because there are three human qualities which may be said
to be ruled by three celestial causes, namely, the act of volition, the act
of understanding, and bodily acts. And the first, as has been said, is
governed directly and only by God; the second by an Angel; and the third is
governed, but not compelled, by a celestial body.
Secondly, it is clear from what has been said that choice and
volition are governed directly by God, as S. Paul says: It is God Who
causeth us to will and to perform, according to His good pleasure: and the
understanding of the human intellect is ordered by God through the mediation
of the Angels. Accordingly also all things corporeal, whether they be
interior as are the powers and knowledge acquired through the inner bodily
functions, or exterior as are sickness and health, are dispensed by the
celestial bodies, through the mediation of Angels. And when Dionysius, in
the fourth chapter de Diuinis Nominibus, says that the celestial bodies are
the cause of that which happens in this world, this is to be understood as
to natural health and sickness. But the sicknesses we are considering are
supernatural, since they are inflicted by the power of the devil, with God's
permission. Therefore we cannot say that it is due to the influence of the
stars that a man is bewitched; although it can truly be said that it is due
to the influence of the stars that some men cannot be bewitched.
But if it is objected that these two opposite effects must spring
from the same cause, and that the pendulum must swing both ways, it is
answered that, when a man is preserved by the influence of the stars from
these supernatural ills, this is not due directly to the influence of the
stars, but to an angelic power, which can strengthen that influence so that
the enemy with his malice cannot prevail against it; and that angelic power
can be passed on through the virtue of the stars. For a man may be at the
point of death, having reached the natural term of life, and God in His
power, which in such matters always works indirectly, may alter this be
sending some power of preservation instead of the natural defect in the man
and in his dominating influence. Accordingly we may say of a man who is
subject to witchcraft, that he can in just the same way be preserved from
witchcraft, or that this preservation comes of an Angel deputed to guard
him; and this is the chief of all means of protection.
And when it is said in Jeremias xxii: Write ye this man childless, a
man that shall not prosper in his days: this is to be understood with regard
to the choices of the will, in which one man prospers and another does not;
and this also can be ascribed to the influence of the stars. For example:
one man may be influenced by his stars to make a useful choice, such as to
enter some religious Order. And when his understanding is enlightened to
consider such a step, and by Divine operation his will is inclined to put it
into execution, such a man is said to prosper well. Or similarly when a man
is inclined to some trade, or anything that is useful. On the other hand, he
will be called unfortunate when his choice is inclined by the higher Powers
to unprofitable things.
S. Thomas, in his third book of the Summa against the Gentiles, and
in several places, speaks of these and many other opinions, when he
discusses in what lies the difference that one man should be well born and
another unfortunately born, that a man should be lucky or unlucky, or well
or badly governed and guarded. For according to the disposition of his stars
a man is said to be well or badly born, and so fortunate or unfortunate; and
according as he is enlightened by an Angel, and follows such enlightenment,
he is said to be well or badly guarded. And according as he is directed by
God towards good, and follows it, he is said to be well governed. But these
choices have no place here, since we are not concerned with them but with
the preservation from witchcraft; and we have said enough for the present on
this subject. We proceed to the rites practised by witches, and first to a
consideration of how they lure the innocent into becoming partakers of their
perfidies.
Chapter I Of the several Methods by which Devils through Witches Entice and
Allure the Innocent to the Increase of that Horrid Craft and Company.
There are three methods above all by which devils, through the
agency of witches, subvert the innocent, and by which that perfidy is
continually being increased. And the first is through weariness, through
inflicting grievous losses in their temporal possessions. For, as S. Gregory
says: The devil often tempts us to give way from very weariness. And it is
to be understood that it is within the power of a man to resist such
temptation; but that God permits it as a warning to us not to give way to
sloth. And in this sense is Judges ii to be understood, where it says that
God did not destroy those nations, that through them He might prove the
people of Israel; and it speaks of the neighbouring nations of the
Canaanites, Jebusites, and others. And in our time the Hussites and other
Heretics are permitted, so that they cannot be destroyed. Devils, therefore,
by means of witches, so afflict their innocent neighbours with temporal
losses, that they are to beg the suffrages of witches, and at length to
submit themselves to their counsels; as many experiences have taught us.
We know a stranger in the diocese of Augsburg, who before he was
forty-four years old lost all his horses in succession through witchcraft.
His wife, being afflicted with weariness by reason of this, consulted with
witches, and after following their counsels, unwholesome as they were, all
the horses which he bought after that (for he was a carrier) were preserved
from witchcraft.
And how many women have complained to us in our capacity of
Inquisitors, that when their cows have been injured by being deprived of
their milk, or in any other way, they have consulted with suspected witches,
and even been given remedies by them, on condition that they would promise
something to some spirit; and when they asked what they would have to
promise, the witches answered that it was only a small thing, that they
should agree to execute the instructions of that master with regard to
certain observances during the Holy Offices of the Church, or to observe
some silent reservations in their confessions to priests.
Here it is to be noted that, as has already been hinted, this
iniquity has small and scant beginnings, as that of the time of the
elevation of the Body of Christ they spit on the ground, or shut their eyes,
or mutter some vain words. We know a woman who yet lives, protected by the
secular law, who, when the priest at the celebration of the Mass blesses the
people, saying, Dominus uobiscum, always adds to herself these words in the
vulgar tongue “Kehr mir die Zung im Arss umb.” Or they even say some such
thing at confession after they have received absolution, or do not confess
everything, especially mortal sins, and so by slow degrees are led to a
total abnegation of the Faith, and to the abominable profession of
sacrilege.
This, or something like it, is the method which witches use towards
honest matrons who are little given to carnal vices but concerned for
worldly profit. But towards young girls, more given to bodily lusts and
pleasures, they observe a different method, working through their carnal
desires and the pleasures of the flesh.
Here it is to be noted that the devil is more eager and keen to
tempt the good than the wicked, although in actual practice he tempts the
wicked more than the good, because more aptitude for being tempted is found
in the wicked than in the good. Therefore the devil tries all the harder to
seduce all the more saintly virgins and girls; and there is reason in this,
besides many examples of it.
For since he already possesses the wicked, but not the good, he
tries the harder to seduce into his power the good whom he does not, than
the wicked whom he does, possess. Similarly any earthly prince takes up arms
against those who do not acknowledge his rule rather than those who do not
oppose him.
And here is an example. Two witches were burned in Ratisbon, as we
shall tell later where we treat of their methods of raising tempests. And
one of them, who was a bath-woman, had confessed among other things the
following: that she had suffered much injury from the devil for this reason.
There was a certain devout virgin, the daughter of a very rich man whom
there is no need to name, since the girl is now dead in the disposition of
Divine mercy, and we would not that his thought should be perverted by evil;
and the witch was ordered to seduce her by inviting her to her house on some
Feast Day, in order that the devil himself, in the form of a young man,
might speak with her. And although she had tried very often to accomplish
this, yet whenever she had spoken to the young girl, she had protected
herself with the sign of the Holy Cross. And no one can doubt that she did
this at the instigation of a holy Angel, to repel the works of the devil.
Another virgin living in the diocese of Strasburg confessed to one
of us that she was alone on a certain Sunday in her father's house, when an
old woman of that town came to visit here and, among other scurrilous words,
made the following proposition; that, if she liked, she would take her to a
place where there were some young men unknown to all the townsmen. And when,
said the virgin, I consented, and followed her to her house, the old woman
said, “See, we go upstairs to an upper room where the young men are; but
take care not to make the sign of the Cross.” I gave her my promise not to
do so, and as she was going up before me and I was going up the stairs, I
secretly crossed myself. At the top of the stairs, when we were both
standing outside the room, the hag turned angrily upon me with a horrible
countenance, and looking at me said, “Curse you! Why did you cross yourself?
Go away from here. Depart in the name of the devil.” And so I returned
unharmed to my home.
It can be seen from this how craftily that old enemy labours in the
seduction of souls. For it was in this way that the bath-woman whom we have
mentioned, and who was burned, confessed that she had been seduced by some
old women. A different method, however, was used in the case of her
companion witch, who had met the devil in human form on the road while she
herself was going to visit her lover for the purpose of fornication. And
when the Incubus devil had seen her, and has asked her whether she
recognized him, and she had said that she did not, he had answered" “I am
the devil; and if you wish, I will always be ready at your pleasure, and
will not fail you in any necessity.” And when she had consented, she
continued for eighteen years, up to the end of her life, to practise
diabolical filthiness with him, together with a total abnegation of the
Faith as a necessary condition.
There is also a third method of temptation through the way of
sadness and poverty. For when girls have been corrupted, and have been
scorned by their lovers after they have immodestly copulated with them in
the hope and promise of marriage with them, and have found themselves
disappointed in all their hopes and everywhere despised, they turn to the
help and protection of devils; either for the sake of vengeance by
bewitching those lovers or the wives they have married, or for the sake of
giving themselves up to every sort of lechery. Alas! experience tells us
that there is no number to such girls, and consequently the witches that
spring from this class are innumerable. Let us give a few out of many
examples.
There is a place in the diocese of Brixen where a young man deposed
the following facts concerning the bewitchment of his wife.
“In the time of my youth I loved a girl who importuned me to marry
her; but I refused her and married another girl from another country. But
wishing for friendship's sake to please her, I invited her to the wedding.
She came, and while the other honest women were wishing us luck and offering
gifts, she raised her hand and, in the hearing of the other women who were
standing round, said, You will have few days of health after to-day. My
bride was frightened, since she did not know her (for, as I have said, I had
married her from another country), and asked the bystanders who she was who
had threatened her in that way; and they said that she was a loose and
vagrom woman. None the less, it happened just as she had said. For after a
few days my wife was so bewitched that she lost the use of all her limbs,
and even now, after ten years, the effects of witchcraft can be seen on her
body.”
If we were to collect all the similar instances which have occurred
in one town of that diocese, it would take a whole book; but they are
written and preserved at the house of the Bishop of Brixen, who still lives
to testify to their truth, astounding and unheard-of though they are.
But we must not pass over in silence one unheard-of and astonishing
instance. A certain high-born Count in the ward of Westerich, in the diocese
of Strasburg, married a noble girl of equal birth; but after he had
celebrated the wedding, he was for three years unable to know her carnally,
on account, as the event proved, of a certain charm which prevented him. In
great anxiety, and not knowing what to do, he called loudly on the Saints of
God. It happened that he went to the State of Metz to negotiate some
business; and while he was talking about the streets and squares of the
city, attended by his servants and domiciles, he met a certain women who had
formerly been his mistress. Seeing her, and not at all thinking of the spell
that was on him, he spontaneously addressed her kindly for the sake of their
old friendship, asking her how she did, and whether she was well. And she,
seeing the Count's gentleness, in her turn asked very particularly after his
health and affairs; and when he answered that he was well, and that
everything prospered with him, she was astonished and was silent for a time.
The Count, seeing her thus astonished, again spoke kindly to her, inviting
her to converse with him. So she inquired after his wife, and received a
similar reply, that she was in all respects well. Then she asked if he had
any children; and the Count said he had three sons, one born in each year.
At that she was more astonished, and was again silent for a while. And the
Count asked her, Why, my dear, do you make such careful inquiries? I am sure
that you congratulate my on my happiness. Then she answered, Certainly I
congratulate you; but curse that old woman who said she would bewitch your
body so that you could not have connexion with your wife! And in proof of
this, there is a pot in the well in the middle of your yard containing
certain objects evilly bewitched, and this was placed there in order that,
as long as its contents were preserved intact, for so long you would be
unable to cohabit. But see! it is all in vain, and I am glad, etc. On his
return home the Count did not delay to have the well drained; and, finding
the pot, burned its contents and all, whereupon he immediately recovered the
virility which he had lost. Wherefore the Countess again invited all the
nobility to a fresh wedding celebration, saying that she was now the Lady of
that castle and estate, after having for so long remained a virgin. For the
sake of the Count's reputation it is not expedient to name that castle and
estate; but we have related this story in order that the truth of the matter
may be known, to bring so great a crime into open detestation.
From this it is clear that witches use various methods to increase
their numbers. For the above-mentioned woman, because she had been
supplanted by the Count's wife, case that spell upon the Count with the help
of another witches; and this is how one witchcraft brings innumerable others
in its train.
Chapter II Of the Way whereby a Formal Pact with Evil is made.
The method by which they profess their sacrilege through an open
pact of fidelity to devils varies according to the several practices to
which different witches are addicted. And to understand this it first must
be noted that there are, as was shown in the First Part of this treatise,
three kinds of witches; namely, those who injure but cannot cure; those who
cure but, through some strange pact with the devil, cannot injure; and those
who both injure and cure. And among those who injure, one class in
particular stands out, which can perform every sort of witchcraft and spell,
comprehending all that all the others individually can do. Wherefore, if we
describe the method of profession in their case, it will suffice also for
all the other kinds. And this class is made up of those who, against every
instinct of human or animal nature, are in the habit of eating and devouring
the children of their own species.
And this is the most powerful class of witches, who practise
innumerable other harms also. For they raise hailstorms and hurtful tempests
and lightnings; cause sterility in men and animals; offer to devils, or
otherwise kill, the children whom they do not devour. But these are only the
children who have not been re-born by baptism at the font, for they cannot
devour those who have been baptized, nor any without God's permission. They
can also, before the eyes of their parents, and when no one is in sight,
throw into the water children walking by the water side; they make horses go
mad under their riders; they can transport themselves from place to place
through the air, either in body or in imagination; they can affect Judges
and Magistrates so that they cannot hurt them; they can cause themselves and
other to keep silence under torture; they can bring about a great trembling
in the hands and horror in the minds of those who would arrest them; they
can show to others occult things and certain future events, by the
information of devils, though this may sometimes have a natural cause (see
the question: Whether devils can foretell the future, in the Second Book of
Sentences); they can see absent things as if they were present; they can
turn the minds of men to inordinate love or hatred; they can at times strike
whom they will with lightning, and even kill some men and animals; they can
make of no effect the generative desires, and even the power of copulation,
cause abortion, kill infants in the mother's womb by a mere exterior touch;
they can at time bewitch men and animals with a mere look, without touching
them, and cause death; they dedicate their own children to devils; and in
short, as has been said, they can cause all the plagues which other witches
can only cause in part, that is, when the Justice of God permits such things
to be. All these things this most powerful of all classes of witches can do,
but they cannot undo them.
But it is common to all of them to practise carnal copulation with
devils; therefore, if we show the method used by this chief class in their
profession of their sacrilege, anyone may easily understand the method of
the other classes.
There were such witches lately, thirty years ago, in the district of
Savoy, towards the State of Berne, as Nider tells in his Formicarius. And
there are now some in the country of Lombardy, in the domains of the Duke of
Austria, where the Inquisitor of Como, as we told in the former Part, caused
forty-one witches to be burned in one year; and he was fifty-five years old,
and still continues to labour in the Inquisition.
Now the method of profession is twofold. One is a solemn ceremony,
like a solemn vow. The other is private, and can be made to the devil at any
hour alone. The first method is when witches meet together in the conclave
on a set day, and the devil appears to them in the assumed body of a man,
and urges them to keep faith with him, promising them worldly prosperity and
length of life; and they recommend a novice to his acceptance. And the devil
asks whether she will abjure the Faith, and forsake the holy Christian
religion and the worship of the Anomalous Woman (for so they call the Most
Blessed Virgin MARY), and never venerate the Sacraments; and if he finds the
novice or disciple willing, then the devil stretches out his hand, and so
does the novice, and she swears with upraised hand to keep that covenant.
And when this is done, the devil at once adds that this is not enough; and
when the disciple asks what more must be done, the devil demands the
following oath of homage to himself: that she give herself to him, body and
soul, for ever, and do her utmost to bring others of both sexes into his
power. He adds, finally, that she is to make certain unguents from the bones
and limbs of children, especially those who have been baptized; by all which
means she will be able to fulfil all her wishes with his help.
We Inquisitors had credible experience of this method in the town of
Breisach in the diocese of Basel, receiving full information from a young
girl witch who had been converted, whose aunt also had been burned in the
diocese of Strasburg. And she added that she had become a witch by the
method in which her aunt had first tried to seduce her.
For one day her aunt ordered her to go upstairs with her, and at her
command to go into a room where she found fifteen young men clothed in green
garments after the manner of German knights. And her aunt said to her:
Choose whom you wish from these young men, and he will take you for his
wife. And when she said she did not wish or any of them, she was sorely
beaten and at last consented, and was initiated according to the aforesaid
ceremony. She said also that she was often transported by night with her
aunt over vast distances, even from Strasburg to Cologne.
This is she who occasioned our inquiry in the First Part into the
question whether witches are truly and bodily transported by devils from
place to place: and this was on account of the words of the Canon (6, q. 5,
Episcopi), which seem to imply that they are only so carried in imagination;
whereas they are at times actually and bodily transported.
For when she was asked whether it was only in imagination and
phantastically that they so rode, through an illusion of devils, she
answered that they did so in both ways; according to the truth which we
shall declare later of the manner in which they are transferred from place
to place. She said also that the greatest injuries were inflicted by
midwives, because they were under an obligation to kill or offer to devils
as many children as possible; and that she had been severely beaten by her
aunt because she had opened a secret pot and found the heads of a great many
children. And much more she told us, having first, as was proper, taken an
oath to speak the truth.
And he account of the method of professing the devil's faith
undoubtedly agrees with what has been written by that most eminent Doctor,
John Nider, who even in our times has written very illuminatingly; and it
may be especially remarked that he tells of the following which he had from
an Inquisitor of the diocese of Edua, who held many inquisitions on witches
in that diocese, and caused many to be burned.
For he says that this Inquisitor told him that in the Duchy of
Lausanne certain witches had cooked and eaten their own children, and that
the following was the method in which they became initiated into such
practices. The witches met together and, by their art, summoned a devil in
the form of a man, to whom the novice was compelled to swear to deny the
Christian religion, never to adore the Eucharist, and to tread the Cross
underfoot whenever she could do so secretly.
Here is another example from the same source. There was lately a
general report, brought to the notice of Peter the Judge in Boltingen, that
thirteen infants had been devoured in the State of Berne; and the public
justice exacted full vengeance on the murderers. And when Peter asked one of
the captive witches in what manner they ate children, she replied: “This is
the manner of it. We set our snares chiefly for unbaptized children, and
even for those that have been baptized, especially when they have not been
protected by the sign of the Cross and prayers” (Reader, notice that, at the
devil's command, they take the unbaptized chiefly, in order that they may
not be baptized), “and with our spells we kill them in their cradles or even
when they are sleeping by their parents' side, in such a way that they
afterwards are thought to have been overlain or to have died some other
natural death. Then we secretly take them from their graves, and cook them
in a cauldron, until the whole flesh comes away from the bones to make a
soup which may easily be drunk. Of the more solid matter we make an unguent
which is of virtue to help us in our arts and pleasures and our
transportations; and with the liquid we fill a flask or skin, whoever drinks
from which, with the addition of a few other ceremonies, immediately
acquires much knowledge and becomes a leader in our sect.”
Here is another very clear and distinct example. A young man and his
wife, both witches, were imprisoned in Berne; and the man, shut up by
himself apart from her in a separate tower, said: “If I could obtain pardon
for my sins, I would willingly declare all that I know about witchcraft; for
I see that I ought to die.” And when he was told by the learned clerks who
were there that he could obtain complete pardon if he truly repented, he
joyfully resigned himself to death, and laid bare the method by which he had
first been infected with his heresy. “The following,” he said, “is the
manner in which I was seduced. It is first necessary that, on a Sunday
before the consecration of Holy Water, the novice should enter the church
with the masters, and there in their presence deny Christ, his Faith,
baptism, and the whole Church. And then he must pay homage to the Little
Master, for so and not otherwise do they call the devil.” Here it is to be
noted that this method agrees with those that have been recounted; for it is
immaterial whether the devil is himself present or not, when homage is
offered to him. For this he does in his cunning, perceiving the temperament
of the novice, who might be frightened by his actual presence into
retracting his vows, whereas he would be more easily persuaded to consent by
those who are known to him. And therefore they call him the Little Master
when he is absent, that through seeming disparagement of his Master the
novice may feel less fear. “And then he drinks from the skin, which has been
mentioned, and immediately feels within himself a knowledge of all our arts
and an understanding of our rites and ceremonies. And in this manner was I
seduced. But I believe my wife to be so obstinate that she would rather go
straight to the fire than confess the smallest part of the truth; but, alas!
we are both guilty.” And as the young man said, so it happened in every
respect. For the young man confessed and was seen to die in the greatest
contrition; but the wife, though convicted by witnesses, would not confess
any of the truth, either under torture or in death itself; but when the fire
had been prepared by the gaoler, cursed him in the most terrible words, and
so was burned. And from these examples their method of initiation in solemn
conclave is made clear.
The other private method is variously performed. For sometimes when
men or women have been involved in some bodily or temporal affliction, the
devil comes to them speaking to them in person, and at times speaking to
them through the mouth of someone else; and he promises that, if they will
agree to his counsels, he will do for them whatever they wish. But he starts
from small things, as was said in the first chapter, and leads gradually to
the bigger things. We could mention many examples which have come to our
knowledge in the Inquisition, but, since this matter presents no difficulty,
it can briefly be included with the previous matter.
A Few Points are to be Noticed in the Explanation of their Oath of Homage.
Now there are certain points to be noted concerning the homage which
the devil exacts, as, namely, for what reason and in what different ways he
does this. It is obvious that his principal motive is to offer the greater
offence to the Divine Majesty by usurping to himself a creature dedicated to
God, and thus more certainly to ensure his disciple's future damnation,
which is his chief object. Nevertheless, it is often found by us that he has
received such homage for a fixed term of years at the time of the profession
of perfidy; and sometimes he exacts the profession only, postponing the
homage to a later day.
And let us declare that the profession consists in a total or
partial abnegation of the Faith: total, as has been said before, when the
Faith is entirely abjured; partial, when the original pact makes it
incumbent on the witch to observe certain ceremonies in opposition to the
decrees of the Church, such as fasting on Sundays, eating meat on Fridays,
concealing certain crimes at confession, or some such profane thing. But let
us declare that homage consists in the surrender of body and soul.
And we can assign four reasons why the devil requires the practice
of such things. For we showed in the First Part of this treatise, when we
examined whether devils could turn the minds of men to love or hatred, that
they cannot enter the inner thoughts of the heart, since this belongs to God
alone. But the devil can arrive at a knowledge of men's thoughts by
conjecture, as will be shown later. Therefore, if that cunning enemy sees
that a novice will be hard to persuade, he approaches her gently, exacting
only small things that he may gradually lead her to greater things.
Secondly, it must be believed that there is some diversity among
those who deny the Faith, since some do so with their lips but not in their
heart, and some both with their lips and in their heart. Therefore the
devil, wishing to know whether their profession comes from the heart as well
as from the lips, sets them a certain period, so that he may understand
their minds from their works and behaviour.
Thirdly, if after the lapse of a set time he find that she is less
willing to perform certain practices, and is bound to him only by word but
not in her heart, he presumes that the Divine Mercy has given her the
guardianship of a good Angel, which he knows to be of great power. Then he
casts her off, and tries to expose her to temporal afflictions, so that he
gain some profit from her despair.
The truth of this is clear. For if it is asked why some witches will
not confess the truth under even the greatest tortures, while other readily
confess their crimes when they are questioned (and some of them, after they
have confessed, try to kill themselves by hanging), the reason is as
follows. It may truly be said that, when it is not due to a Divine impulse
conveyed through a holy Angel that a witch is made to confess the truth and
abandon the spell of silence, then it is due to the devil whether she
preserves silence of confesses her crimes. The former is the case with those
whom he knows to have denied the Faith both with their lips and in their
hearts, and also to have given him their homage; for he is sure of their
constancy. But in the latter case he withdraws his protection, since he
knows that they are of no profit to him.
We have often learned from the confessions of those whom we have
caused to be burned, that they have not been willing agents of witchcraft.
And they have not said this in the hope of escaping damnation, for its truth
is witnessed by the blows and stripes which they have received from devils
when they have been unwilling to perform their orders, and we have often
seen their swollen and livid faces. Similarly, after they have confessed
their crimes under torture they always try to hang themselves; and this we
know for a fact; for after the confession of their crimes, guards are
deputed to watch them all the time, and even then, when the guards have been
negligent, they have been found hanged with their shoe-laces or garments.
For, as we have said, they devil causes this, lest they should obtain pardon
through contrition or sacramental confession; and those whose hearts he
cannot seduce from finding grace with God, he tries to lead into despair
through worldly loss and a horrible death. However, through the great grace
of God, as it is pious to believe, they can obtain forgiveness by true
contrition and pure confession, when they have not been willing
participators in those foul and filthy practices.
This is exemplified by certain events which took place hardly three
years ago in the dioceses of Strasburg and Constance, and in the towns of
Hagenau and Ratisbon. For in the first town one hanged herself with a
trifling and flimsy garment. Another, named Walpurgis, was notorious for her
power of preserving silence, and used to teach other women how to achieve a
like quality of silence by cooking their first-born sons in an oven. Many
such examples are to our hand, as they are also in the case of others burned
in the second town, some of which will be related.
And there is a forth reason why the devil exacts a varying degree of
homage, making it relatively small in some cases because he is more skilful
than Astronomers in knowing the length if human life, and so can easily fix
a term which he knows will be preceded by death, or can, in the manner
already told, forestall natural death with some accident.
All this, in short, can be shown by the actions and behaviour of
witches. But first we can deduce the astuteness of the devil in such things.
For according to S. Augustine in the de Natura Daemonis seven reasons are
assigned why devils can conjecture probable future events, though they
cannot know them certainly. The first is that they have a natural subtlety
in their understanding, by which they arrive at their knowledge without the
process of reasoning which is necessary for us. Secondly, by their long
experience and by revelation of supernal spirits, they know more than we do.
For S. Isidore says that the Doctors have often affirmed that devils derive
their marvellous cunning from three sources, their natural subtlety, their
long experience, and the revelation of supernal spirits. The third reason is
their rapidity of motion, by which they can with miraculous speed anticipate
in the West things which are happening in the East. Fourthly, just as they
are able, with God's permission, to cause disease and famines, so also they
can predict them. Fifthly, they can more cunningly read the signs of death
than a physician can by looking at the urine or feeling the pulse. For just
as a physician sees signs in a sick man which a layman would not notice, so
the devil sees what no man can naturally see. Sixthly, they can by signs
which proceed from a man's mind conjecture more astutely than the wisest men
what is or will be in that man's mind. For they know what impulses, and
therefore what actions, will probably follow. Seventhly, they understand
better than men the acts and writings of the Prophets, and, since on these
much of the future depends, they can foretell from them much that will
happen. Therefore it is not wonderful that they can know the natural term of
a man's life; though it is different in the case of the accidental term when
a witch is burned; for this the devil ultimately causes when, as has been
said, he finds a witch reluctant, and fears for her conversion; whereas he
protects even up to their natural death others whom he knows to be his
willing agents.
Let us give examples of both these cases, which are known to us.
There was in the diocese of Basel, in a town called Oberweiler situated on
the Rhine, an honest parish priest, who fondly held the opinion, or rather
error, that there was no witchcraft in the world, but that it only existed
in the imagination of men who attributed such things to witches. And God
wished so to purge him of this error that he might even be made aware of the
practice of devils in setting a term to the lives of witches. For as he was
hastening to cross a bridge, on some business that he had to do, he met a
certain old woman in his hurry, and would not give way to her, but pressed
on so that he thrust the old woman into the mud. She indignantly broke into
a flood of abuse, and said to him, “Father, you will not cross with
impunity.” And though he took small notice of those words, in the night,
when he wished to get out of his bed, he felt himself bewitched below the
waist, so that he always had to be supported by the arms of other men when
he wished to go to the church; and so he remained for three years, under the
care of his own mother. After that time the old woman fell sick, the hag
whom he had always suspected as being the cause of his witchcraft, owing to
the abusive words with which she had threatened him; and it happened that
she sent to him to hear her confession. And though the priest angrily said,
“Let her confess to the devil her master,” yet, at the instance of his
mother, he went to the house supported by two servants, and sat at the head
of the bed where the witch lay. And the two servants listened outside the
window, so eager were they to know whether she would confess that she had
bewitched the priest. Now it happened that, though she made no mention in
her confession of having been the cause of his malady, after the confession
was finished, she said, “Father, do you know who bewitched you?” And when he
gently answered that he did not, she added, “You suspect me, and with
reason; for know that I brought it upon you for this reason,” explaining as
we have already told. And when he begged to be liberated, she said, “Lo! the
set time has come, and I must die; but I will so cause it that in a few
days, after my death, you will be healed.” And so it happened. For she died
at the time fixed by the devil, and within thirty days the priest found
himself completely healed in one night. The name of that priest is Father
Hässlin, and he lives yet in the diocese of Strasburg.
Similarly in the diocese of Basel, in the village called Buchel,
near the town of Gewyll, this happened. A certain woman was taken, and
finally burned, who for six years had had an Incubus devil, even when she
was lying in bed by the side of her husband. And this she did three times a
week, on Sundays, Tuesdays, and Thursdays, and on some of the other more
holy nights. But the homage she had given to the devil was of such a sort
that she was bound to dedicate herself body and soul to him for ever, after
seven years. But God provided mercifully: for she was taken in the sixth
year and condemned to the fire, and having truly and completely confessed,
is believed to have obtained pardon from God. For she went most willingly to
her death, saying that she would gladly suffer an even more terrible death,
if only she could be set free from and escape the power of the devil.
Chapter III How they are Transported from Place to Place.
And now we must consider their ceremonies and in what manner they
proceed in their operations, first in respect of their actions towards
themselves and in their own persons. And among their chief operations are
being bodily transported from place to place, and to practise carnal
connexion with Incubus devils, which we shall treat of separately, beginning
with their bodily vectification. But here it must be noted that this
transvection offers a difficulty, which has often been mentioned, arising
from one single authority, where it is said: It cannot be admitted as true
that certain wicked women, perverted by Satan and seduced by the illusions
and phantasms of devils, do actually, as they believe and profess, ride in
the night-time on certain beasts with Diana, a goddess of the Pagans, or
with Herodias and an innumerable multitude of women, and in the untimely
silence of night pass over immense tracts of land, and have to obey her in
all things as their Mistress, etc. Wherefore the priest of God ought to
preach to the people that this is altogether false, and that such phantasms
are sent not by God, but by an evil Spirit to confuse the minds of the
faithful. For Satan himself transforms himself into various shapes and
forms; and by deluding in dreams the mind which he holds captive, leads it
through devious ways, etc.
And there are those who, taking their example from S. Germain and a
certain other man who kept watch over his daughter to determine this matter,
sometimes preach that this is an altogether impossible thing; and that it is
indiscreet to ascribe to witches and their operations such levitations, as
well as the injuries which happen to men, animals, and the fruits of the
earth; since just as they are the victims of phantasy in their
transvections, so also are they deluded in the matter of the harm they wreak
on living creatures.
But this opinion was refuted as heretical in the First Question; for
it leaves out of account the Divine permission with regard to the devil's
power, which extends to even greater things than this: and it is contrary to
the meaning of Sacred Scripture, and has caused intolerable damage to Holy
Church, since now for many years, thanks to this pestiferous doctrine,
witches have remained unpunished, because the secular courts have lost their
power to punish them. Therefore the diligent reader will consider what was
there set down for the stamping out of that opinion, and will for the
present note how they are transported, and in what ways this is possible, of
which some examples will be adduced.
It is shown in various ways that they can be bodily transported; and
first, from the operations of other Magicians. For if they could not be
transported, it would either be because God does not permit it, or because
the devil cannot do this since it is contrary to nature. It cannot be for
the first reason, for both greater and less things can be done by the
permission of God; and greater things are often done both to children and
men, even to just men confirmed in grace.
For when it is asked whether substitutions of children can be
affected by the work of devils, and whether the devil can carry a man from
place to place even against his will; to the first question the answer is,
Yes. For William of Paris says in the last part of his De Uniuerso:
Substitutions of children are, with God's permission, possible, so that the
devil can affect a change of the child or even a transformation. For such
children are always miserable and crying; and although four or five mothers
could hardly support enough milk for them, they never grow fat, yet are
heavy beyond the ordinary. But this should neither be affirmed nor denied to
women, on account of the great fear which it may cause them, but they should
be instructed to ask the opinion of learned men. For God permits this on
account of the sins of the parents, in that sometimes men curse their
pregnant wives, saying, May you be carrying a devil! or some such thing. In
the same way impatient women often say something of the sort. And many
examples have been given by other men, some of them pious men.
For Vincent of Beauvais (Spec. Hist., XXVI, 43) related a story told
by S. Peter Damian of a five-year-old son of a nobleman, who was for the
time living in a monastery; and one night he was carried out of the
monastery into a locked mill, where he was found in the morning. And when he
was questioned, he said that he had been carried by some men to a great
feast and bidden to eat; and afterwards he was put into the mill through the
roof.
And what of those Magicians whom we generally call Necromancers, who
are often carried through the air by devils for long distances? And
sometimes they even persuade others to go with them on a horse, which is not
really a horse but a devil in that form, and, as they say, thus warn their
companions not to make the sign of the Cross.
And though we are two who write this book, one of us has very often
seen and known such men. For there is a man who was once a scholar, and is
now believed to be a priest in the diocese of Freising, who used to say that
at one time he had been bodily carried through the air by a devil, and taken
to the most remote parts.
There lives another priest in Oberdorf, a town near Landshut, who
was at that time a friend of that one of us, who saw with his own eyes such
a transportation, and tells how the man was borne on high with arms
stretched out, shouting but not whimpering. And the cause, as he tells it,
was as follows. A number of scholars had met together to drink beer, and
they all agreed that the one who fetched the beer should not have to pay
anything. And so one of them was going to fetch the beer, and on opening the
door saw a thick cloud before the grunsel, and returning in terror told his
companions why he would not go for the drink. Then that one of them who was
carried away said angrily: “Even if the devil were there, I shall fetch the
drink.” And, going out, he was carried through the air in the sight of all
the others.
And indeed it must be confessed that such things can happen not only
to those who are awake, but also to men who are asleep; namely, they can be
bodily transported through the air while they are fast asleep.
This is clear in the case of certain men who walk in their sleep on
the roofs of houses and over the highest buildings, and no one can oppose
their progress either on high or below. And if they are called by their own
names by the other bystanders, they immediately fall crashing to the ground.
Many think, and not without reason, that this is devils' work. For
devils are of many different kinds, and some, who fell from the lower choir
of Angels, are tortured as if for smaller sins with lighter punishments as
well as the punishment of damnation which they must suffer eternally. And
these cannot hurt anybody, at least not seriously, but for the most part
carry out only practical jokes. And others are Incubi or Succubi, who punish
men in the night, defiling them in the sin of lechery. It is not wonderful
if they are given also to horse-play such as this.
The truth can be deduced from the words of Cassian, Collationes I,
where he says that there is no doubt that there are as many different
unclean spirits as there are different desires in men. For it is manifest
that some of them, which the common people call Fauns, and we call Trolls,
which abound in Norway, are such buffoons and jokers that they haunt certain
places and roads and, without being able to do any hurt to those who pass
by, are content with mocking and deluding them, and try to weary them rather
than hurt them. And some of them only visit men with harmless nightmares.
But others are so furious and truculent that they are not content to afflict
with an atrocious dilation the bodies of those whom they inflate, but even
come rushing from on high and hasten to strike them with the most savage
blows. Our author means that they do not only possess men, but torture them
horribly, as did those which are described in S. Matthew viii.
From this we can conclude, first that it must not be said that
witches cannot be locally transported because God does not permit it. For if
He permits it in the case of the just and innocent, and of other Magicians,
how should He not in the case of those who are totally dedicated to the
devil? And we say with all reverence: Did not the devil take up Our Saviour,
and carry Him up to a high place, as the Gospel testifies?
Neither can the second argument of our opponents be conceded, that
the devil cannot do this thing. For it has already been shown that he has so
great natural power, exceeding all corporeal power, that there is no earthly
power that can be compared with him; as it is said: “There is no power on
earth that can be compared with him,” etc. Indeed the natural power or
virtue which is in Lucifer is so great that there is none greater among the
good Angels in Heaven. For just as he excelled all the Angels in his nature,
and not his nature, but only his grace, was diminished by his Fall, so that
nature still remains in him, although it is darkened and bound. Wherefore
the gloss on that “There is no power on earth” says: Although he excels all
things, yet he is subject to the merits of the Saints.
Two objections which someone may bring forward are not valid. First,
that man's soul could resist him, and that the text seems to speak of one
devil in particular, since it speaks in the singular, namely Lucifer. And
because it was he who tempted Christ in the wilderness, and seduced the
first man, he is now bound in chains. And the other Angels are not so
powerful, since he excels them all. Therefore the other spirits cannot
transport wicked men through the air from place to place.
These arguments have no force. For, to consider the Angels first,
even the least Angel is incomparably superior to all human power, as can be
proved in many ways. First, a spiritual is stronger than a corporeal power,
and so is the power of an Angel, or even of the soul, greater than that of
the body. Secondly, as to the soul; every bodily shape owes its
individuality to matter, and, in the case of human beings, to the fact that
a soul informs it; but immaterial forms are absolute intelligences, and
therefore have an absolute and more universal power. For this reason, the
soul when joined to the body cannot in this way suddenly transfer its body
locally or raise it up in the air; although it could easily do so, with
God's permission, if it were separate from its body. Much more, then, is
this possible to an entirely immaterial spirit, such as a good or bad Angel.
For a good Angel transported Habacuc in a moment from Judaea to Chaldaea.
And for this reason it is concluded that those who by night are carried in
their sleep over high buildings are not carried by their own souls, nor by
the influence of the stars, but by some mightier power, as was shown above.
Thirdly, it is the nature of the body to be moved, as to place,
directly by a spiritual nature; and, as Aristotle says, Physics, VIII, local
motion is the first of bodily motions; and he proves this by saying that
local motion is not intrinsically in the power of any body as such, but is
due to some exterior force.
Wherefore it is concluded, not so much from the holy Doctors as from
the Philosophers, that the highest bodies, that is, the stars, are moved by
spiritual essences, and by separate Intelligences which are good both by
nature and in intention. For we see that the soul is the prime and chief
cause of local motion in the body.
It must be said, therefore, that neither in its physical capacity
nor in that of its soul can the human body resist being suddenly transported
from place to place, with God's permission, by a spiritual essence good both
in intention and by nature, when the good, who are confirmed in grace, are
transported; or by an essence good by nature, but not good in intention,
when the wicked are transported. Any who wish may refer to S. Thomas in
three articles in Part I, question 90, and again in his question concerning
Sin, and also in the Second Book of Sentences, dist. 7, on the power of
devils over bodily effects.
Now the following is their method of being transported. They take
the unguent which, as we have said, they make at the devil's instruction
from the limbs of children, particularly of those whom they have killed
before baptism, and anoint with it a chair or a broomstick; whereupon they
are immediately carried up into the air, either by day or by night, and
either visibly or, if they wish, invisibly; for the devil can conceal a body
by the interposition of some other substance, as was shown in the First Part
of the treatise where we spoke of the glamours and illusions caused by the
devil. And although the devil for the most part performs this by means of
this unguent, to the end that children should be deprived of the grace of
baptism and of salvation, yet he often seems to affect the same transvection
without its use. For at times he transports the witches on animals, which
are not true animals but devils in that form; and sometimes even without any
exterior help they are visibly carried solely by the operation of the
devil's power.
Here is an instance of a visible transportation in the day-time. In
the town of Waldshut on the Rhine, in the diocese of Constance, there was a
certain witch who was so detested by the townsfolk that she was not invited
to the celebration of a wedding which, however, nearly all the other
townsfolk were present. Being indignant because of this, and wishing to be
revenged, she summoned a devil and, telling him the cause of her vexation,
asked him to raise a hailstorm and drive all the wedding guests from their
dancing; and the devil agreed, and raising her up, carried her through the
air to a hill near the town, in the sight of some shepherds. And since, as
she afterwards confessed, she had no water to pour into the trench (for
this, as we shall show, is the method they use to raise hailstorms), she
made a small trench and filled it with her urine instead of water, and
stirred it with her finger, after their custom, with the devil standing by.
Then the devil suddenly raised that liquid up and sent a violent storm of
hailstones which fell only on the dancers and townsfolk. And when they had
dispersed and were discussing among themselves the cause of that storm, the
witch shortly afterwards entered the town; and this greatly aroused their
suspicions. But when the shepherds had told what they had seen, their
suspicions became almost a certainty. So she was arrested, and confessed
that she had done this thing because she had not been invited to the
wedding: and for this, and for many other witchcrafts which she had
perpetrated, she was burned.
And since the public report of this sort of transvection is
continually being spread even among the common people, it is unnecessary to
add further proof of it here. But we hope that this will suffice to refute
those who either deny altogether that there are such transvections, or try
to maintain that they are only imaginary or phantastical. And, indeed, it
would be a matter of small importance if such men were left in their error,
were it not that this error tends to the damage of the Faith. For notice
that, not content with that error, they do not fear to maintain and publish
others also, to the increase of witches and the detriment of the Faith. For
they assert that all the witchcraft which is truly and actually ascribed to
witches as instruments of the devil is only so ascribed in imagination and
illusion, as if they were really harmless, just as their transvection is
only phantastic. And for this reason many witches remain unpunished, to the
great dispraise of the Creator, and to their own most heavy increase.
The arguments on which they base their fallacy cannot be conceded.
For first they advance the chapter of the Canon (Episcopi, 26, q. 5), where
it is said that witches are only transported in imagination; but who is so
foolish as to conclude from this that they cannot also be bodily
transported? Similarly at the end of that chapter it is set down that
whoever believes that a man can be changed for the better or the worse, or
can be transformed into another shape, is to be thought worse than an
infidel or a pagan; but who could conclude from this that men cannot be
transformed into beasts by a glamour, or that they cannot be changed from
health to sickness and from better to worse? They who so scratch at the
surface of the words of the Canon hold an opinion which is contrary to that
of all the holy Doctors, and, indeed, against the teaching of the Holy
Scripture.
For the contrary opinion is abundantly proved by what has been
written in various places in the First Part of this treatise; and it is
necessary to study the inner meaning of the words of the Canon. And this was
examined in the First Question of the First Part of the treatise, in
refuting the second of three errors which are there condemned, and where it
is said that four things are to be preached to the people. For they are
transported both bodily and phantastically, as is proved by their own
confessions, not only of those who have been burned, but also of others who
have returned to penitence and the Faith.
Among such there was the woman in the town of Breisach whom we asked
whether they could be transported only in imagination, or actually in the
body; and she answered that it was possible in both ways. For if they do not
wish to be bodily transferred, but want to know all that is being done in a
meeting of their companions, then they observe the following procedure. In
the name of all the devils they lie down to sleep on their left side, and
then a sort of bluish vapour comes from their mouth, through which they can
clearly see what is happening. But if they wish to be bodily transported,
they must observe the method which has been told.
Besides, even if that Canon be understood in its bare meaning
without any explanation, who is so dense as to maintain on that account that
all their witchcraft and injuries are phantastic and imaginary, when the
contrary is evident to the senses of everybody? Especially since there are
many species of superstition, namely, fourteen; among which the species of
witches holds the highest degree in spells and injuries, and the species of
Pythoness, to which they can be reduced, which is only able to be
transported in imagination, holds the lowest degree.
And we do not concede that their error can be substantiated by the
Legends of S. Germain and certain others. For it was possible for the devils
to lie down themselves by the side of the sleeping husbands, during the time
when a watch was being kept on the wives, just as if they were sleeping with
their husbands. And we do not say that this was done for any reverence felt
for the Saint; but the case is put that the opposite of what is set down in
the Legend may not be believed to be impossible.
In the same way all other objections can be answered: that it is
found that some witches are transported only in imagination, but that it is
also found in the writings of the Doctors that many have been bodily
transported. Whoever wishes may refer to Thomas of Brabant in his book about
Bees, and he will find many wonderful things concerning both the imaginary
and the bodily transvection of men.
Chapter IV Here follows the Way whereby Witches copulate with those Devils
known as Incubi.
As to the method in which witches copulate with Incubus devils, six
points are to be noted. First, as to the devil and the body which he
assumes, of what element it is formed. Second, as to the act, whether it is
always accompanied with the injection of semen received from some other man.
Third, as to the time and place, whether one time is more favourable than
another for this practice. Fourth, whether the act is visible to the women,
and whether only those who were begotten in this way are so visited by
devils. Fifth, whether it applies only to those who were offered to the
devil at birth by midwives. Sixth, whether the actual venereal pleasure is
greater or less in this act. And we will speak first of the matter and
quality of the body which the devil assumes.
It must be said that he assumes an aerial body, and that it is in
some respects terrestrial, in so far as it has an earthly property through
condensation; and this is explained as follows. The air cannot of itself
take definite shape, except the shape of some other body in which it is
included. And in that case it is not bound by its own limits, but by those
of something else; and one part of the air continues into the next part.
Therefore he cannot simply assume an aerial body as such.
Know, moreover, that the air is in every way a most changeable and
fluid matter: and a sign of this is the fact that when any have tried to cut
or pierce with a sword the body assumed by a devil, they have not been able
to; for the divided parts of the air at once join together again. From this
it follows that air is in itself a very competent matter, but because it
cannot take shape unless some other terrestrial matter is joined with it,
therefore it is necessary that the air which forms the devil's assumed body
should be in some way inspissated, and approach the property of the earth,
while still retaining its true property as air. And devils and disembodied
spirits can effect this condensation by means of gross vapours raised from
the earth, and by collecting them together into shapes in which they abide,
not as defilers of them, but only as their motive power which give to that
body the formal appearance of life, in very much the same way as the soul
informs the body to which it is joined. They are, moreover, in these assumed
and shaped bodies like a sailor in a ship which the wind moves.
So when it is asked of what sort is the body assumed by the devil,
it is to be said that with regard to its material, it is one thing to speak
of the beginning of its assumption, and another thing to speak of its end.
For in the beginning it is just air; but in the end it is inspisated air,
partaking of some of the properties of the earth. And all this the devils,
with God's permission, can do of their own nature; for the spiritual nature
is superior to the bodily. Therefore the bodily nature must obey the devils
in respect of local motion, though not in respect of the assumption of
natural shapes, either accidental or substantial, except in the case of some
small creatures (and then only with the help of some other agent, as has
been hinted before). But as to local motion, no shape is beyond their power;
thus they can move them as they wish, in such circumstances as they will.
From this there may arise an incidental question as to what should
be thought when a good or bad Angel performs some of the functions of life
by means of true natural bodies, and not in aerial bodies; as in the case of
Balaam's ass, through which the Angel spoke, and when the devils take
possession of bodies. It is to be said that those bodies are not called
assumed, but occupied. See S. Thomas, II. 8, Whether Angels assume bodies.
But let us keep strictly to our argument.
In what way is it to be understood that devils talk with witches,
see them, hear them, eat with them, and copulate with them? And this is the
second part of this first difficulty.
For the first, it is to be said that three things are required for
true conversation: namely, lungs to draw in the air; and this is not only
for the sake of producing sound, but also to cool the heart; and even mutes
have this necessary quality.
Secondly, it is necessary that some percussion be made of a body in
the air, as a greater or less sound is made when one beats wood in the airs,
or rings a bell. For when a substance that is susceptible to sound is struck
by a sound-producing instrument, it gives out a sound according to its size,
which is received in the air and multiplied to the ears of the hearer, to
whom, if he is far off, it seems to come through space.
Thirdly, a voice is required; and it may be said that what is called
Sound in inanimate bodies is called Voice in living bodies. And here the
tongue strikes the respirations of air against an instrument or living
natural organ provided by God. And this is not a bell, which is called a
sound, whereas this is a voice. And this third requisite may clearly be
exemplified by the second; and I have set this down that preachers may have
a method of teaching the people.
And fourthly, it is necessary that he who forms the voice should
mean to express by means of that voice some concept of the mind to someone
else, and that he should himself understand what he is saying; and so manage
his voice by successively striking his teeth with his tongue in his mouth,
by opening and shutting his lips, and by sending the air struck in his mouth
into the outer air, that in this way the sound is reproduced in order in the
ears of the hearer, who then understands his meaning.
To return to the point. Devils have no lungs or tongue, though they
can show the latter, as well as teeth and lips, artificially made according
to the condition of their body; therefore they cannot truly and properly
speak. But since they have understanding, and when they wish to express
their meaning, then, by some disturbance of the air included in their
assumed body, not of air breathed in and out as in the case of men, they
produce, not voices, but sounds which have some likeness to voices, and send
them articulately through the outside air to the ears of the hearer. And
that the likeness of a voice can be made without respiration of air is clear
from the case of other animals which do not breathe, but are said to made a
sound, as do also certain other instruments, as Aristotle says in the de
Anima. For certain fishes, when they are caught, suddenly utter a cry
outside the water, and die.
All this is applicable to what follows, so far as the point where we
treat of the generative function, but not as regards good Angels. If anyone
wishes to inquire further into the matter of devils speaking in possessed
bodies, he may refer to S. Thomas in the Second Book of Sentences, dist. 8,
art. 5. For in that case they use the bodily organs of the possessed body;
since they occupy those bodies in respect of the limits of their corporeal
quantity, but not in respect of the limits of their essence, either of the
body or of the soul. Observe a distinction between substance and quantity,
or accident. But this is impertinent.
For now we must say in what manner they see and hear. Now sight is
of two kinds, spiritual and corporeal, and the former infinitely excels the
latter; for it can penetrate, and is not hindered by distance, owing to the
faculty of light of which it makes use. Therefore it must be said that in no
way does an Angel, either good or bad, see with the eyes of its assumed
body, nor does it use any bodily property as it does in speaking, when it
uses the air and the vibration of the air to produce sound which becomes
reproduced in the ears of the hearer. Wherefore their eyes are painted eyes.
And they freely appear to men in these likenesses that they may manifest to
them their natural properties and converse with them spiritually by these
means.
For with this purpose the holy Angels have often appeared to the
Fathers at the command of God and with His permission. And the bad angels
manifest themselves to wicked men in order that men, recognizing their
qualities, may associate themselves with them, here in sin, and elsewhere in
punishment.
S. Dionysius, at the end of his Celestial Hierarchy, says: In all
parts of the human body the Angel teaches us to consider their properties:
concluding that since corporeal vision is an operation of the living body
through a bodily organ, which devils lack, therefore in their assumed
bodies, just as they have the likeness of limbs, so that have the likeness
of their functions.
And we can speak in the same way of their hearing, which is far
finer than that of the body; for it can know the concept of the mind and the
conversation of the soul more subtly than can a man by hearing the mental
concept through the medium of spoken words. See S. Thomas, the Second Book
of Sentences, dist. 8. For if the secret wishes of a man are read in his
face, and physicians can tell the thoughts of the heart from the heart-beats
and the state of the pulse, all the more can such things be known by devils.
And we may say as to eating, that in the complete act of eating
there are four processes. Mastication in the mouth, swallowing into the
stomach, digestion in the stomach, and fourthly, metabolism of the necessary
nutriment and ejection of what is superflous. All Angels can perform the
first two processes fo eating in their assumed bodies, but not the third and
fourth; but instead of digesting and ejecting they have another power by
which the food is suddenly dissolved in the surrounding matter. In Christ
the process of eating was in all respects complete, since He had the
nutritive and metabolistic powers; not, be it said, for the purpose of
converting food into His own body, for those power were, like His body,
glorified; so that the food was suddenly dissolved in His body, as when one
throws water on to fire.
How in Modern Time Witches perform the Carnal Act with Incubus Devils,
and how they are Multiplied by this Means.
But no difficulty arises out of what has been said, with regard to
our principal subject, which is the carnal act which Incubi in an assumed
body perform with witches: unless perhaps anyone doubts whether modern
witches practise such abominable coitus; and whether witches had their
origin in this abomination.
In answering these two doubts we shall say, as to the former of
them, something of the activities of the witches who lived in olden times,
about 1400 years before the Incarnation of Our Lord. It is, for example,
unknown whether they were addicted to these filthy practises as modern
witches have been since that time; for so far as we know history tells us
nothing on this subject. But no one who reads the histories can doubt that
there have always been witches, and that by their evil works much harm has
been done to men, animals, and the fruits of the earth, and that Incubus and
Succubus devils have always existed; for the traditions of the Canons and
the holy Doctors have left and handed down to posterity many things
concerning them through many hundreds of years. Yet there is this
difference, that in times long past the Incubus devils used to infest women
against their wills, as is often shown by Nider in his Formicarius, and by
Thomas of Brabant in his book on the Universal Good, or on Bees.
But the theory that modern witches are tainted with this sort of
diabolic filthiness is not substantiated only in our opinion, since the
expert testimony of the witches themselves has made all these things
credible; and that they do not now, as in times past, subject themselves
unwillingly, but willingly embrace this most foul and miserable servitude.
For how many women have be left to be punished by secular law in various
dioceses, especially in Constance and the town of Ratisbon, who have been
for many years addicted to these abominations, some from their twentieth and
some from their twelfth or thirteenth year, and always with a total or
partial abnegation of the Faith? All the inhabitants of those places are
witnesses of it. For without reckoning those who secretly repented, and
those who returned to the Faith, no less than forty-eight have been burned
in five years. And there was no question of credulity in accepting their
stories because they turned to free repentance; for they all agreed in this,
namely, that there were bound to indulge in these lewd practices in order
that the ranks of their perfidy might be increased. But we shall treat of
these individually in the Second Part of this work, where their particular
deeds are described; omitting those which came under the notice of our
colleague the Inquisitor of Como in the County of Burbia, who in the space
of one year, which was the year of grace 1485, caused forty-one witches to
be burned; who all publicly affirmed, as it is said, that they had practised
these abominations with devils. Therefore this matter is fully substantiated
by eye-witnesses, by hearsay, and the testimony of credible witnesses.
As for the second doubt, whether witches had their origin from these
abominations, we may say with S. Augustine that it is true that all the
superstitious arts had their origin in a pestilent association of men with
devils. For he says so in his work On the Christian Doctrine: All this sort
of practices, whether of trifling or of noxious superstition, arose from
some pestilent association of men with devils, as though some pact of
infidel and guileful friendship had been formed, and they are all utterly to
be repudiated. Notice here that it is manifest that, as there are various
kinds of superstition or magic arts, and various societies of those who
practise them; and as among the fourteen kinds of that art the species of
witches is the worst, since they have not a tacit but an overt and expressed
pact with the devil, and more than this, have to acknowledge a form of
devil-worship through abjuring the Faith; therefore it follows that witches
hold the worst kind of association with devils, with especial reference to
the behaviour of women, who always delight in vain things.
Notice also S. Thomas, the Second Book of Sentences (dist. 4, art.
4), in the solution of an argument, where he asks whether those begotten in
this way by devils are more powerful than other men. He answers that this is
the truth, basing his belief not only on the text of Scripture in Genesis
vi: And the same became the mighty men which were of old; but also on the
following reason. Devils know how to ascertain the virtue in semen: first,
by the temperament of him from whom the semen is obtained; secondly, by
knowing what woman is most fitted for the reception of that semen; thirdly,
by knowing what constellation is favourable to that corporeal effect; and we
may add, fourthly, from their own words we learn that those whom they beget
have the best sort of disposition for devil's work. When all these causes so
concur, it is concluded that men born in this way are powerful and big in
body.
Therefore, in return to the question whether witches had their
origin in these abominations, we shall say that they originated from some
pestilent mutual association with devils, as is clear from our first
knowledge of them. But no one can affirm with certainty that they did not
increase and multiply by means of these foul practices, although devils
commit this deed for the sake not of pleasure but of corruption. And this
appears to be the order of the process. A Succubus devil draws the semen
from a wicked man; and if he is that man's own particular devil, and does
not wish to make himself an Incubus to a witch, he passes that semen on to
the devil deputed to a woman or witch; and this last, under some
constellation that favours his purpose that the man or woman so born should
be strong in the practice of witchcraft, becomes the Incubus to the witch.
And it is no objection that those of whom the text speaks were not
witches but only giants and famous and powerful men; for, as was said
before, witchcraft was not perpetuated in the time of the law of Nature,
because of the recent memory of the Creation of the world, which left no
room for Idolatry. But when the wickedness of man began to increase, the
devil found more opportunity to disseminate this kind of perfidy.
Nevertheless, it is not to be understood that those who were said to be
famous men were necessarily so called by reason of their good virtues.
Whether the Relations of an Incubus Devil with a Witch are always
accompanied by the Injection of Semen.
To this question it is answered that the devil has a thousand ways
and means of inflicting injury, and from the time of his first Fall has
tried to destroy the unity of the Church, and in every way to subvert the
human race. Therefore no infallible rule can be stated as to this matter,
but there is this probable distinction: that a witch is either old and
sterile, or she is not. And if she is, then he naturally associates with the
witch without the injection of semen, since it would be of no use, and the
devil avoids superfluity in his operations as far as he can. But if she is
not sterile, he approaches her in the way of carnal delectation which is
procured for the witch. And should be disposed to pregnancy, then if he can
conveniently possess the semen extracted from some man, he does not delay to
approach her with it for the sake of infecting her progeny.
But it is asked whether he is able to collect the semen emitted in
some nocturnal pollution in sleep, just as he collects that which is spent
in the carnal act, the answer is that it is probably that he cannot, though
others hold a contrary opinion. For it must be noted that, as has been said,
the devils pay attention to the generative virtue of the semen, and such
virtue is more abundant and better preserved in semen obtained by the carnal
act, being wasted in the semen that is due to nocturnal pollutions in sleep,
which arises only from the superfluity of the humours and is not emitted
with so great generative virtue. Therefore it is believed that he does not
make use of such semen for the generation of progeny, unless perhaps he
knows that the necessary virtue is present in that semen.
But this also cannot altogether be denied, that even in the case of
a married witch who has been impregnated by her husband, the devil can, by
the commixture of another semen, infect that which has been conceived.
Whether the Incubus operates more at one Time than another: and similarly of
the Place.
To the question whether the devil observes times and places it is to
be said that, apart from his observation of certain times and constellations
when his purpose is to effect the pollution of the progeny, he also observes
certain times when his object is not pollution, but the causing of venereal
pleasure on the part of the witch; and these are the most sacred times of
the whole year, such as Christmas, Easter, Pentacost, and other Feast days.
And the devils do this for three reasons. First, that in this way
witches may become imbued not only with the vice of perfidy through apostasy
from the Faith, but also with that of Sacrilege, and that the greater
offence may be done to the Creator, and the heavier damnation rest upon the
souls of the witches.
The second reason is that when God is so heavily offended, He allows
them greater power of injuring even innocent men by punishing them either in
their affairs or their bodies. For when it is said: “The son shall not bear
the iniquity of the father,” etc., this refers only to eternal punishment,
for very often the innocent are punished with temporal afflictions on
account of the sins of others. Wherefore in another place God says: “I am a
mighty and jealous God, visiting the sins of the fathers unto the third and
fourth generation.” Such punishment was exemplified in the children of the
men of Sodom, who were destroyed for their fathers' sins.
The third reason is that they have greater opportunity to observe
many people, especially young girls, who on Feast Days are more intent on
idleness and curiosity, and are therefore more easily seduced by old
witches. And the following happened in the native country of one of us
Inquisitors (for there are two of us collaborating in this work).
A certain young girl, a devout virgin, was solicited one Feast Day
by an old woman to go with her upstairs to a room where there were some very
beautiful young men. And when she consented, and as they were going upstairs
with the old woman leading the way, she warned the girl not to make the sign
of the Cross. And though she agreed to this, yet she secretly crossed
herself. Consequently it happened that, when they had gone up, the virgin
saw no one, because the devils who were there were unable to show themselves
in assumed bodies to that virgin. And the old woman cursed her, saying:
Depart in the name of all the devils; why did you cross yourself? This I had
from the frank relation of that good and honest maiden.
A fourth reason can be added, namely, that they can in this way more
easily seduce men, by causing them to think that if God permits such things
to be done at the most holy times, it cannot be such a heavy sin as if He
did not permit them at such times.
With regard to the question whether the favour one place more than
another, it is to be said that it is proved by the words and actions of
witches that they are quite unable to commit these abominations in sacred
places. And in this can be seen the efficacy of the Guardian Angels, that
such places are reverenced. And further, witches assert that they never have
any peace except at the time of Divine Service when they are present in the
church; and therefore they are the first to enter and the last to leave the
church. Nevertheless, they are bound to observe certain other abominable
ceremonies at the command of the devils, such as to spit on the ground at
the Elevation of the Host, or to utter, either verbally or otherwise, the
filthiest thoughts, as: I wish you were in such or such a place. This matter
is touched upon in the Second Part.
Whether Incubi and Succubi Commit this Act Visibly on the part of the Witch,
or on the part of Bystanders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
As to whether they commit these abominations together visibly or
invisibly, it is to be said that, in all the cases of which we have had
knowledge, the devil has always operated in a form visible to the witch; for
there is no need for him to approach her invisibly, because of the pact of
federation with him that has been expressed. But with regard to any
bystanders, the witches themselves have often been seen lying on their backs
in the fields or the woods, naked up to the very navel, and it has been
apparent from the disposition of those limbs and members which pertain to
the venereal act and orgasm, as also from the agitation of their legs and
thighs, that, all invisibly to the bystanders, they have been copulating
with Incubus devils; yet sometimes, howbeit this is rare, at the end of the
act a very black vapour, of about the stature of a man, rises up into the
air from the witch. And the reason is that that Schemer knows that he can in
this way seduce or pervert the minds of girls or other men who are standing
by. But of these matters, and how they have been performed in many places,
in the town of Ratisbon, and on the estate of the nobles of Rappolstein, and
in certain other countries, we will treat in the Second Part.
It is certain also that the following has happened. Husbands have
actually seen Incubus devils swiving their wives, although they have thought
that they were not devils but men. And when they have taken up a weapon and
tried to run them through, the devil has suddenly disappeared, making
himself invisible. And then their wives have thrown their arms around them,
although they have sometimes been hurt, and railed at their husbands,
mocking them, and asking them if they had eyes, or whether they were
possessed of devils.
That Incubus Devils do not Infest only those Women who have been Begotten by
their Filthy Deeds or those who have been Offered to them by Midwives, but
All Indifferently with Greater or Less Venereal Delectation.
In conclusion, finally, it can be said that these Incubus devils
will not only infest those women who have been generated by means of such
abominations, or those who have been offered to them by midwives, but that
they try with all their might, by means of witches who are bawds or hot
whores, to seduce all the devout and chaste maidens in that whole district
or town. For this is well known by the constant experience of Magistrates;
and in the town of Ratisbon, when certain witches were burned, these
wretches affirmed, before their final sentence, that they had been commanded
by their Masters to use ever endeavour to effect the subversion of pious
maids and widows.
If it be asked: Whether the venereal delectation is greater or less
with the Incubus devils in assumed bodies than it is in like circumstances
with men in a true physical body, we may say this: It seems that, although
the pleasure should naturally be greater when like disports with like, yet
that cunning Enemy can so bring together the active and passive elements,
not indeed naturally, but in such qualities of warmth and temperament, that
he seems to excite no less degree of concupiscence. But this matter will be
discussed more fully later with reference to the qualities of the feminine
sex.
Chapter V Witches commonly perform their Spells through the Sacraments of
the Church. And how they Impair the Powers of Generation, and how they may
Cause other Ills to happen to God's Creatures of all kinds. But herein we
except the Question of the Influence of the Stars.
But now there are several things to be noted concerning their
methods of bringing injury upon other creatures of both sexes, and upon the
fruits of the earth: first with regard to men, then with regard to beasts,
and thirdly with regard to the fruits of the earth. And as to men, first,
how they can cast an obstructive spell on the procreant forces, and even on
the venereal act, so that a woman cannot conceive, or a man cannot perform
the act. Secondly, how that act is obstructed sometimes with regard to one
woman but not another. Thirdly, how they take away the virile member as
though it were altogether torn away from the body. Fourthly, if it is
possible to distinguish whether any of the above injuries have been caused
by a devil on his own account, or if it has been through the agency of a
witch. Fifthly, how witches change men and women into beasts by some
prestige or glamour. Sixthly, how witch midwives in various ways kill that
which has been conceived in the mother's womb; and when they do not do this,
offer the children to devils. And lest these things should seem incredible,
they have been proved in the First Part of this work by questions and
answers to arguments; to which, if necessary, the doubtful reader may turn
back for the purpose of investigating the truth.
For the present our object is only to adduce actual facts and
examples which have been found by us, or have been written by others in
detestation of so great a crime, to substantiate those former arguments in
case they should be difficult for anyone to understand; and, by those things
that are related in this Second Part, to bring back to the Faith and away
from their error those who think there are no witches, and that no
witchcraft can be done in the world.
And with regard to the first class of injuries with which they
afflict the human race, it is to be noted that, apart from the methods by
which they injure other creatures, they have six ways of injuring humanity.
And one is, to induce an evil love in a man for a woman, or in a woman for a
man. The second is to plant hatred or jealousy in anyone. The third is to
bewitch them so that a man cannot perform the genital act with a woman, or
conversely a woman with a man; or by various means to procure an abortion,
as has been said before. The fourth is to cause some disease in any of the
human organs. The fifth, to take away life. The sixth, to deprive them of
reason.
In this connexion it should be said that, saving the influence of
the stars, the devils can by their natural power in every way cause real
defects and infirmities, and this by their natural spiritual power, which is
superior to any bodily power. For no one infirmity is quite like another,
and this is equally true of natural defects in which there is no physical
infirmity. Therefore they proceed by different methods to cause each
different infirmity or defect. And of those we shall give instances in the
body of this work as the necessity arises.
But first, lest the reader's mind should be kept in any doubt as to
why they have no power to alter the influence of the stars, we shall say
that there is a threefold reason. First, the stars are above them even in
the region of punishment, which is the region of the lower mists; and this
by reason of the duty which is assigned to them. See the First Part,
Question II, where we dealt with Incubus and Succubus devils.
The second reason is that the stars are governed by the good Angels.
See many places concerning the Powers which move the stars, and especially
S. Thomas, part I, quest. 90. And in this matter the Philosophers agree with
the Theologians.
Thirdly, it is on account of the general order and common good of
the Universe. which would suffer general detriment if evil spirits were
allowed to cause any alteration in the influence of the stars. Wherefore
those changes which were miraculously caused in the Old or New Testament
were done by God through the good Angels; as, for example, when the sun
stood still for Joshua, or when it went backward for Hezekiah, or when it
was supernaturally darkened at the Passion of Christ. But in all other
matters, with God's permission, they can work their spells, either the
devils themselves, or devils through the agency of witches; and, in fact, it
is evident that they do so.
Secondly, it is to be noted that in all their methods of working
injury they nearly always instruct witches to make their instruments of
witchcraft by means of the Sacraments or sacramental things of the Church,
or some holy thing consecrated to God: as when they sometimes place a waxen
image under the Altar-cloth, or draw a thread through the Holy Chrism, or
use some other consecrated thing in such a way. And there are three reasons
for this.
For a similar reason they are wont to practise their witchcraft at
the more sacred time of the year, especially at the Advent of Our Lord, and
at Christmas. First, that by such means they may make men guilty of not only
perfidy, but also sacrilege, by contaminating whatever is divine in them;
and that so they may the more deeply offend God their Creator, damn their
own souls, and cause many more to rush into sin.
Secondly, that God, being so heavily offended by men, may grant the
devil greater power of tormenting them. For so says S. Gregory, that in His
anger He sometimes grants the wicked their prayers and petitions, which He
mercifully denies to others. And the third reason is that, by the seeming
appearance of good, he may more easily deceive certain simple men, who think
that they have performed some pious act and obtained the grace from God,
whereas they have only sinned the more heavily.
A fourth reason also can be added touching the more sacred seasons
and the New Year. For, according to S. Augustine, there are other mortal
sins besides adultery by which the observance of the Festivals may be
infringed. Superstition, moreover, and witchcraft arising from the most
servile operations of the devil are contrary to the reverence that is due to
God. Therefore, as has been said, he causes a man to fall more deeply, and
the Creator is the more offended.
And of the New Year we may say, according to S. Isidore, Etym. VIII.
2, that Janus, from whom the month of January is named, which also begins on
the Day of Circumcision, was an idol with two faces, as if one were the end
of the old year and the other the beginning of the new, and, as it were, the
protector and auspicious author of the coming year. And in honour of him, or
rather of the devil in the form of that idol, the Pagans made much
boisterous revelry, and were very merry among themselves, holding various
dances and feasts. And concerning these Blessed Augustine makes mention in
many places, and gives a very ample description of them in his Twenty-sixth
Book.
And now bad Christians imitate these corruptions, turning them to
lasciviousness when the run about at the time of Carnival with masks and
jests and other superstitions. Similarly witches use these revelries of the
devil for their own advantage, and work their spells about the time of the
New Year in respect of the Divine Offices and Worship; as on S. Andrew's Day
and at Christmas.
And now, as to how they work their witchcraft, first by means of the
Sacraments, and then by means of sacramental objects, we will refer to a few
known facts, discovered by us in the Inquisition.
In a town which it is better not to names, for the sake of charity
and expediency, when a certain witch received the Body of Our Lord, she
suddenly lowered her head, as is the detestable habit of women, placed her
garment near her mouth, and taking the Body of the Lord out of her mouth,
wrapped it in a handkerchief; and afterwards, at the suggestion of the
devil, placed it in a pot in which there was a toad, and hid it in the
ground near her house by the storehouse, together with several other things,
by means of which she had to work her witchcraft. But with the help of God's
mercy this great crime was detected and brought to light. For on the
following day a workman was going on his business near that house, and heard
a sound like a child crying; and when he had come near to the stone under
which the pot had been hidden, he heard it much more clearly, and thinking
that some child have been buried there by the woman, went to the Mayor or
chief magistrate, and told him what had been done, as he thought, by the
infanticide. And the Mayor quickly send his servants and found it to be as
he had said. But they were unwilling to exhume the child, thinking it wiser
to place a watch and wait to see if any woman came near the place; for they
did not know that it was the Lord's Body that was hidden there. And so it
happened that the same witch came to the place, and secretly hid to pot
under her garment before their eyes. And when she was taken and questioned,
she discovered her crime, saying that the Lord's Body had been hidden in the
pot with a toad, so that by means of their dust she might be able to cause
injuries at her will to men and other creatures.
It is also to be noted that when witches communicate they observe
this custom, that, when they can do so without being noticed, they receive
the Lord's Body under their tongue instead of on the top. And as far as can
be seen, the reason is that they never wish to receive any remedy that might
counteract their abjuration of the Faith, either by Confession or by
receiving the Sacrament of the Eucharist; and secondly, because in this way
it is easier for them to take the Lord's Body out of their mouths so that
they can apply it, as has been said, to their own uses, to the greater
offence of the Creator.
For this reason all rectors of the Church and those who communicate
the people are enjoined to take the utmost care when they communicate women
that the mouth shall be well open and the tongue thrust well out, and their
garments be kept quite clear. And the more care is taken in this respect,
the more witches become known by this means.
Numberless other superstitions they practise by means of sacramental
objects. Sometimes they place a waxen image or some aromatic substance under
the altar cloth, as we said before, and then hide it under the threshold of
a house, so that the person for whom it is placed there may be bewitched on
crossing over it. Countless instances could be brought forward, but these
minor sorts of spells are proved by the greater.
Chapter VI How Witches Impede and Prevent the Power of Procreation.
Concerning the method by which they obstruct the procreant function
both in men and animals, and in both sexes, the reader my consult that which
has been written already on the question, Whether devils can through witches
turn the minds of men to love or hatred. There, after the solutions of the
arguments, a specific declaration is made relating to the method by which,
with God's permission, they can obstruct the procreant function.
But it must be noted that such obstruction is caused both
intrinsically and extrinsically. Intrinsically they cause it in two ways.
First, when they directly prevent the erection of the member which is
accomodated to fructification. And this need not seem impossible, when it is
considered that they are able to vitiate the natural use of any member.
Secondly, when they prevent the flow of the vital essences to the members in
which resides the motive force, closing up the seminal ducts so that it does
not reach the generative vessels, or so that it cannot be ejaculated, or is
fruitlessly spilled.
Extrinsically they cause it at times by means of images, or by the
eating of herbs; sometimes by other external means, such as cocks'
testicles. But it must not be thought that it is by the virtue of these
things that a man is made impotent, but by the occult power of devils'
illusions witches by this means procure such impotence, namely, that they
cause man to be unable to copulate, or a woman to conceive.
And the reason for this is that God allows them more power over this
act, by which the first sin was disseminated, than over other human actions.
Similarly they have more power over serpents, which are the most subject to
the influence of incantations, than over other animals. Wherefore it has
often been found by us and other Inquisitors that they have caused this
obstruction by means of serpents or some such things.
For a certain wizard who had been arrested confessed that for many
years he had by witchcraft brought sterility upon all the men and animals
which inhabited a certain house. Moreover, Nider tells of a wizard named
Stadlin who was taken in the diocese of Lausanne, and confessed that in a
certain house where a man and his wife were loving, he had by his witchcraft
successively killed in the woman's womb seven children, so that for many
years the woman always miscarried. And that, in the same way, he had caused
that all the pregnant cattle and animals of the house were during those
years unable to give birth to any live issue. And when he was questioned as
to how he had done this, and what manner of charge should be preferred
against him, he discovered his crime, saying: I put a serpent under the
threshold of the outer door of the house; and if this is removed, fecundity
will be restored to the inhabitants. And it was as he said; for though the
serpent was not found, having been reduced to dust, the whole piece of
ground was removed, and in the same year fecundity was restored to the wife
and to all the animals.
Another instance occurred hardly four years ago in Reichshofen.
There was a most notorious witch, who could at all times and by a mere touch
bewitch women and cause an abortion. Now the wife of a certain nobleman in
that place had become pregnant and had engaged a midwife to take care of
her, and had been warned by the midwife not to go out of the castle, and
above all to be careful not to hold any speech or conversation with that
witch. After some weeks, unmindful of that warning, she went out of the
castle to visit some women who were met together on some festive occasion;
and when she had sat down for a little, the witch came, and, as if for the
purpose of saluting her, placed both her hands on her stomach; and suddenly
she felt the child moving in pain. Frightened by this, she returned home and
told the midwife what had happened. Then the midwife exclaimed: “Alas! you
have already lost your child.” And so it proved when her time came; for she
gave birth, not to an entire abortion, but little by little to separate
fragments of its head and feet and hands. And the great affliction was
permitted by God to punish her husband, whose duty it was to bring witches
to justice and avenge their injuries to the Creator.
And there was in the town of Mersburg in the diocese of Constance a
certain young man who was bewitched in such a way that he could never
perform the carnal act with any woman except one. And many have heard him
tell that he had often wished to refuse that woman, and take flight to other
lands; but that hitherto he had been compelled to rise up in the night and
to come very quickly back, sometimes over land, and sometimes through the
air as if he were flying.
Chapter VII How, as it were, they Deprive Man of his Virile Member.
We have already shown that they can take away the male organ, not
indeed by actually despoiling the human body of it, in the manner which we
have already declared. And of this we shall instance a few examples.
In the town of Ratisbon a certain young man who had an intrigue with
a girl, wishing to leave her, lost his member; that is to say, some glamour
was cast over it so that he could see or touch nothing but his smooth body.
In his worry over this he went to a tavern to drink wine; and after he had
sat there for a while he got into conversation with another woman who was
there, and told her the cause of his sadness, explaining everything, and
demonstrating in his body that it was so. The woman was astute, and asked
whether he suspected anyone; and when he named such a one, unfolding the
whole matter, she said: “If persuasion is not enough, you must use some
violence, to induce her to restore to you your health.” So in the evening
the young man watched the way by which the witch was in the habit of going,
and finding her, prayed her to restore to him the health of his body. And
when she maintained that she was innocent and knew nothing about it, he fell
upon her, and winding a towel tightly about her neck, choked her, saying:
“Unless you give me back my health, you shall die at my hands.” Then she,
being unable to cry out, and growing black, said: “Let me go, and I will
heal you.” The young man then relaxed the pressure of the towel, and the
witch touched him with her hand between the thighs, saying: “Now you have
what you desire.” And the young man, as he afterwards said, plainly felt,
before he had verified it by looking or touching, that his member had been
restored to him by the mere touch of the witch.
A similar experience is narrated by a certain venerable Father from
the Dominican House of Spires, well known in the Order for the honest of his
life and for his learning. “One day,” he says, “while I was hearing
confessions, a young man came to me and, in the course of his confession,
woefully said that he had lost his member. Being astonished at this, and not
being willing to give it easy credence, since the opinion of the wise it is
a mark of light-heartedness to believe too easily, I obtained proof of it
when I saw nothing on the young man's removing his clothes and showing the
place. Then, using the wisest counsel I could, I asked whether he suspected
anyone of having so bewitched him. And the young man said that he did
suspect someone, but that she was absent and living in Worms. Then I said:
‘I advise you to go to her as soon as possible and try your utmost to soften
her with gentle words and promises’; and he did so. For he came back after a
few days and thanked me, saying that he was whole and had recovered
everything. And I believed his words, but again proved them by the evidence
of my eyes.”
But there are some points to be noted for the clearer understanding
of what has already been written concerning this matter. First, it must in
no way be believed that such members are really torn right away from the
body, but that they are hidden by the devil through some prestidigitory art
so that they can be neither seen nor felt. And this is proved by the
authorities and by argument; although is has been treated of before, where
Alexander of Hales says that a Prestige, properly understood, is an illusion
of the devil, which is not caused by any material change, but exists only in
the perceptions of him who is deluded, either in his interior or exterior
senses.
With reference to these words it is to be noted that, in the case we
are considering, two of the exterior senses, namely, those of sight and
touch, are deluded, and not the interior senses, namely, common-sense,
fancy, imagination, thought, and memory. (But S. Thomas says they are only
four, as has been told before, reckoning fancy and imagination as one; and
with some reason, for there is little difference between imagining and
fancying. See S. Thomas, I, 79.) And these senses, and not only the exterior
senses, are affected when it is not a case of hiding something, but the
causing something to appear to a man either when he is aware or asleep.
As when a man who is awake sees things otherwise than as they are;
such as seeing someone devour a horse with its rider, or thinking he sees a
man transformed into a beast, or thinking that he is himself a beast and
must associate with beasts. For then the exterior senses are deluded and are
employed by the interior senses. For by the power of devils, with God's
permission, mental images long retained in the treasury of such images,
which is the memory, are drawn out, not from the intellectual understanding
in which such images are stored, but from the memory, which is the
repository of mental images, and is situated at the back of the head, and
are presented to the imaginative faculty. And so strongly are they impressed
on that faculty that a man has an inevitable impulse to imagine a horse or a
beast, when the devil draws from the memory an image of a horse or a beast;
and so he is compelled to think that he sees with his external eyes such a
beast when there is actually no such beast to see; but it seems to be so by
reason of the impulsive force of the devil working by means of those images.
And it need not seem wonderful that devils can do this, when even a
natural defect is able to effect the same result, as is shown in the case of
frantic and melancholy men, and in maniacs and some drunkards, who are
unable to discern truly. For frantic men think they see marvellous things,
such as beasts and other horrors, when in actual fact they see nothing. See
above, in the question, Whether witches can turn the minds of men to love
and hatred; where many thing are noted.
And, finally, the reason is self-evident. For since the devil has
power over inferior things, except only the soul, therefore he is able to
effect certain changes in those things, when God allows, so that things
appear to be otherwise than they are. And this he does, as I have said,
either by confusing and deluding the organ of sight so that a clear thing
appears cloudy; just as after weeping, owing to the collected humours, the
light appears to different from what it was before. Or by operating on the
imaginative faculty by a transmutation of mental images, as has been said.
Or by some agitation of various humours, so that matters which are earthy
and dry seem to be fire or water: as some people make everyone in the house
strip themselves naked under the impression that they are swimming in water.
It may be asked further with reference to the above method of
devils, whether this sort of illusions can happen indifferently to the good
and to the wicked: just as other bodily infirmities can, as will be shown
later, be brought by witches even upon those who are in a state of grace. To
this question, following the words of Cassian in his Second Collation of the
Abbot Sirenus, we must answer that they cannot. And from this it follows
that all who are deluded in this way are presumed to be in deadly sin. For
he says, as is clear from the words of S. Antony: The devil can in no way
enter the mind or body of any man, nor has the power to penetrate into the
thoughts of anybody, unless such a person has first become destitute of all
holy thoughts, and is quite bereft and denuded of spiritual contemplation.
This agrees with Boethius where he says in the Consolation of
Philosophy: We had given you such arms that, if you had not thrown them
away, you would have been preserved from infirmity.
Also Cassian tells in the same place of two Pagan witches, each in
his own way malicious, who by their witchcraft sent a succession of devils
into the cell of S. Antony for the purpose of driving him from there by
their temptations; being infected with hatred for the holy man because a
great number of people visited him every day. And though these devils
assailed him with the keenest of spurs to his thoughts, yet he drove them
away by crossing himself on the forehead and breast, and by prostrating
himself in earnest prayer.
Therefore we may say that all who are so deluded by devils, not
reckoning any other bodily infirmities, are lacking in the gift of divine
grace. And so it is said in Tobias vi: The devil has power against those who
are subject to their lusts.
This is also substantiated by what we told in the First Part in the
question, Whether witches can change men into the shapes of beasts. For we
told of a girl who was turned into a filly, as she herself and, except S.
Macharius, all who looked at her were persuaded. But the devil could not
deceive the senses of the holy man; and when she was brought to him to be
healed, he saw true woman and not a horse, while on the other hand everyone
else exclaimed that she seemed to be a horse. And the Saint, by his prayers,
freed her and the others from that illusion, saying that this had happened
to her because she had not attended sufficiently to holy things, nor used as
she should Holy Confession and the Eucharist. And for this reason, because
in her honesty she would not consent to the shameful proposal of a young
man, who had caused a Jew who was a witch to bewitch the girl so that, by
the power of the devil, he turned her into a filly.
We may summarize our conclusions as follows: - Devils can, for their
profit and probation, injure the good in their fortunes, that is, in such
exterior things as riches, fame, and bodily health. This is clear from the
case of the Blessed Job, who was afflicted by the devil in such matters. But
such injuries are not of their own causing, so that they cannot be led or
driven into any sin, although they can be tempted both inwardly and
outwardly in the flesh. But the devils cannot afflict the good with this
sort of illusions, either actively or passively.
Not actively, but deluding their senses as they do those of others
who are not in a state of grace. And not passively, by taking away their
male organs by some glamour. For in these two respects they could never
injure Job, especially in regard to the venereal act; for he was of such
continence that he was able to say: I have vowed a vow with my eyes that I
shall never think about a virgin, and still less about another man's wife.
Nevertheless the devil knows that he has great power over sinners (see S.
Luke xi: When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in
peace).
But it may be asked, as to illusions in respect of the male organ,
whether, granted that the devil cannot impose this illusion on those in a
state of grace in a passive way, he cannot still do so in an active sense:
the argument being that the man in a state of grace is deluded because he
ought to see the member in its right place, when he who thinks it has been
taken away from him, as well as other bystanders, does not see in in its
place; but if this is conceded, it seems to be contrary to what has been
said. It can be said that there is not so much force in the active as in the
passive loss; meaning by active loss, not his who bears the loss, but his
who sees the loss from without, as is self-evident. Therefore, although a
man in a state of grace can se the loss of another, and to that extent the
devil can delude his senses; yet he cannot passively suffer such loss in his
own body, as, for example, to be deprived of his member, since he is not
subject to list. In the same way the converse is true, as the Angel said to
Tobias: Those who are given to lust, the devil has power over them.
And what, then, is to be thought of those witches who in this way
sometimes collect male organs in great numbers, as many as twenty or thirty
members together, and put them in a bird's nest, or shut them up in a box,
where they move themselves like living members, and eat oats and corn, as
has been seen by many and is a matter of common report? It is to be said
that it is all done by devil's work and illusion, for the senses of those
who see them are deluded in the way we have said. For a certain man tells
that, when he had lost his member, he approached a known witch to ask her to
restore it to him. She told the afflicted man to climb a certain tree, and
that he might take which he liked out of the nest in which there were
several members. And when he tried to take a big one, the witch said: You
must not take that one; adding, because it belongs to a parish priest.
All these things are caused by devils through an illusion or
glamour, in the manner we have said, by confusing the organ of vision by
transmuting the mental images in the imaginative faculty. And it must not be
said that these members which are shown are devils in assumed members, just
as they sometimes appear to witches and men in assumed aerial bodies, and
converse with them. And the reason is that they effect this thing by an
easier method, namely, by drawing out an inner mental image from the
repository of the memory, and impressing it on the imagination.
And if anyone wishes to say that they could go to work in a similar
way, when they are said to converse with witches and other men in assumed
bodies; that is, that they could cause such apparitions by changing the
mental images in the imaginative faculty, so that when men thought the
devils were present in assumed bodies, they were really nothing but an
illusions caused by such a change of the mental images in the inner
perceptions.
It is to be said that, if the devil had no other purpose than merely
to show himself in human form, then there would be no need for him to appear
in an assumed body, since he could effect his purpose well enough by the
aforesaid illusion. But this is not so; for he has another purpose, namely,
to speak and eat with them, and to commit other abominations. Therefore it
is necessary that he should himself be present, placing himself actually in
sight in an assumed body. For, as S. Thomas says, Where the Angel's power
is, there he operates.
And it may be asked, if the devil by himself and without any witch
takes away anyone's virile member, whether there is any difference between
one sort of deprivation and the other. In addition to what has been said in
the First Part of this work on the question, Whether witches can take away a
member, he does actually take it away, and it is actually restored when it
has to be restored. Secondly, as it is not taken away without injury, so it
is not without pain. Thirdly, that he never does this unless compelled by a
good Angel, for by so doing he cuts off a great source of profit to him; for
he knows that he can work more witchcraft on that act than on other human
acts. For God permits him to do more injury to that than to other human
acts, as has been said. But none of the above points apply when he works
through the agency of a witch, with God's permission.
And if it is asked whether the devil is more apt to injure men and
creatures by himself than through a witch, it can be said that there is no
comparison between the two cases. For he is infinitely more apt to do harm
through the agency of witches. First, because he thus gives greater offence
to God, by usurping to himself a creature dedicated to Him. Secondly,
because when God is the more offended, He allows him the more power of
injuring men. And thirdly, for his own gains, which he places in the
perdition of souls.
Chapter VIII Of the Manner whereby they Change Men into the Shapes of
Beasts
But that witches, by the power of devils, change men into the shapes
of beasts (for this is their chief manner of transmutation), although it has
been sufficiently proved in the First Part of the work, Question 10, Whether
witches can do such things: nevertheless, since that question with its
arguments and solutions may be rather obscure to some; especially since no
actual examples are adduced to prove them, and even the method by which they
so transform themselves is not explained; therefore we add the present
exposition by the resolution of several doubts.
And first, that Canon (26, Q. 5, Episcopi) is not to be understood
in this matter in the way in which even many learned men (but would that
their learning were good!) are deceived; who do not fear to affirm publicly
in their sermons that such prestidigitatory transmutations are in no way
possible even by the power of devils. And we have often said that this
doctrine is greatly to the detriment of the Faith, and strengthens the
witches, who rejoice very much in such sermons.
But such preachers, as has been noted, touch only the outer surface,
and fail to reach the inner meaning of the words of the Canon. For when it
says: Whoever believes that any creature can be made, or can be changed for
the better or the worse, or be transformed into any other shape or likeness
except by the Creator Himself Who made all, is without doubt an infidel. . .
.
The reader must here remark two chief things. First, concerning the
words “be made”; and secondly, concerning the words “be transformed into
another likeness.” And as to the first, it is answered that “be made” can be
understood in two ways: namely, as meaning “be created,” or as in the sense
of the natural production of anything. Now in the first sense it belongs
only to God, as is well known, Who in His infinite might can make something
out of nothing.
But in the second sense there is a distinction to be drawn between
creatures; for some are perfect creatures, like a man, and an ass, etc. And
other are imperfect, such as serpents, frogs, mice, etc., for they can also
be generated from putrefaction. Now the Canon obviously speaks only of the
former sort, not of the second; for in the case of the second it can be
proved from what Blessed Albert says in his book On Animals, where he asks:
whether devils can make true animals; and still with this difference, that
they cannot do so in an instant, as God does, but by some motion, however
sudden, as is shown in the case of the Magicians in Exodus vii. The reader
may, if he likes, refer to some of the remarks in the question we have
quoted in the First Part of the work, and in the solution of the first
argument.
Secondly, it is said that they cannot transmute any creature. You
may say that transmutation is of two sorts, substantial and accidental; and
this accidental is again of two kinds, consisting either in the natural form
belonging to the thing which is seen, or in a form which does not belong to
the thing which is seen, but exists only in the organs and perceptions of
him who sees. The Canon speaks of the former, and especially of formal and
actual transmutation, in which one substance is transmuted into another; and
this sort only God can effect, Who is the Creator of such actual substances.
And it speaks also of the second, although the devil can effect that, in so
far as, with God's permission, he causes certain diseases and induces some
appearance on the accidental body. As when a face appears to be leprous, or
some such thing.
But properly speaking it is not such matters that are in question,
but apparitions and glamours, by which things seem to be transmuted into
other likenesses; and we say that the words of the Canon cannot exclude such
transmutations; for their existence is proved by authority, by reason, and
by experience; namely, by certain experiences related by S. Augustine in
Book XVIII, chapter 17, of the De Ciuitate Die, and by the arguments in
explanation of them. For among other prestidigitatory transformations, he
mentions that the very famous Sorceress, Circe, changed the companions of
Ulysses into beasts; and that certain innkeepers' wives had turned their
guests into beasts of burden. He mentions also that the companions of
Diomedes were changed into birds, and for a long time flew about the temple
of Diomedes; and that Praestantius tells it for a fact that his father said
that he had been a packhorse, and had carried corn with other animals.
Now when the companions of Ulysses were changed into beasts, it was
only in appearance, or deception of the eyes; for the animal shapes were
drawn out of the repository or memory of images, and impressed on the
imaginative faculty. And so imaginary vision was caused, and through the
strong impression on the other senses and organs, the beholder thought that
he saw animals, in the manner of which we have already treated. But how
these things can be done by the devil's power without injury will be shown
later.
But when the guests were changed into beasts of burden by the
innkeepers' wives; and when the father of Praestantius thought he was a
packhorse and carried corn; it is to be noted that in these cases there were
three deceptions.
First, that those men were caused by a glamour to seem to be changed
into beasts of burden, and this change was caused in the way we have said.
Second, that devils invisibly bore those burdens up when they were too heavy
to be carried. Third, that those who seemed to others to be changed in shape
seemed also to themselves to be changed into beasts; as it happened to
Nabuchodonosor, who lived for seven years eating straw like an ox.
And as to the comrades of Diomedes being changed into birds and
flying round his temple, it is to be said that this Diomedes was one of the
Greeks who went to the siege of Troy; and when he wished to return home, he
was drowned with his comrades in the sea; and then, at the suggestion of
some idol, a temple was built to him that he might be numbered among the
gods; and for a long time, to keep that error alive, devils in the shape of
birds flew about in place of his companions. Therefore that superstition was
one of the glamours we have spoken of; for it was not caused by the
impression of mental images on the imaginative faculty, but by their flying
in the sight of men in the assumed bodies of birds.
But if it is asked whether the devils could have deluded the
onlookers by the above-mentioned method of working upon the mental images,
and not by assuming aerial bodies like flying birds, the answer is that they
could have done so.
For it was the opinion of some (as S. Thomas tells in the Second
Book of Sentences, dist. 8, art. 2) that no Angel, good or bad, ever assumed
a body; but that all that we read in the Scriptures about their appearances
was caused by a glamour, or by the imaginary vision.
And here the learned Saint notes a difference between a glamour and
imaginary vision. For in a glamour there may be an exterior object which is
seen, but it seems other than it is. But imaginary vision does not
necessarily require an exterior object, but can be caused without that and
only by those inner mental images impressed on the imagination.
So, following their opinion, the comrades of Diomedes were not
represented by devils in the assumed bodies and likeness of birds, but only
by a fantastic and imaginary vision caused by working upon those mental
images, etc.
But the learned Saint condemns this as an erroneous and not a simple
opinion (though, it is piously believed, it is not actually heretical),
although such appearances of good and bad Angels may at times have been
imaginary, with no assumed body. But, as he says, the saints are agreed that
the Angels also appeared to the actual sight, and such appearance was in an
assumed body. And the scriptural text reads more as if it speaks of bodily
appearance than imaginary or prestidigitatory ones. Therefore we can say for
the present concerning any visions like that of the comrades of Diomedes:
that although those comrades could by the devil's work have appeared in the
imaginary vision of the beholders in the manner we have said, yet it is
rather presumed that they were caused to be seen by devils in assumed aerial
bodies like flying birds; or else that other natural birds were caused by
devils to represent them.
Chapter IX How Devils may enter the Human Body and the Head without doing
any Hurt, when they cause such Metamorphosis by Means of Prestidigitation.
Concerning the method of causing these illusory transmutations it
may further be asked: whether the devils are then inside the bodies and
heads of those who are deceived, and whether the latter are to be considered
as possessed by devils; how it can happen without injury to the inner
perceptions and faculties that a mental image is transferred from one inner
faculty to another; and whether or not such work ought to be considered
miraculous.
First we must again refer to a distinction between such illusory
glamours; for sometimes the outer perceptions only are affected, and
sometimes the inner perceptions are deluded and so affect the outer
perceptions.
In the former case the glamour can be caused without the devils'
entering into the outer perceptions, and merely by an exterior illusion; as
when the interposition of some other body, or in some other way; or when he
himself assumes a body and imposes himself on the vision.
But in the latter case it is necessary that he must first occupy the
head and the faculties. And this is proved by authority and by reason.
And it is not a valid objection to say that two created spirits
cannot be in one and the same place, and that the soul pervades the whole of
the body. For on this question there is the authority of S. John Damascene,
when he says: Where the Angel is, there he operates. And S. Thomas, in the
Second Book of Sentences, dist. 7, art. 5, says: All Angels, good and bad,
by their natural power, which is superior to all bodily power, are able to
transmute our bodies.
And this is clearly true, not only by reason of the superior
nobility of their nature, but because the whole mechanism of the world and
all corporeal creatures are administered by Angels; as S. Gregory says in
the 4th Dialogue: In this visible world nothing can be disposed except by an
invisible creature. Therefore all corporeal matters are governed by the
Angels, who are also called, not only by the Holy Doctors but also by all
the Philosophers, the Powers which move the stars. It is clear also from the
fact that all human bodies are moved by their souls, just as all other
matter is moved by the stars and the Powers which move them. Any who wish
may refer to S. Thomas in the First Part, Quest. 90, art. 1.
From this it is concluded that, since devils operates there where
they are, therefore when they confuse the fancy and the inner perceptions
they are existing in them.
Again, although to enter the soul is possible only to God Who
created it, yet devils can, with God's permission, enter our bodies; and
they an then make impressions on the inner faculties corresponding to the
bodily organs. And by those impressions the organs are affected in
proportion as the inner perceptions are affected in the way which has been
shown: that the devil can draw out some image retained in a faculty
corresponding to one of the senses; as he draws from the memory, which is in
the back part of the head, an image of a horse, and locally moves that
phantasm to the middle part of the head, where are the cells of imaginative
power; and finally to the sense of reason, which is in the front of the
head. And he causes such a sudden change and confusion, that such objects
are necessarily thought to be actual things seen with the eyes. This can be
clearly exemplified by the natural defect in frantic men and other maniacs.
But if it is asked how he can do this without causing pain in the
head, the answer is easy. For in the first place he does not cause any
actual physical change in the organs, but only moves the mental images. And
secondly, he does not effect these changes by injecting any active quality
which would necessarily cause pain, since the devil is himself without any
corporeal quality, and can therefore operate without the use of any such
quality. Thirdly, as has been said, he effects these transmutations only by
a local movement from one organ to another, and not by other movements
through which painful transformations are sometimes caused.
And as for the objection that two spirits cannot separately exist in
the same place, and that, since the soul exists in the head, how can a devil
be there also? It is to be said that the soul is thought to reside in the
centre of the heart, in which it communicates with all the members by an
outpouring of life. An example can be taken from a spider, which feels in
the middle of its web when any part of the web is touched.
However, S. Augustine says in his book On the Spirit and Soul, that
it is all in all, and all in every part of the body. Granting that the soul
is in the head, still the devil can work there; for his work is different
from the work of the soul. The work of the soul is in the body, to inform it
and fill it with life; so that it exists not merely locally, but in the
whole matter. But the devil works in such a part and such a place of the
body, effecting his changes in respect of the mental images. Therefore,
since there is no confusion between their respective operations, they can
both exist together in the same part of the body.
There is also the question whether such men are to be considered
obsessed or frenzied, that is, possessed of devils. But this is considered
separately; namely, whether it is possible through the work of witches for a
man to be obsessed with a devil, that is, that the devil should actually and
bodily possess him. And this question is specially discussed in the
following chapter, since it has this special difficulty, namely, whether
this can be caused through the operations of witches.
But as to the question whether the temporal works of witches and
devils are to be considered as miracles or of a miraculous nature; it is to
be said that they are so, in so far as they are beyond the order of created
nature as known to us, and are done by creatures unknown to us. But they are
not properly speaking miracles as are those which are outside the whole of
created nature; as are the miracles of God and the Saints. (See what was
written in the First Part of this work, in the Fifth Question, in the
refutation of the third error.)
But there are those who object that this sort of work must not be
considered miracles, but simply works of the devil; since the purpose of
miracles is the strengthening of the Faith, and they must not be conceded to
the adversary of the Faith. And also because the signs of Antichrist are
called lying signs by the Apostle.
First it is to be said that to work miracles is the gift of freely
given grace. And they can be done by bad men and bad spirits, up to the
limits of the power which is in them.
Wherefore the miracles wrought by the good can be distinguished from
those wrought by the wicked in at least three ways. First, the signs which
are given by the good are done by Divine power in such matters as are beyond
the capacity of their own natural power, such as raising the dead, and
things of that sort, which the devils are not able to accomplish in truth,
but only by an illusion: so Simon Magus moved the head of a dead man; but
such manifestations cannot last long. Secondly, they can be distinguished by
their utility; for the miracles of the good are of a useful nature, as the
healing of sickness, and such things. But the miracles done by witches are
concerned with harmful and idle things; as when they fly in the air, or
benumb the limbs of men, or such things. And S. Peter assigns this
difference in the Itinerarium of Clement.
The third difference relates to the Faith. For the miracles of the
good are ordained for the edification of the Faith and of good living;
whereas the miracles of the wicked are manifestly detrimental to the Faith
and to righteousness.
They are distinguished also by the way in which they are done. For
the good do miracles in a pious and reverent invocation of the Divine Name.
But witches and wicked men work them by certain ravings and invocations of
devils.
And there is no difficulty in the fact that the Apostle called the
works of the devil and Antichrist lying wonders; for the marvels so done by
Divine permission are true in some respects and false in others. They are
true in so far as they are within the limits of the devil's power. But they
are false when he appears to do things which are beyond his power, such as
raising the dead, or making the blind to see. For when he appears to do the
former, he either enters into the dead body or else removes it, and himself
takes its place in an assumed aerial body; and in the latter case he takes
away the sight by a glamour, and then suddenly restores it by taking away
the disability he has caused, not by bringing light to the inner
perceptions, as is told in the legend of Bartholomew. Indeed all the
marvellous works of Antichrist and of witches can be said to be lying signs,
insasmuch as their only purpose is to deceive. See S. Thomas, dist. 8, de
Uirtute Daemonum.
We may also quote here the distinction which is drawn in the
Compendium of Theological Truth between a wonder and a miracle. For in a
miracle four conditions are required: that it should be done by God; that it
should be beyond the existing order of nature; thirdly, that it should be
manifest; and fourthly, that it should be for the corroboration of the
Faith. But since the works of witches fail to fulfil at least the first and
last conditions, therefore they may be called wonderful works, but nor
miracles.
It can also be argued in this way. Although witches' works can in a
sense be said to be miraculous, yet some miracles are supernatural, some
unnatural, and some preternatural. And they are supernatural when they can
be compared with nothing in nature, or in natural power, as when a virgin
gives birth. They are unnatural when they are against the normal course of
nature but do not overstep the limits of nature, such as causing the blind
to see. And they are preternatural when they are done in a manner parallel
to that of nature, as when rods are changed into serpents; for this can be
done naturally also, through long putrefaction on account of seminal
reasons; and thus the works of magicians may be said to be marvellous.
It is expedient to recount an actual example, and then to explain it
step by step. There is a town in the diocese of Strasburg, the name of which
it is charitable and honourable to withhold, in which a workman was one day
chopping some wood to burn in his house. A large cat suddenly appeared and
began to attack him, and when he was driving it off, another even larger one
came and attacked him with the first more fiercely. And when he again tried
to drive them away, behold, three of them together attacked him, jumping up
at his face, and biting and scratching his legs. In great fright and, as he
said, more panic-stricken than he had ever been, he crossed himself and,
leaving his work, fell upon the cats, which were swarming over the wood and
again leaping at his face and throat, and with difficulty drove them away by
beating one on the head, another on the legs, and another on the back. After
the space of an hour, while he was again engaged upon his task, two servants
of the town magistrates came and took him as a malefactor and led him into
the presence of the bailiff or judge. And the judge, looking at him from a
distance, and refusing to hear him, ordered him to be thrown into the
deepest dungeon of a certain tower or prison, where those who were under
sentence of death were placed. The man cried out, and for three days
bitterly complained to the prison guards that he should suffer in that way,
when he was conscious of no crime; but the more the guards tried to procure
him a hearing, the more furious the judge became, expressing in the
strongest terms his indignation that so great a malefactor had not yet
acknowledged his crime, but dared to proclaim his innocence when the
evidence of the facts proved his horrible crime. But although these could
not prevail upon him, yet the judge was induced by the advice of the other
magistrates to grant the man a hearing. So when he was brought out of prison
into the presence of the judge, and the judge refused to look at him, the
poor man threw himself before the knees of the other magistrates, pleading
that he might know the reason for his misfortune; and the judge broke into
these words: You most wicked of men, how can you not acknowledge your crime?
At such a time on such a day you beat three respected matrons of this town,
so that they lie in their beds unable to rise or to move. The poor man cast
his mind back to the events of that day and that hour, and said: Never in
all my life have I struck or beaten a woman, and I can prove by credible
witnesses that at that time on that day I was busy chopping wood; and an
hour afterwards your servants found me still engaged on that task. Then the
judge again exclaimed in a fury: See how he tries to conceal his crime! The
women are bewailing their blows, they exhibit the marks, and publicly
testify that he struck them. Then the poor man considered more closely on
that even, and said: I remember that I struck some creatures at that time,
but they were not women. The magistrates in astonishment asked him to relate
what sort of creatures he had struck; and he told, to their great amazement,
all that had happened, as we have related it. So, understanding that it was
the work of the devil, they released the poor man and let him go away
unharmed, telling him not to speak of this matter to anyone. But it could
not be hidden from those devout persons present who were zealous for the
Faith.
Now concerning this it may be asked, whether the devils appeared
thus in assumed shapes without the presence of the witches, or whether the
witches were actually present, converted by some glamour into the shapes of
those beasts. And in answering this it should be said that, although it was
equally possible for the devils to act in either way, it is rather presumed
that it was done in the second manner. For when the devils attacked the
workman in the shapes of cats, they could suddenly, by local motion through
the air, transfer the women to their houses with the blows which they
received as cats from the workman; and no on doubts that this was because of
a mutual pact formerly made between them. For in the same way they can cause
injury or wound in a person whom they wish to bewitch, by means of
puncturing a painted or molten image which represents the person whom they
wish to injure. Many examples of this could be adduced.
And it cannot be validly objected that perhaps those women who were
so injured were innocent, because according to previously quoted examples it
is shown that injuries may happen even to the innocent, when someone is
unknowingly hurt by a witch by means of an artificial image. The example is
not apposite; for it is one thing to be hurt by a devil through a witch, and
another thing to be hurt by the devil himself without any witch. For the
devil receives blows in the form of an animal, and transfers them to one who
is bound to him by a pact, when it is with such an one's consent that he
acts in this manner in such a shape. Therefore he can in this way hurt only
the guilty who are bound to him by a pact, and never the innocent. But when
devils seek to do injury by means of witches, then, with the permission of
God for the avenging of so great a crime, they often afflict even the
innocent.
Nevertheless, devils at times, with God's permission, in their own
persons hurt even the innocent; and formerly they injured the Blessed Job,
although they were not personally present, nor did the devils make use of
any such illusory apparition as in the example we have quoted, when they
used the phantasm of a cat, an animal which is, in the Scriptures, an
appropriate symbol of the perfidious, just as a dog is the symbol of
preachers; for cats are always setting snares for each other. And the Order
of Preaching Friars was represented in its first Founder by a dog barking
against heresy.
Therefore it is presumed that those three witches attacked the
workman in the second manner, either because the first manner did not please
them so much, or because the second suited more with their curiosity.
And this was the order which they observed. First, they were urged
to do this at the instance of the devils, and not the devils at the instance
of the witches. For so we have often found in their confessions, that at the
instance of devils who constantly spur them on to commit evil, they have to
do more than they would. And it is likely that the witches would not, on
their own account, have thought of attacking the poor man.
And there is no doubt that the reason why the devils urged them to
do this is that they knew well that, when a manifest crime remains
unpunished, God is the more offended, the Catholic Faith is brought into
disrepute, and the number of witches is the more increased. Secondly, having
gained their consent, the devils transported their bodies with that ease
which belongs to a spiritual power over a bodily power. Thirdly, having in
the way which has been told been turned into the forms of beasts by some
glamour, they had to attack the workman; and the devils did not defend them
from the blows, although they could have done so just as easily as they had
transported them; but they permitted them to be beaten, and the one who beat
them to be known, in the knowledge that those crimes would, for the reasons
we have mentioned, remain unpunished by faint-hearted men who had no zeal
for the Faith.
We read also of a certain holy man, who once found the devil
preaching in the form of a devout priest preaching in a church, and knowing
in his spirit that is was the devil, observed his words, whether he was
teaching the people well or ill. And finding him irreproachable and
inveighing against sin, he went up to him at the end of the sermon and asked
him the reason for this. And the devil answered: I preach the truth, knowing
that, because they are hearers of the word only, and not doers, God is the
more offended and my gain is increased.
Chapter X Of the Method by which Devils through the Operations of Witches
sometimes actually possess men.
It has been shown in the previous chapter how devils can enter the
heads and other parts of the body of men, and can move the inner mental
images from place to place. But someone may doubt whether they are able at
the instance of witches to obsess men entirely; or fell some uncertainty
about their various methods of causing such obsession without the instance
of witches. And to clear up these doubts we must undertake three
explanations. First, as to the various methods of possession. Secondly, how
at the instance of witches and with God's permission devils at time possess
men in all those ways. Thirdly, we must substantiate our arguments with
facts and examples.
With references to the first, we must make an exception of that
general method by which the devil inhabits a man in any mortal sin. S.
Thomas, in Book 3, quest. 3, speaks of this method where he considers the
doubt whether the devil always substantially possesses a man when he commits
mortal sin; and the reason for the doubt is that the indwelling Holy Ghost
always forms a man with grace, according to I. Corinthians, iii: Ye are the
temple of God, and the spirit of God dwelleth in you. And, since guilt is
opposed to grace, it would seem that there were opposing forces in the same
place.
And there he proves that to possess a man can be understood in two
ways: either with regard to the soul, or with regard to the body. And in the
first way it is not possible for the devil to possess the soul, since God
alone can enter that; therefore the devil is not in this way the cause of
sin, which the Holy Spirit permits the soul itself to commit; so there is no
similitude between the two.
But as to the body, we may say that the devil can possess a man in
two ways, just as there are two classes of men: those who are in sin, and
those who are in grace. In the first way, we may say that, since a man is by
any mortal sin brought into the devil's service, in so far as the devil
provides the outer suggestion of sin either to the senses or to the
imagination, to that extent he is said to inhabit the character of a man
when he is moved by every stirring temptation, like a ship in the sea
without a rudder.
The devil can also essentially possess a man as is clear in the case
of frantic men. But this rather belongs to the question of punishment than
that of sin, as will be shown; and bodily punishments are not always the
consequence of sin, but are inflicted now upon sinners and now upon the
innocent. Therefore both those who are and those who are not in a state of
grace can, in the depth of the incomprehensible judgement of God, be
essentially possessed by devils. And though this method of possession is not
quite pertinent to our inquire, we have set it down lest it should seem
impossible to anyone that, with God's permission, men should at times be
substantially inhabited by devils at the instance of witches.
We may say, therefore, that just as there are five ways in which
devils by themselves, without witches, can injure and possess men, so they
can also do so in those ways at the instance of witches; since then God is
the more offended, and greater power of molesting men is allowed to the
devil through witches. And the methods are briefly the following, excepting
the fact that they sometimes plague a man through his external possessions:
sometimes they injure men only in their own bodies; sometimes in their and
in their faculties; sometimes they only tempt them inwardly and outwardly;
others they at times deprive of the use of their reason; others they change
into the appearance of irrational beasts. We shall speak of these methods
singly.
But first we shall rehearse five reasons why God allows men to be
possessed, for the sake of preserving a due order in our matter. For
sometimes a man is possessed for his own advantage; sometimes for a slight
sin of another; and sometimes for his own venial sin; sometimes for
another's heavy sin. For all these reasons let no one doubt that God allows
such things to be done by devils at the instance of witches; and it is
better to prove each of them by the Scriptures, rather than by recent
examples, since new things are always strengthened by old examples.
For an example of the first is clearly shown in the Dialogue of
Severus, a very dear disciple of S. Martin, where he tells that a certain
Father of very holy life was so gifted by grace with the power of expelling
devils, that they were put to flight not only by his words, but even by his
letters or his hair-shirt. And since the Father became very famous in the
world, and felt himself tempted with vainglory, although he manfully
resisted that vice, yet, that he might be the more humiliated, he prayed
with his whole heart to God that he might be for five months possessed by a
devil; and this was done. For he was at once possessed and had to be put in
chains, and everything had to applied to him which is customary in the case
of demoniacs. But at the end of the fifth month he was immediately delivered
both from all vainglory and from the devil. But we do not read, nor is it
for the present maintained, that for this reason a man can be possessed by a
devil through the witchcraft of another man; although, as we have said, the
judgements of God are incomprehensible.
For the second reason, when someone is possessed because of the
light sin of another, S. Gregory gives an example. The Blessed Abbot
Eleutherius, a most devout man, was spending the night near a convent of
virgins, who unknown to him ordered to be put by his cell a young boy who
used to be tormented all night by the devil. But on that same night the boy
was delivered from the devil by the presence of the Father. When the Abbot
learned of this, and the boy now being placed in the holy man's monastery,
after many days he began to exult rather immoderately over the boy's
liberation, and said to his brother monks: The devil was playing his pranks
with those Sisters, but he had not presumed to approach this boy since he
came to the servants of God. And behold! the devil at once began to torment
the boy. And by the tears and fasting of the holy man and his brethren he
was with difficulty delivered, but on the same day. And indeed that an
innocent person should be possessed for the slight fault of another is not
surprising when men are possessed by devils for their own light fault, or
for another's heavy sin, or for their own heavy sin, and some also at the
instance of witches.
Cassia, in his First Collation of the Abbot Serenus, gives an
example of how one Moses was possessed for his own venial sin. This Moses,
he says, was a hermit of upright and pious life; but because on one occasion
he engaged in a dispute with the Abbot Macharius, and went a little too far
in the expression of a certain opinion, he was immediately delivered up to a
terrible devil, who caused him to void his natural excrements through his
mouth. And that this scourge was inflicted by God for the sake of purgation,
lest any stain of his momentary fault should remain in him, is clear from
his miraculous cure. For by continual prayers and submission to the Abbot
Macharius, the vile spirit was quickly driven away and departed from him.
A similar case is that related by S. Gregory in his First Dialogue
of the nun who ate a lettuce without having first made the sign of the
Cross, and was set free by the Blessed Father Equitius.
In the same Dialogue St. Gregory tells an example of the fourth
case, where someone in possessed because of the heavy sin of another. The
Blessed Bishop Fortunatus had driven the devil from a possessed man, and the
devil began to walk about the streets of the city in the guise of a pilgrim,
crying out: Oh, the holy man Bishop Fortunatus! See, he has cast me, a
pilgrim, out of my lodging, and I can find no rest anywhere. Then a certain
man sitting with his wife and son invited the pilgrim to lodge with him, and
asking why he had been turned out, was delighted with the derogatory story
of the holy man which the pilgrim had invented. And thereupon the devil
entered his son, and cast him upon the fire, and killed him. And then for
the first time did the unhappy father understand whom he had received as a
guest.
And fifthly, we read many examples of men being possessed for their
own heavy sin, both in the Holy Scripture and in the passions of the Saints.
For in I. Kings xv, Saul was possessed for disobedience to God. And, as we
have said, we have mentioned all these so that it need not seem to anyone
impossible that men should also be possessed because of the crimes of, and
at the instance of, witches. And we shall be able to understand the various
methods of such possession by quoting actual examples.
In the time of Pope Pius II the following was the experience of one
of us two Inquisitors before he entered upon his office in the Inquisition.
A certain Bohemian from the town of Dachov brought his only son, a secular
priest, to Rome to be delivered, because he was possessed. It happened that
I, one of us Inquisitors, went into a refectory, and that priest and his
father came and sat down at the same table with me. We saluted each other,
and talked together, as is customary; and the father kept sighing and
praying Almighty God that his journey might prove to have been successful. I
felt great pity for him, and began to ask what was the reason of his journey
and of his sorrow. Then he, in the hearing of his son who was sitting next
to me at the table, answered: “Alas! I have a son possessed by a devil, and
with great trouble and expense I have brought him here to be delivered.” And
when I asked where the son was, he showed me him sitting by my side. I was a
little frightened, and looked at him closely; and because he took his food
with such modesty, and answered piously to all questions, I began to doubt
that he was not possessed, but that some infirmity had happened to him. Then
the son himself told what had happened, showing how and for how long he had
been possessed, and saying: “A certain witch brought this evil upon me. For
I was rebuking her on some matter concerned with the discipline of the
Church, upbraiding her rather strongly since she was of an obstinate
disposition, when she said that after a few days that would happen to me
which has happened. And the devil which possesses me has told me that a
charm was placed by the witch under a certain tree, and that until it was
removed I could not be delivered; but he would not tell me which was the
tree.” But I would not in the least have believed his words if he had not at
once informed me of the facts of the case. For when I asked him about the
length of the intervals during which he had the use of his reason more than
is usual in the case of persons possessed, he answered: “I am only deprived
of the use of my reason when I wish to contemplate holy things or to visit
sacred places. For the devil specifically told me in his own words uttered
through my mouth that, because he had up to that time been much offended by
my sermons to the people, we would in no way allow me to preach.” For
according to his father, he was a preacher full of grace, and loved by all.
But I, the Inquisitor, wishing for proofs, had him taken for a fortnight and
more to various holy places, and especially to the Church of S. Praxedes the
Virgin, where there is part of the marble pillar to which Our Saviour was
bound when He was scourged, and to the place where S. Peter the Apostle was
crucified; and in all these places he uttered horrible cries while he was
being exorcised, now saying that he wished to come forth, and after a little
maintaining the contrary. And as we have said before, in all his behaviour
he remained a sober priest without any eccentricity, except during the
process of any exorcisms; and when these were finished, and the stole was
taken from his neck, he showed no sign of madness or any immoderate action.
But when he passed any church, and genuflected in honour of the Glorious
Virgin, the devil made him thrust his tongue far out of his mouth; and when
he was asked whether he could not restrain himself from doing this, he
answered: “I cannot help myself at all, for so he uses all my limbs and
organs, my neck, my tongue, and my lungs, whenever he pleases, causing me to
speak or to cry out; and I hear the words as if they were spoken by myself,
but I am altogether unable to restrain them; and when I try to engage in
prayer he attacks me more violently, thrusting out my tongue.” And there was
in the Church of S. Peter a column brought from Solomon's Temple, by virtue
of which many who are obsessed with devils are liberated, because Christ had
stood near it when He preached in the Temple; but even here he could not be
delivered, owing to the hidden purpose of God which reserved another method
for his liberation. For though he remained shut in by the column for a whole
day and night, yet on the following day, after various exorcisms had been
performed upon him, with a great concourse of people standing round, he was
asked by which part of the column Christ had stood; and he bit the column
with his teeth, and, crying out, showed the place, saying: “Here He stood!
Here He stood!” And at last he said, “I will not go forth.” And when he was
asked why, he answered in the Italian tongue (although the poor priest did
not understand that language), They all practise such and such things,
naming the worst vice of lustfulness. And afterwards the priest asked me,
saying, “Father, what did those Italian words mean which came from my
mouth?” And when I told him, he answered, “I heard the words, but I could
not understand them.” Eventually it proved that this demoniac was of that
sort of which the Saviour spoke in the Gospel, saying: This sort goeth not
out save by prayer and fasting. For a venerable Bishop, who had been driven
from his see by the Turks, piously took compassion on him, and by fasting on
bread and water for forty days, and by prayers and exorcisms, at last
through the grace of God delivered him and sent him back to his home
rejoicing.
Now it would be a miracle if anyone in this life could thoroughly
explain in what and in how many ways the devil possesses or injures men: yet
we can say that, leaving out of account his method of injuring men in their
temporal fortunes, there are five ways. For some are affected only in their
own bodies; some both in their bodies and in their inner perceptions; some
only in their inner perceptions; some are so punished at to be at times only
deprived of their reason; and others are turned into the semblance of
irrational beasts. Now the priest we have just mentioned was possessed in
the fourth manner. For he was not touched in his worldly fortunes or in his
own body, as it happened to the Blessed Job, over whom the Scripture clearly
tells us that God gave the devil power, saying to Satan: Behold, all that he
hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand. And this
refers to exterior things. But afterwards He gave him power over his body,
saying: Behold, he is in thine hand; but save his life.
And it can also be said that Job was tormented in the third manner,
that is, in the inner perceptions of his soul as well as his body; for it is
said in Job xii: If it is said to the Lord, My bed will console me, and I
will take comfort to myself on my couch, then Thou wilt terrify me with
dreams, and shake me with the horror of visions: though these dreams were
caused by the devil, according to Nicolas of Lyra and S. Thomas: Thou wilt
terrify me with dreams, which appear to me in sleep, and with visions which
come to me waking by a distortion of my inner perceptions. For the phantasms
which occur to the thoughts in the day-time can become the terror of
sleepers, and such were visited upon Job through the infirmity of his body.
Therefore he was so shut off from all comfort that he saw no remedy or way
of escaping from his misery except in death, and said that he was shaken
with horror. And no one doubts that witches can injure men in these ways
through devils, as will be shown in what follows, how they bring injuries
upon the fortunes of men and upon the bodies of men and animals by means of
hailstorms.
And there is a third way of injuring the body and the inner
perceptions, without taking away the reason, which is shown when witches, as
has been said, so inflame the minds of men with unlawful lust that they are
compelled to travel long distances in the night to go to their mistresses,
being too fast bound in the net of carnal desire.
We may mention an example which is said to have happened in Hesse,
in the diocese of Marburg. A certain priest was possessed, and during an
exorcism the devil was asked for how long he had inhabited that priest. He
answered, For seven years. And when the exorcist objected, But you have
tormented him for hardly three years; where were you for the rest of the
time? He answered, I was hiding in his body. And when he asked in what part
of the body, he answered, Generally in his head. And when he was again asked
where he was when the priest was celebrating the Sacrament, he said, I hid
myself under his tongue. And the other said: Wretch! How were you so bold as
not to flee from the presence of your Creator? Then the devil said: Anyone
may hide under a bridge while a holy man is crossing, as long as he does not
pause in his walk. But with the help of Divine grace the priest was
delivered, whether he told the truth or not; for both he and his father are
liars.
The fourth method applies to the case of the priest who was
liberated in Rome, under the proposition that the devil can enter the body,
but not the soul, which only God can enter. But when I say that the devil
can enter the body, I do not mean that he can occupy the essential limits of
the body.
I will explain this further; and in doing so it will be shown how
devils sometimes substantially occupy a man, and at times deprive him of his
reason. For we may say that the limits of the body can be considered in two
ways: they may be physical or essential limits. Whenever any Angel, good or
bad, works within the physical limits of the body, he enters the body in
such a way as to influence its physical capacities. And in this way the good
Angels cause imaginary visions in the good. But they are never said to enter
into the essence of the body, since they cannot do so, either as part of it
or as a quality of it. Not as a part, for the angelic and the human essence
are entirely different from each other; and not as a quality, as if giving
it its character, for it has its character by creation from God. Wherefore
He alone is able to influence its inner essence, and to preserve it when He
is pleased in His mercy to preserve it.
So we conclude that, speaking of all other perfections in the good
or defects in the wicked, when these are caused by a spirit operating in the
head and its attributes, such a spirit enters into the head within the
physical limits of the physical capacities of the body.
But if the spirit is working upon the soul, then again it works from
the outside, but in various ways. And they are said to work on the soul when
they represent phantasms or shapes to the intellect, and not only to the
common understanding and the outer perceptions. And when bad Angels so
operate, there follow temptations and evil thoughts and affections, caused
by an indirect influence upon the intellect. But good Angels cause phantasms
of revelation which enlighten the understanding. And there is this
difference between them; that good Angels can even directly impress
enlightening fancies upon the intellect; but bad Angels are said not to
enlighten but rather to darken by means of their phantasms, and they cannot
influence the intellect directly, but only indirectly, in so far as the
intellect is bound to take such phantasms into consideration.
But even a good Angel is not said to enter into the soul, although
he enlightens it: similarly a superior Angel is not said to enter into an
inferior, although he enlightens it; but he works only from the outside, and
co-operates in the way we have said. Therefore far less can a bad Angel
enter the soul.
And so the devil occupied the body of the priest in three ways.
First, as he could enter his body within its physical limits, so he occupied
his head by substantially inhabiting it. Secondly, he could extrinsically
work upon his reason. And he could have so tormented him without any
intermission or respite; but we may say that the priest had this gift from
God, that he should not be tormented by the devil without intermission.
Thirdly, that although he was deprived of the power of the sane use of
words, yet he was always conscious of his words, though not of their
meaning. And this differs from the other methods of obsession, for we
generally read that those who are possessed are afflicted by devils without
intermission; as is clear in the case of the lunatic in the Gospel, whose
father said to Jesus: Lord, have mercy on my son, for he is lunatic, and
sore vexed (S. Matthew xvii); and of the woman whom Satan had crippled for
eighteen years, who was bowed together and could in no wise lift herself up
(S. Luke xiii). And in these ways devils can without doubt at the instance
of witches and with God's permission inflict torments.
Chapter XI Of the Method by which they can Inflict Every Sort of Infirmity,
generally Ills of the Graver Kind.
But there is no bodily infirmity, not even leprosy or epilepsy,
which cannot be caused by witches, with God's permission. And this is proved
by the fact that no sort of infirmity is excepted by the Doctors. For a
careful consideration of what has already been written concerning the power
of devils and the wickedness of witches will show that this statement offers
no difficulty. Nider also deals with this subject both in his Book of
Precepts and in his Formicarius, where he asks: Whether witches can actually
injure men by their witchcraft. And the question makes no exception of any
infirmity, however incurable. And he there answers that they can do so, and
proceeds to ask in what way and by what means.
And as to the first, he answers, as has been shown in the First
Question of the First Part of this treatise. And it is proved also by S.
Isidore where he describes the operations of witches (Etym. 8, cap. 9), and
says that they are called witches on account of the magnitude of their
crimes; for they disturb the elements by raising up storms with the help of
devils, they confuse the minds of men in the ways already mentioned, by
either entirely obstructing or gravely impeding the use of their reason. He
adds also that without the use of any poison, but by the mere virulence of
their incantations, they can deprive men of their lives.
It is proved also by S. Thomas in the Second Book of Sentences,
dist. 7 and 8, and in Book IV, dist. 34, and in general all the Theologians
write that witches can with the help of the devil bring harm upon men and
their affairs in all the ways in which the devil alone can injure or
deceive, namely, in their affairs, their reputation, their body, their
reason, and their life; which means that those injuries which are caused by
the devil without any witch, can also be caused by a witch; and even more
readily so, on account of the greater offence which is given to the Divine
Majesty, as has been shown above.
In Job i and ii is found a clear case of the injury in temporal
affairs. The injury to reputation is shown in the history of the Blessed
Jerome, that the devil transformed himself into the appearance of S.
Silvanus, Bishop of Nazareth, a friend of S. Jerome. And this devil
approached a noble woman by night in her bed and began first to provoke and
entice her with lewd words, and then invited her to perform the sinful act.
And when she called out, the devil in the form of the saintly Bishop hid
under the woman's bed, and being sought for and found there, he in lickerish
language declared lyingly that he was the Bishop Silvanus. On the morrow
therefore, when the devil had disappeared, the holy man was scandalously
defamed; but his good name was cleared when the devil confessed at the tomb
of S. Jerome that he had done this in an assumed body.
The injury to the body is shown in the case of the Blessed Job, who
was stricken by the devil with terrible sores, which are explained as a form
of leprosy. And Sigisbert and Vincent of Beauvais (Spec. Hist. XXV, 37) both
tell that in the time of the Emperor Louis II, in the diocese of Mainz, a
certain devil began to thrown stones and to beat at the houses as if with a
hammer. And then by public statements, and secret insinuations, he spread
discord ad troubled the minds of many. Then he excited the anger of all
against one man, whose lodging, where he was resting, he set on fire, and
said that they were all suffering for his sins. So at last that man had to
find his lodging in the fields. And when the priests were saying a litany on
this account, the devil stoned many of the people with stones till he hurt
them to bleeding; and sometimes he would desist, and sometimes rage; and
this continued for three years, until all the houses there were burned down.
Exampled of the injury to the use of the reason, and of the
tormenting of the inner perceptions, are seen in those possessed and
frenzied men of whom the Gospels tell. And as for death, and that they
deprive some of their lives, it is proved in Tobias vi, in the case of the
seven husbands of the virgin Sara, who were killed because of their
lecherous lust and unbridled desired for the virgin Sara, of whom they were
not worthy to be the husbands. Therefore it is concluded that both by
themselves, and all the more with the help of witches, devils can injure men
in every way without exception.
But if it is asked whether injuries of this sort are to be ascribed
rather to devils than to witches, it is answered that, when the devils cause
injuries by their own direct action, then they are principally to be
ascribed to them. But when they work through the agency of witches for the
disparagement and offending of God and the perdition of souls, knowing that
by this means God is made more angry and allows them greater power of doing
evil; and because they do indeed perpetuate countless witchcrafts which the
devil would not be allowed to bring upon men if he wished to injure men
alone by himself, but are permitted, in the just and hidden purpose of God,
through the agency of witches, on account of their perfidy and abjuration of
the Catholic Faith; therefore such injuries are justly ascribed to witches
secondarily, however much the devil may be the principal actor.
Therefore when a woman dips a twig in water and sprinkles the water
in the air to make it rain, although she does not herself cause the rain,
and could not be blamed on that account, yet, because she has entered into a
pact with the devil by which she can do this as a witch, although it is the
devil who causes the rain, she herself nevertheless deservedly bears the
blame, because she is an infidel and does the devil's work, surrendering
herself to his service.
So also when a witch makes a waxen image or some such thing in order
to bewitch somebody; or when an image of someone appears by pouring molten
lead into water, and some injury is done upon the image, such as piercing it
or hurting it in any other way, when it is the bewitched man who is in
imagination being hurt; although the injury is actually done to the image by
some witch or some other man, and the devil in the same manner invisibly
injures the bewitched man, yet it is deservedly ascribed to the witch. For,
without her, God would never allow the devil to inflict the injury, nor
would the devil on his own account try to injure the man.
But because it has been said that in the matter of their good name
the devils can injure men on the own account and without the co-operation of
witches, there may arise a doubt whether the devils cannot also defame
honest women so that they are reputed to be witches, when they appear in
their likeness to bewitch someone; from which it would happen that such a
woman would be defamed without cause.
In answering this we must premise a few remarks. First, it has been
said that the devil can do nothing without the Divine permission, as is
shown in the First Part of this work in the last Question. It has also been
shown that God does not allow so great power of evil against the just and
those who live in grace, as against sinners; and as the devils have more
power against sinners (see the text: When a strong man armed, etc.) so they
are permitted by God to afflict them more than the just. Finally, although
they can, with God's permission, injure the just in their affairs, their
reputation, and their bodily health, yet, because they know that this power
is granted them chiefly for the increase of the merits of the just, they are
the less eager to injure them.
Therefore it can be said that in this difficulty there are several
points to be considered. First, the Divine permission. Secondly, the man who
is thought to be righteous, for they who are so reputed are not always
actually in a state of grace. Thirdly, the crime of which an innocent man
would be suspected; for that crime in its very origin exceeds all the crimes
of the world. Therefore it is to be said that it is granted that, with God's
permission, an innocent person, whether or not he is in a state of grace,
may be injured in his affairs to this particular crime and the gravity of
the accusation (for we have often quoted S. Isidore's saying that they are
called witches from the magnitude of their crimes), it can be said that for
an innocent person to be defamed by the devil in a way that has been
suggested does not seem at all possible, for many reasons.
In the first place, it is one thing to be defamed in respect of
vices which are committed without any expressed or tacit contract with the
devil, such as theft, robbery, or fornication; but quite another matter to
be defamed in respect of vices which it is impossible to accuse a man of
having perpetrated unless he has entered upon an expressed contract with the
devil; and such are the works of witches, which cannot be laid at their door
unless it is by the power of devils that they bewitch men, animals and the
fruits of the earth. Therefore, although the devil can blacken men's
reputations in respect of other vices, yet it does not seem possible for him
to do so in respect of this vice which cannot be perpetrated without his co-
operation.
Besides, it has never hitherto been known to have happened that an
innocent person has been defamed by the devil to such an extent that he was
condemned to death for this particular crime. Furthermore, when a person is
only under suspicion, he suffers no punishment except that which the Canon
prescribes for his purgation, as will be shown in the Third Part of this
work in the second method of sentencing witches.
And it is set down there that, if such a man fails in his purgation,
he is to be considered guilty, but that he should be solemnly adjured before
the punishment due to his sin is proceeded with and enforced. But here we
are dealing with actual events; and it has never yet been known that an
innocent person has been punished on suspicion of witchcraft, and there is
no doubt that God will never permit such a thing to happen.
Besides, He does not suffer the innocent who are under Angelic
protection to be suspected of smaller crimes, such as robbery and such
things; then all the more will He preserve those who are under that
protection from suspicion of the crime of witchcraft.
And it is no valid objection to quote the legend of S. Germanius,
when devils assumed the bodies of other women and sat down at table and
slept with the husbands, deluding the latter into the belief that those
women were in their own bodies eating and drinking with them, as we have
mentioned before. For the women in this case are not to be held guiltless.
For in the Canon (Episcopi 26. q. 2) such women are condemned for thinking
that they are really and actually transported, when they are so only in
imagination; although, as we have shown above, they are at times bodily
transported by devils.
But our present proposition is that they can, with God's permission,
cause all other infirmities, with no exception; and it is to be concluded
from what we have said that this is so. For no exception is made by the
Doctors, and there is no reason why there should be any, since, as we have
often said, the natural power of devils is superior to all corporeal power.
And we have found in our experience that this is true. For although greater
difficulty may be felt in believing that witches are able to cause leprosy
or epilepsy, since these diseases arise from some long-standing physical
predisposition or defect, none the less it has sometimes been found that
even these have been caused by witchcraft. For in the diocese of Basel, in
the district of Alsace and Lorraine, a certain honest labourer spoke roughly
to a certain quarrelsome woman, and she angrily threatened him that she
would soon avenge herself on him. He took little notice of her; but on the
same night he felt a pustule grow upon his neck, and he rubbed it a little,
and found his whole face and neck puffed up and swollen, and a horrible form
of leprosy appeared all over his body. He immediately went to his friends
for advice, and told them of the woman's threat, and said that he would
stake his life on the suspicion that this had been done to him by the magic
art of that same witch. In short, the woman was taken, questioned, and
confessed her crimes. But when the judge asked her particularly about the
reason for it, and how she had done it, she answered: “When that man used
abusive words to me, I was angry and went home; and my familiar began to ask
the reason for my ill humour. I told him, and begged him to avenge me on the
man. And he asked what I wanted him to do to him; and I answered that I
wished he would always have a swollen face. And the devil went away and
afflicted the man even beyond my asking; for I had not hoped that he would
infect him with such sore leprosy.” And so the woman was burned.
And in the diocese of Constance, between Breisach and Freiburg,
there is a leprous woman (unless she has paid the debt of all flesh within
these two years) who used to tell to many people how the same thing had
happened to her by reason of a similar quarrel which took place between her
and another woman. For one night when she went out of the house to do
something in front of the door, a warm wind came from the house of the other
woman, which was opposite, and suddenly struck her face; and from that time
she had been afflicted with the leprosy which she now suffered.
And lastly, in the same diocese, in the territory of the Black
Forest, a witch was being lifted by a gaoler on to the pile of wood prepared
for her burning, and she said: ”I will pay you”; and blew into his face. And
he was at once afflicted with a horrible leprosy all over his body, and did
not survive many days. For the sake of brevity, the fearful crimes of this
witch, and many more instances could be recounted, are omitted. For we have
often found that certain people have been visited with epilepsy or the
falling sickness by means of eggs which have been buried with dead bodies,
especially the dead bodies of witches, together with other ceremonies of
which we cannot speak, particularly when these eggs have been given to a
person either in food or drink.
Chapter XII Of the Way how in Particular they Afflict Men with Other Like
Infirmities
But who can reckon the number of infirmities which they have
inflicted upon men, such as blindness, the sharpest pains, and contortions
of the body? Yet we shall set down a few examples which we have seen with
our eyes, or have been related to one of us Inquisitors.
When an inquisition was being held on some witches in the town of
Innsbruck, the following case, among others, was brought to light. A certain
honest woman who had been legally married to one of the household of the
Archduke formally deposed the following. In the time of her maidenhood she
had been in the service of one of the citizens, whose wife became afflicted
with grievous pains in the head; and a woman came who said she could cure
her, and so began certain incantations and rites which she said would
assuage the pains. And I carefully watched (said this woman) what she did,
and saw that, against the nature of water poured into a vase, she caused
water to rise in its vessel, together with other ceremonies which there is
no need to mention. And considering that the pains in my mistress' head were
not assuaged by these means, I addressed the witch in some indignation with
these words: “I do not know what you are doing, but whatever it is, it is
witchcraft, and you are doing it for your own profit.” Then the witch at
once replied: “You will know in three days whether I am a witch or not.” And
so it proved; for on the third day when I sat down and took up a spindle, I
suddenly felt a terrible pain in my body. First it was inside me, so that it
seemed that there was no part of my body in which I did not feel horrible
shooting pains; then it seemed to me just as if burning coals were being
continually heaped upon my head; thirdly, from the crown of my head to the
soles of my feet there was no place large enough for a pinprick that was not
covered with a rash of white pustules; and so I remained in these pains,
crying out and wishing only for death, until the fourth day. At last my
mistress' husband told me to go to a certain tavern; and with great
difficulty I went, whilst he walked before, until we were in front of the
tavern. “See!” he said to me; “there is a loaf of white bread over the
tavern door.” “I see,” said I. Then he said: “Take it down, if you possibly
can, for it may do you good.” And I, holding on to the door with one hand as
much as I could, got hold of the loaf with the other. “Open it” (said my
master) “and look carefully at what is inside.” Then, when I had broken open
the loaf, I found many things inside it, especially some white grains very
like the pustules on my body; and I saw also some seeds and herbs such as I
could not eat or even look at, with the bones of serpents and other animals.
In my astonishment I asked my master what was to be done; and he told me to
throw it all into the fire. I did so; and behold! suddenly, not in an hour
or even a few minutes, but at the moment when that matter was thrown into
the fire, I regained all my former health.
And much more was deposed against the wife of the citizen in whose
service this woman had been, by reason of which she was not lightly but very
strongly suspected, and especially because she had used great familiarity
with known witches. It is presumed that, having knowledge of the spell of
witchcraft hidden in the loaf, she had told it to her husband; and then, in
the way described, the maid-servant recovered her health.
To bring so great a crime into detestation, it is well that we
should tell how another person, also a woman, was bewitched in the same
town. An honest married woman deposed the following an oath.
Behind my house (she said) I have a greenhouse, and my neighbour's
garden borders on it. One day I noticed that a passage had been made from my
neighbour's garden to my greenhouse, not without some damage being cause;
and as I was standing in the door of my greenhouse reckoning to myself and
bemoaning both the passage and the damage, my neighbour suddenly came up and
asked if I suspected her. But I was frightened because of her bad
reputation, and only answered, “The footprints on the grass are proof of the
damage.” Then she was indignant because I had not, as she hoped, accused her
with the actionable words, and went away murmuring; and though I could hear
her words, I could not understand them. After a few days I became very ill
with pains in the stomach, and the sharpest twinges shooting from my left
side to my right, and conversely, as if two swords or knives were thrust
through my breast; whence day and night I disturbed all the neighbours with
my cries. And when they came from all sides to console me, it happened that
a certain clay-worker, who was engaged in an adulterous intrigue with the
witch, my neighbour, coming to visit me, took pity on my illness, and after
a few words of comfort went away. But the next day he returned in a hurry,
and, after consoling me, added: “I am going to test whether your illness is
due to witchcraft, and if I find that it is, I shall restore your health.”
So he took some molten lead and, while I was lying in bed, poured it into a
bowl of water which he placed on my body. And when the lead solidified into
a certain image and various shapes, he said: “See! your illness has been
caused by witchcraft; and one of the instruments of that witchcraft is
hidden under the threshold of your house door. Let us go, then, and remove
it, and you will feel better.” So my husband and he went to remove the
charm; and the clay-worker, taking up the threshold, told my husband to put
his hand into the hold which then appeared, and take out whatever he found;
and he did so. And first he brought out a waxen image about a palm long,
perforated all over, and pierced through the sides with two needles, just in
the same way that I felt the stabbing pains from side to side; and then
little bags containing all sorts of things, such as grains and seeds and
bones. And when all these things were burned, I became better, but not
entirely well. For although the shootings and twinges stopped, and I quite
regained my appetite for food, yet even now I am by no means fully restored
to health. — And when we asked her why it was that she had not been
completely restored, she answered: There are some other instruments of
witchcraft hidden away which I cannot find. And when I asked the man how he
knew where the first instruments were hidden, he answered: “I knew this
through the love which prompts a friend to tell things to a friend; for your
neighbour revealed this to me when she was coaxing me to commit adultery
with her.” This is the story of the sick woman.
But if I were to tell all the instances that were found in that one
town I should need to make a book of them. For countless men and women who
were blind, or lame, or withered, or plagued with various infirmities,
severally took their oath that they had strong suspicions that their
illnesses, both in general and in particular, were caused by witches, and
that they were bound to endure those ills either for a period or right up to
their deaths. And all that they said and testified was true, either as
regards a specified illness or as regards a specified illness or as regards
the death of others. For that country abounds in henchmen and knights who
have leisure for vice, and seduce women, and then wish to cast them off when
they desire to marry an honest woman. But they can rarely do this without
incurring the vengeance of some witchcraft upon themselves or their wives.
For when those women see themselves despised, they persist in tormenting not
so much the husband as the wife, in the fond hope that, if the wife should
die, the husband would return to his former mistress.
For when a cook of the Archduke had married an honest girl from a
foreign country, a witch, who had been his mistress, met them in the public
road and, in the hearing of other honest people, foretold the bewitching and
death of the girl, stretching out her hand and saying: “Not for long will
you rejoice in your husband.” And at once, on the following day, she took to
her bed, and after a few days paid the debt of all flesh, exclaiming just as
she expired: Lo! thus I die, because that woman, with God's permission, has
killed me by her witchcraft; yet verily I go to another and better marriage
with God.
In the same way, according to the evidence of public report, a
certain soldier was slain by witchcraft, and many others whom I omit to
mention.
But among them there was a well-known gentleman, whom his mistress
wished to come to her on one occasion to pass the night; but he sent his
servant to tell her that he could not visit her that night because he was
busy. She promptly flew into a rage, and said to the servant: Go and tell
your master that he will not trouble me for long. On the very next day he
was taken ill, and he was buried within a week.
And there are witches who can bewitch their judges by a mere look or
glance from their eyes, and publicly boast that they cannot be punished; and
when malefactors have been imprisoned for their crimes, and exposed to the
severest torture to make them tell the truth, these witches can endow them
with such an obstinacy of preserving silence that they are unable to lay
bare their crimes.
And there are some who, in order to accomplish their evil charms and
spells, beat and stab the Crucifix, and utter the filthiest words against
the Purity of the Most Glorious Virgin MARY, casting the foulest aspersions
on the Nativity of Our Saviour from Her inviolate womb. It is not expedient
to repeat those vile words, nor yet to describe their detestable crimes, as
the narrative would give too great offence to the ears of the pious; but
they are all kept and preserved in writing, detailing the manner in which a
certain baptized Jewess had instructed other young girls. And one of them,
named Walpurgis, being in the same year at the point of death, and being
urged by those who stood round her to confess her sins, exclaimed: I have
given myself body and soul to the devil; there is no hope of forgiveness for
me; and so died.
These particulars have not been written to the shame, but rather to
the praise and glory of the most illustrious Archduke. For he was truly a
Catholic Prince, and laboured very zealously with the Church at Brixen to
exterminate witches. But they are written rather in hate and loathing of so
great a crime, and that men may not cease to avenge their wrongs, and the
insults and offences these wretches offer to the Creator and our Holy Faith,
to say nothing of the temporal losses which they cause. For this is their
greatest and gravest crime, namely, that they abjure the Faith.
Chapter XIII How Witch Midwives commit most Horrid Crimes when they either
Kill Children or Offer them to Devils in most Accursed Wise.
We must not omit to mention the injuries done to children by witch
midwives, first by killing them, and secondly by blasphemously offering them
to devils. In the diocese of Strasburg and in the town of Zabern there is an
honest woman very devoted to the Blessed Virgin MARY, who tells the
following experience of hers to all the guests that come to the tavern which
she keeps, known by the sign of the Black Eagle.
I was, she says, pregnant by my lawful husband, now dead, and as my
time approached, a certain midwife importuned me to engage her to assist at
the birth of my child. But I knew her bad reputation, and although I had
decided to engage another woman, pretended with conciliatory words to agree
to her request. But when the pains came upon me, and I had brought in
another midwife, the first one was very angry, and hardly a week later came
into my room one night with two other women, and approached the bed where I
was lying. And when I tried to call my husband, who was sleeping in another
room, all the use was taken away from my limbs and tongue, so that except
for seeing and hearing I could not move a muscle. And the witch, standing
between the other two, said: “See! this vile woman, who would not take me
for her midwife, shall not win through unpunished.” The other two standing
be her pleaded for me, saying: “She has never harmed any of us.” But the
witch added: “Because she has offended me I am going to put something into
her entrails; but, to please you, she shall not feel any pain for half a
year, but after that time she shall be tortured enough.” So she came up and
touched my belly with her hands; and it seemed to me that she took out my
entrails, and put in something which, however, I could not see. And when
they had gone away, and I had recovered my power of speech, I called my
husband as soon as possible, and told him what had happened. But he put it
down to pregnancy, and said: “You pregnant women are always suffering from
fancies and delusions.” And when he would by no means believe me, I replied:
“I have been given six months' grace, and if, after that time, no torment
comes to me, I shall believe you.”
She related this to her son, a cleric who was then Archdeacon of the
district, and who came to visit her on the same day. And what happened? When
exactly six months had passed, such a terrible pain came into her belly that
she could not help disturbing everybody with her cries day and night. And
because, as has been said, she was most devout to the Virgin, the Queen of
Mercy, she fasted with bread and water every Saturday, so that she believed
that she was delivered by Her intercession. For one day, when she wanted to
perform an action of nature, all those unclean things fell from her body;
and she called her husband and son, and said: “Are those fancies? Did I not
say that after a half a year the truth would be known? Or who ever saw me
ear thorns, bones, and even bits of wood?” For there were brambles as long
as a palm, as well as a quantity of other things.
Moreover (as was said in the First Part of the work), it was shown
by the confession of the servant, who was brought to judgement at Breisach,
that the greatest injuries to the Faith as regards the heresy of witches are
done by midwives; and this is made clearer than daylight itself by the
confessions of some who were afterwards burned.
For in the diocese of Basel at the town of Dann, a witch who was
burned confessed that she had killed more than forty children, by sticking a
needle through the crowns of their heads into their brains, as they came out
from the womb.
Finally, another woman in the diocese of Strasburg confessed that
she had killed more children than she could count. And she was caught in
this way. She had been called from one town to another to act as midwife to
a certain woman, and, having performed her office, was going back home. But
as she went out of the town gate, the arm of a newly born child fell out of
the cloak she had wrapped around her, in whose folds the arm had been
concealed. This was seen by those who were sitting in the gateway, and when
she had gone on, they picked up from the ground what they took to be a piece
of meat; but when they looked more closely and saw that it was not a piece
of meat, but recognized it by its fingers as a child's arm, they reported it
to the magistrates, and it was found that a child had died before baptism,
lacking an arm. So the witch was taken and questioned, and confessed the
crime, and that she had, as has been said, killed more children than she
could count.
Now the reason for such practices is as follows: It is to be
presumed that witches are compelled to do such things at the command of evil
spirits, and sometimes against their own wills. For the devil knows that,
because of the pain of loss, or original sin, such children are debarred
from entering the Kingdom of Heaven. And by this means the Last Judgement is
delayed, when the devils will be condemned to eternal torture; since the
number of the elect os more slowly completed, on the fulfilment of which the
world will be consumed. And also, as has already been shown, witches are
taught by the devil to confect from the limbs of such children an unguent
which is very useful for their spells.
But in order to bring so great a sin into utter detestation, we must
not pass over in silence the following horrible crime. For when they do not
kill the child, they blasphemously offer it to the devil in this manner. As
soon as the child is born, the midwife, if the mother herself is not a
witch, carries it out of the room on the pretext of warming it, raises it
up, and offers it to the Prince of Devils, that is Lucifer, and to all the
devils. And this is done by the kitchen fire.
A certain man relates that he noticed that his wife, when her time
came to give birth, against the usual custom of women in childbirth, did not
allow any woman to approach the bed except her own daughter, who acted as
midwife. Wishing to know the reason for this, he hid himself in the house
and saw the whole order of the sacrilege and dedication to the devil, as it
has been described. He saw also, as it seemed to him, that without any human
support, but by the power of the devil, the child was climbing up the chain
by which the cooking-pots were suspended. In great consternation both at the
terrible words of the invocation of the devils, and at the other iniquitous
ceremonies, he strongly insisted that the child should be baptized
immediately. While it was being carried to the next village, where there was
a church, and when they had to cross a bridge over a certain river, he drew
his sword and ran at his daughter, who was carrying the child, saying in the
hearing of two others who were with them: “You shall not carry the child
over the bridge; for either it must cross the bridge by itself, or you shall
be drowned in the river.” The daughter was terrified and, together with the
other women in company, asked him if he were in his right mind (for he had
hidden what had happened from all the others except the two men who were
with him). Then he answered: “You vile drab, by your magic arts you made the
child climb the chain in the kitchen; now make it cross the bridge with no
on carrying it, or I shall drown you in the river.” And so, being compelled,
she put the child down on the bridge, and invoked the devil by her art; and
suddenly the child was seen on the other side of the bridge. And when the
child had been baptized, and he had returned home, since he now had
witnesses to convict his daughter of witchcraft (for he could not prove the
former crime of the oblation to the devil, inasmuch as he had been the only
witness of the sacrilegious ritual), he accused bother daughter and mother
before the judge after their period of purgation; and they were both burned,
and the crime of midwives of making that sacrilegious offering was
discovered.
But here the doubt arises: to what end or purpose is the
sacrilegious offering of children, and how does it benefit the devils? To
this it can be said that the devils do this for three reasons, which serve
three most wicked purposes. The first reason arises from their pride, which
always increases; as it is said: “They that hate Thee have lifted up the
head.” For they try as far as possible to conform with divine rites and
ceremonies. Secondly, they can more easily deceive men under the mask of an
outwardly seeming pious action. For in the same way they entice young
virgins and boys into their power; for though they might solicit such by
means of evil and corrupt men, yet they rather deceive them by magic mirrors
and reflections seen in witches' finger-nails, and lure them on in the
belief that they love chastity, whereas they hate it. For the devil hates
above all the Blessed Virgin, because she bruised his head. Just so in this
oblation of children they deceive the minds of witches into the vice of
infidelity under the appearance of a virtuous acts. And the third reason is,
that the perfidy of witches may grow, to the devils' own gain, when they
have witches dedicated to them from their very cradles.
And this sacrilege affects the child in three ways. In the first
place, visible offerings to God are made of visible things, such as wine of
bread or the fruits of the earth, as a sign of honour and subjection to Him,
as it is said in Ecclesiasticus xxv: Thou shalt not appear empty before the
Lord. And such offerings cannot and must not afterwards be put to profane
uses. Therefore the holy Father, S. John Damascene, says: The oblations
which are offered in church belong only to the priests, but not that they
should divert them to their own uses, but that they should faithfully
distribute them, partly in the observance of divine worship, and partly for
the use of the poor. From this it follows that a child who has been offered
to the devil in sign of subjection and homage to him cannot possibly be
dedicated by Catholics to a holy life, in worthy and fruitful service to God
for the benefit of himself and others.
For who can say that the sins of the mothers and of other do not
redound in punishment upon the children? Perhaps someone will quote that
saying of the prophet: “The sons shall not bear the iniquity of the father.”
But there is that other passage in Exodus xx: I am a jealous God, visiting
the sins of the father upon the children unto the third and fourth
generation. Now the meaning of these two sayings is as follows. The first
speaks of spiritual punishment in the judgement of Heaven or God, and not in
the judgement of men. And this is the punishment of the soul, such as loss
or the forfeiture of glory, or the punishment of pain, that is, of the
torment of eternal fire. And with such punishments no one is punished except
for his own sin, either inherited as original sin or committed as actual
sin.
The second text speaks of those who imitate the sins of their
father, as Gratian has explained (I, q. 4, etc.); and there he gives other
explanations as to how the judgement of God inflicts other punishments on a
man, not only for his own sins which he has committed, or which he might
commit (but is prevented by punishment from committing), but also for the
sins of others.
And it cannot be argued that when a man is punished without cause,
and without sin, which should be the cause of punishment. For according to
the rule of law, no one must be punished without sin, unless there is some
cause of punishment. And we can say that there is always a most just cause,
though it may not be known to us: see S. Augustine, XXIV, 4. And if we
cannot in the result penetrate the depth of God's judgement, yet we know
that what He has said is true, and what He has done is just.
But there is this distinction to be observed in innocent children
who are offered to devils not by their mothers when they are witches, but by
midwives who, as we have said, secretly take from the embrace and the womb
of an honest mother. Such children are not so cut off from grace that they
must necessarily become prone to such crimes; but it is piously to be
believed that they may rather cultivate their mothers' virtues.
The second result to the children of this sacrilege is as follows.
When a man offers himself as a sacrifice to God, he recognizes God as his
Beginning and his End; and this sacrifice is more worthy than all the
external sacrifices which he makes, having its beginning in his creation and
its end in his glorification, as it is said: A sacrifice to God is an
afflicted spirit, etc. In the same way, when a witch offers a child to the
devils, she commends it body and soul to him as its beginning and its end in
eternal damnation; wherefore not without some miracle can the child be set
free from the payment of so great a debt.
And we read often in history of children whom their mothers, in some
passion or mental disturbance, have unthinkingly offered to the devil from
the very womb, and how it is only with the very greatest difficulty that
they can, when they have grown to adult age, be delivered from that bondage
which the devil has, with God's permission, usurped to himself. And of this
the Book of Examples, Most Blessed Virgin MARY, affords many illustrations;
a notable instance being that of the man whom the Supreme Pontiff was unable
to deliver from the torments of the devil, but at last he was sent to a holy
man living in the East, and finally with great difficulty was delivered from
his bondage through the intercession of the Most Glorious Virgin Herself.
And if God so severely punishes even such a thoughtless, I will not
say sacrifice, but commendation used angrily by a mother when her husband,
after copulating with her, says, I hope a child will come of it; and she
answers, May the child go to the devil! How much greater must be the
punishment when the Divine Majesty is offended in the way we have described!
The third effect of this sacrilegious oblation is to inculcate an
habitual inclination to cast spells upon men, animals, and the fruits of the
earth. This is shown by S. Thomas in the 2nd Book, quest, 108, where he
speaks of temporal punishment, how some are punished for the sins of others.
For he says that, bodily speaking, sons are part of their fathers'
possessions, and servants and animals belong to their masters; therefore
when a man is punished in all his possessions, it follows that often the
sons suffer for the fathers.
And this is quite a different matter from what has been said about
God visiting the sins of the fathers upon the children unto the third and
fourth generation. For there it is a question of those who imitate their
fathers' sins, but here we speak of those who suffer instead of their
fathers, when they do not imitate their sins by committing them in fact, but
only inherit the results of their sins. For in this way the son born to
David in adultery died very soon; and the animals of the Amalekites were
ordered to be killed. Nevertheless, there is much mystery in all this.
Taking into consideration all that we have said, we may well
conclude that such children are always, up to the end of their lives,
predisposed to the perpetration of witchcraft. For just as God sanctifies
that which is dedicated to Him, as is proved by the deeds of the Saints,
when parents offer to God the fruit which they have generated; so also the
devil does not cease to infect with evil that which is offered to him. Many
examples can be found in the Old and New Testaments. For so were many of the
Patriarchs and Prophets, such as Isaac, Samuel, and Samson; and so were
Alexis and Nicolas, and many more, guided by much grace to a holy life.
Finally, we know from experience that the daughters of witches are
always suspected of similar practises, as imitators of their mothers'
crimes; and that indeed the whole of a witch's progeny is infected. And the
reason for this and for all that has been said before is, that according to
their pact with the devil, they always have to leave behind them and
carefully instruct a survivor, so that they may fulfil their vow to do all
they can to increase the number of witches. For how else could it happen, as
it has very often been found, that tender girls of eight or ten years have
raised up tempests and hailstorms, unless they had been dedicated to the
devil under such a pact by their mothers. For the children could not do such
things of themselves by abjuring the Faith, which is how all adult witches
have to begin, since they have no knowledge of any single article of the
Faith. We will recount an example of such a child.
In the duchy of Swabia a certain farmer went to his fields with his
little daughter, hardly eight years old, to look at his crops, and began
complaining about the drought, saying: Alas! when will it rain? The girl
heard him, and in the simplicity of her heart said: Father, if you want it
to rain, I can soon make it come. And her father said to her: What? Do you
know how to make it rain? And the girl answered: I can make it rain, and I
can make hailstorms and tempests too. And the father asked: Who taught you?
And she answered: My mother did, but she told me not to tell anybody. Then
the father asked: How did she teach you? And she answered: She sent me to a
master who will do anything I ask at any time. But her father said: Have you
ever seen him? And she said: I have sometimes seen men coming in and out to
my mother; and when I asked her who they were, she told that they were our
masters to whom she had given me, and that they were powerful and rich
patrons. The father was terrified, and asked her if she could raise a
hailstorm then. And the girl said: Yes, if I had a little water. Then he led
the girl by the hand to a stream, and said: Do it, but only on our land.
Then the girl put her hand in the water and stirred it in the name of her
master, as her mother had taught her; and behold! the rain fell only on that
land. Seeing this, the father said: Make it hail now, but only on one of our
fields. And when the girl had done this, the father was convinced by the
evidence, and accused his wife before the judge. And the wife was taken and
convicted and burned; but the daughter was reconciled and solemnly dedicated
to God, since which hour she could no more work these spells and charms.
Chapter XIV Here followeth how Witches Injure Cattle in Various Ways.
When S. Paul said, Doth God care for oxen? he meant that, though all
things are subject to Divine providence, both man and beast each in its
degree, as the Psalmist says, yet the sons of men are especially in His
governance and under the protection of His wings. I say, therefore, if men
are injured by witches, with God's permission, both the innocent and just as
well as sinners, and if parents are bewitched in their children, as being
part of their possessions, who can then presume to doubt that, with God's
permission, various injuries can be brought by witches upon cattle and the
fruits of the earth, which are also part of men's possessions? For so was
Job stricken by the devil and lost all his cattle. So also there is not even
the smallest farm where women do not injure each other's cows, by drying up
their milk, and very often killing them.
But first let us consider the smallest of these injuries, that of
drying up the milk. If it is asked how they can do this, it can be answered
that, according to Blessed Albert in his Book on Animals, milk is naturally
menstrual in any animal; and, like another flux in women, when it is not
stopped by some natural infirmity, it is due to witchcraft that it is
stopped. Now the flow of milk is naturally stopped when the animal becomes
pregnant; and it is stopped by an accidental infirmity when the animal eats
some herb the nature of which is to dry up the milk and make the cow ill.
But they can cause this in various ways by witchcraft. For on the
more holy nights according to the instructions of the devil and for the
greater offence to the Divine Majesty of God, a witch will sit down in a
corner of her house with a pail between her legs, stick a knife or some
instrument in the wall or a post, and make as if to milk it with her hands.
Then she summons her familiar who always works with her in everything, and
tells him that she wishes to milk a certain cow from a certain house, which
is healthy and abounding in milk. And suddenly the devil takes the milk from
the udder of that cow, and brings it to where the witch is sitting, as if it
were flowing from the knife.
But when this is publicly preached to the people they get no bad
information by it; for however much anyone may invoke the devil, and think
that by this alone he can do this thing, he deceives himself, because he is
without the foundation of that perfidy, not having rendered homage to the
devil or abjured the Faith. I have set this down because some have thought
that several of the matter of which I have written ought not to be preacher
to the people, on account of the danger of giving them evil knowledge;
whereas it is impossible for anyone to learn from a preacher how to perform
any of the things that have been mentioned. But they have been written
rather to bring so great a crime into detestation, and should be preached
from the pulpit, so that judges may be more eager to punish the horrible
crime of the abnegation of the Faith. Yet they should not always be preached
in this way; for the secular mind pays more attention to temporal losses,
being more concerned with earthly than spiritual matters; therefore when
witches can be accused of inflicting temporal loss, judges are more zealous
to punish them. But who can fathom the cunning of the devil?
I know of some men in a certain city who wished to eat some May
butter one May time. And as they were walking along they came to a meadow
and say down by a stream; and one of them, who had formed some open or tacit
pact with the devil, said: I will get you the best May butter. And at once
he took off his clothes and went into the stream, not standing up but
sitting with his back against the current; and while the others looked on,
he uttered certain words, and moved the water with his hands behind his
back; and in a short time he brought out a great quantity of butter of the
sort that the country women sell in the market in May. And the others tasted
it and declared that it was the very best butter.
From this we can deduce first the following fact concerning their
practices. They are either true witches, by reason of an expressed pact
formed with the devil, or they know by some tacit understanding that the
devil will do what they ask. In the first case there is no need for any
discussion, for such are true witches. But in the second case, then they
owed the devil's help to the fact that they were blasphemously offered to
the devil by a midwife or by their own mothers.
But it may be objected that the devil perhaps brought the butter
without any compact, expressed or tacit, and without any previous dedication
to himself. It is answered that no one can ever use the devil's help in such
matters without invoking him; and that by that very act of seeking help from
the devil he is an apostate from the Faith. This is the decision of S.
Thomas in the Second Book of Sentences, dist. 8, on the question, Whether it
is apostasy from the Faith to use the devil's help. And although Blessed
Albert the Great agrees with the other Doctors, yet he says more expressly
that in such matters there is always apostasy either in word or in deed. For
if invocations, conjurations, fumigations and adorations are used, then an
open pact is formed with the devil, even if there has been no surrender of
body and soul together with explicit abjuration of the Faith either wholly
or in part. For by the mere invocation of the devil a man commits open
verbal apostasy. But if there is no spoken invocation, but only a bare
action from which follows something that could not be done without the
devil's help, then whether a man does it be beginning in the name of the
devil, or with some other unknown words, or without any words but with that
intention; then, says Blessed Albert, it is apostasy of deed, because that
action is looked for from the devil. But since to expect or receive anything
from the devil is always a disparagement of the Faith, it is also apostasy.
So it is concluded that, by whatever means that sorcerer procured
the butter, it was done with either a tacit or an expressed pact with the
devil; and since, if it had been with an expressed pact, he would have
behaved after the usual manner of witches, it is probably that there was a
tacit or secret pact, originating either from himself or from his mother or
a midwife. And I say that it arose from himself, since he only went through
certain motions, and expected the devil to produce the effect.
The second conclusion we can draw from this and similar practices is
this. The devil cannot create new species of things; therefore when natural
butter suddenly came out of the water, the devil did not do this by changing
the water into milk, but by taking butter from some place where it was kept
and bringing it to the man's hand. Or else he took natural milk from a
natural cow and suddenly churned it into natural butter; for while the art
of women takes a little time to make butter, the devil could do it in the
shortest space of time and bring it to the man.
It is in the same way that certain dealers in magic, when they find
themselves in need of wine or some such necessity, merely go out in the
night with a flask or vessel, and bring it back suddenly filled with wine.
For then the devil takes natural wine from some vessel and fills their
flasks for them.
And with regard to the manner whereby witches kill animals and
cattle, it should be said that they act very much as they do in the case of
men. They can bewitch them by a touch and a look, or by a look only; or by
placing under the threshold of the stable door, or near the place where they
go to water, some charm or periapt of witchcraft.
For in this way those witches who were burned at Ratisbon, of whom
we shall say more later on, were always incited by the devil to bewitch the
best horses and the fattest cattle. And when they were asked how they did
so, one of them named Agnes said that they hid certain things under the
threshold of the stable door. And, asked what sort of things, she said: The
bones of different kinds of animals. She was further asked in whose name
they did this, and answered, In the name of the devil and all the other
devils. And there was another of them, named Anna, who had killed twenty-
three horses in succession belonging to one of the citizens who was a
carrier. This man at last, when he had bought his twenty-fourth horse and
reduced to extreme poverty, stood in his stable and said to the witch, who
was standing in the door of her house: “See, I have bought a horse, and I
swear to God and His Holy Mother that if this horse dies I shall kill you
with my own hands.” At that the witch was frightened, and left the horse
alone. But when she was taken and asked how she had done these things, she
answered that she had done nothing but dig a little hole, after which the
devil had put in it certain things unknown to her. From this it is concluded
that the witch co-operates sufficiently if it is only by a touch or a look;
for the devil is permitted no power of injuring creatures without some co-
operation on the part of the witch, as has been shown before. And this is
for the great offence to the Divine Majesty.
For shepherds have often seen animals in the fields give three or
four jumps into the air, and then suddenly fall to the ground and die; and
this is caused by the power of witches at the instance of the devil.
In the diocese of Strasburg, between the town of Fiessen and Mount
Ferrer, a certain very rich man affirmed that more than forty oxen and cows
belonging to him and others had been bewitched in the Alps within the space
of one year, and that there had been no natural plague or sickness to cause
it. To prove this, he said that when cattle die from some change plague or
disease, they do not do so all at once, but by degrees; but that this
witchcraft had suddenly taken all the strength from them, and therefore
everyone judged that they had been killed by witchcraft. I have said forty
head of cattle, but I believe he put the number higher than that. However,
it is very true that many cattle are said to have been bewitched in some
districts, especially in the Alps; and it is known that this form of
witchcraft if unhappily most widespread. We shall consider some similar
cases later, in the chapter where we discuss the remedies for cattle that
have been bewitched.
Chapter XV How they Raise and Stir up Hailstorms and Tempests, and Cause
Lightning to Blast both Men and Beasts.
That devils and their disciples can by witchcraft cause lightnings
and hailstorms and tempests, and that the devils have power from God to do
this, and their disciples do so with God's permission, is proved by Holy
Scripture in Job i and ii. For the devil received power from God, and
immediately caused it to happen that the Sabeans took away from Job fifty
yoke of oxen and five hundred asses, and then fire came from heaven and
consumed seven thousand camels, and a great wind came and smote down this
house, killing his seven sons and his three daughters, and all the young
men, that is to say, the servants, except him who brought the news, were
killed; and finally the devil smote the body of the holy man with the most
terrible sores, and caused his wife and his three friends to vex him
grievously.
S. Thomas in his commentary on Job says as follows: It must be
confessed that, with God's permission, the devils can disturb the air, raise
up winds, and make the fire fall from heaven. For although, in the matter of
taking various shapes, corporeal nature is not at the command of any Angel,
either good or bad, but only at that of God the Creator, yet in the matter
of local motion corporeal nature has to obey the spiritual nature. And this
truth is clearly exemplified in man himself; for at the mere command of the
will, which exists subjectively in the soul, the limbs are moved to perform
that which they have been willed to do. Therefore whatever can be
accomplished by mere local motion, this not only good but bad spirits can by
their natural power accomplish, unless God should forbid it. But winds and
rain and other similar disturbances of the air can be caused by the mere
movement of vapours released from the earth or the water; therefore the
natural power of devils is sufficient to cause such things. So says S.
Thomas.
For God in His justice using the devils as his agents of punishment
inflicts the evils which come to us who live in this world. Therefore, with
reference to that in the Psalms: “He called a famine on the land, and wasted
all their substance of bread.”; the gloss says: God allowed this evil to be
caused by the bad Angels who are in charge of such matters; and by famine is
meant the Angel in charge of famine.
We refer the reader also to what has been written above on the
question as to whether witches must always have the devil's help to aid them
in their works, and concerning the three kinds of harm which the devils at
times inflict without the agency of a witch. But the devils are more eager
to injure men with the help of a witch, since in this way God is the more
offended, and greater power is given to them to torment and punish.
And relevant to this subject is what the Doctors have written in the
Second book of Sentences, dist. 6, on the question whether there is a
special place assigned to the bad Angels in the clouds of the air. For in
devils there are three things to be considered - their nature, their duty
and their sin; and by nature they belong to the empyrean of heaven, through
sin to the lower hell, but by reason of the duty assigned to them, as we
have said, as ministers of punishment to the wicked and trial to the good,
their place is in the clouds of the air. For they do not dwell here with us
on the earth lest they should plague us too much; but in the air and around
the fiery sphere they can so bring together the active and passive agents
that, when God permits, they can bring down fire and lightning from heaven.
A story is told in the Formicarius of a certain man who had been
taken, and was asked by the judge how they went about to raise up hailstorms
and tempests, and whether it was easy for them to do so. He answered: We can
easily cause hailstorms, but we cannot do all the harm that we wish, because
of the guardianship of good Angels. And he added: We can only injure those
who are deprived of God's help; but we cannot hurt those who make the sign
of the Cross. And this is how we got to work: first we use certain words in
the fields to implore the chief of the devils to send one of his servants to
strike the man whom we name. Then, when the devil has come, we sacrifice to
him a black cock at two cross-roads, throwing it up into the air; and when
the devil has received this, he performs our wish and stirs up the air, but
not always in the places which we have named, and, according to the
permission of the living God, sends down hailstorms and lightnings.
In the same work we hear of a certain leader or heresiarch of
witches named Staufer, who lived in Berne and the adjacent country, and used
publicly to boast that, whenever he liked, he could change himself into a
mouse in the sight of his rivals and slip through the hands of his deadly
enemies; and that he had often escaped from the hands of his mortal foes in
this manner. But when the Divine justice wished to put an end to his
wickedness, some of his enemies lay in wait for him cautiously and saw him
sitting in a basket near a window, and suddenly pierced him through with
swords and spears, so that he miserably died for his crimes. Yet he left
behind him a disciple, named Hoppo, who had also for his master that Stadlin
whom we have mentioned before in the sixth chapter.
These two could, whenever they pleased, cause the third part of the
manure or straw or corn to pass invisibly from a neighbour's field to their
own; they could raise the most violent hailstorms and destructive winds and
lightning; could cast into the water in the sight of their parents children
walking by the water-side, when there was no one else in sight; could cause
barrenness in men and animals; could reveal hidden things to others; could
in many ways injure men in their affairs or their bodies; could at times
kill whom they would by lightning; and could cause many other plagues, when
and where the justice of God permitted such things to be done.
It is better to add an instance which came within our own
experience. For in the diocese of Constance, twenty-eight German miles from
the town of Ratisbon in the direction of Salzburg, a violent hailstorm
destroyed all the fruit, crops and vineyards in a belt one mile wide, so
that the vines hardly bore fruit for three years. This was brought to the
notice of the Inquisition, since the people clamoured for an inquiry to be
held; many beside all the townsmen being of the opinion that it was caused
by witchcraft. Accordingly it was agreed after fifteen days' formal
deliberation that it was a case of witchcraft for us to consider; and among
a large number of suspects, we particularly examined two women, one named
Agnes, a bath-woman, and the other Anna von Mindelheim. These two were taken
and shut up separately in different prisons, neither of them knowing in the
least what had happened to the other. On the following day the bath-woman
was very gently questioned in the presence of a notary by the chief
magistrate, a justice named Gelre very zealous for the Faith, and by the
other magistrates with him; and although she was undoubtedly well provided
with that evil gift of silence which is the constant bane of judges, and at
the first trial affirmed that she was innocent of any crime against man or
woman; yet, in the Divine mercy that so great a crime should not pass
unpunished, suddenly, when she had been freed from her chains, although it
was in the torture chamber, she fully laid bare all the crimes which she had
committed. For when she was questioned by the Notary of the Inquisition upon
the accusations which had been brought against her of harm done to men and
cattle, by reason of which she had been gravely suspected of being a witch,
although there had been no witness to prove that she had abjured the Faith
or performed coitus with an Incubus devil (for she had been most secret);
nevertheless, after she had confessed to the harm which she had caused to
animals and men, she acknowledged also all that she was asked concerning the
abjuration of the Faith, and copulation committed with an Incubus devil;
saying that for more than eighteen years she had given her body to an
Incubus devil, with a complete abnegation of the Faith.
After this she was asked whether she knew anything about the
hailstorm which we have mentioned, and answered that she did. And, being
asked how and in what way, she answered: “I was in my house, and at midday a
familiar came to me and told me to go with a little water on to the field or
plain of Kuppel (for so is it named). And when I asked what he wanted to do
with the water, he said that he wanted to make it rain. So I went out at the
town gate, and found the devil standing under a tree.” The judge asked her,
under which tree; and she said, “Under that one opposite that tower,”
pointing it out. Asked what she did under the tree, she said, “The devil
told me to dig a hole and pour the water into it.” Asked whether they say
down together, she said, “I sat down, but the devil stood up.” Then she was,
with what words and in what manner she had stirred the water; and she
answered, “I stirred it with my finger, and called on the name of the devil
himself and all the other devils.” Again the judge asked what was done with
the water, and she answered: “It disappeared, and the devil took it up into
the air.” Then she was asked if she had any associate, and answered: “Under
another tree opposite I had a companion (naming the other capture witch,
Anna von Mindelheim), but I do not know what she did.” Finally, the bath-
woman was asked how long it was between the taking up of the water the
hailstorm; and she answered: “There was just sufficient interval of time to
allow me to get back to my house.”
But (and this is remarkable) when on the next day the other witch
had at first been exposed to the very gentlest questions, being suspended
hardly clear of the ground by her thumbs, after she had been set quite free,
she disclosed the whole matter without the slightest discrepancy from what
the other had told; agreeing as to the place, that it was under such a tree
and the other had been under another; as to the method, namely, of stirring
water poured into a hole in the name of the devil and all the devils; and as
to the interval of time, that the hailstorm had come after her devil had
taken the water up into the air and she had returned home. Accordingly, on
the third day they were burned. And the bath-woman was contrite and
confessed, and commended herself to God, saying that she would die with a
willing heart if she could escape the tortures of the devil, and held in her
hand a cross which she kissed. But the other witch scorned her for doing so.
And this one had consorted with an Incubus devil for more than twenty years
with a complete abjuration of the Faith, and had done far more harm than the
former witch to men, cattle and the fruits of the earth, as is shown in the
preserved record of their trial.
These instances must serve, since indeed countless examples of this
sort of mischief could be recounted. But very often men and beasts and
storehouses are struck by lightning by the power of devils; and the cause of
this seems to be more hidden and ambiguous, since it often appears to happen
by Divine permission without the co-operation of any witch. However, it has
been found that witches have freely confessed that they have done such
things, and there are various instances of it, which could be mentioned, in
addition to what has already been said. Therefore it is reasonable to
conclude that, just as easily as they raise hailstorms, so can they cause
lightning and storms at sea; and so no doubt at all remains on these points.
Chapter XVI Of Three Ways in which Men and Women may be Discovered to be
Addicted to Witchcraft: Divided into Three Heads: and First of the
Witchcraft of Archers.
For our present purpose the last class of witchcraft is that which
is practised in three forms by men; and first we must consider the seven
deadly and horrible crimes which are committed by wizards who are archers.
For first, on the Sacred Day of the Passion of Our Lord, that is to say, on
Good Friday, as it is called, during the solemnization of the Mass of the
Presanctified they shoot with arrows, as at a target, at the most sacred
image of the Crucifix. Oh, the cruelty and injury to the Saviour! Secondly,
though there is some doubt whether they have to utter a verbal form of
apostasy to the devil in addition to that apostasy of deed, yet whether it
be so or not, no greater injury to the Faith can be done by a Christian. For
it is certain that, if such things were done by an infidel, they would be of
no efficacy; for no such easy method of gratifying their hostility to the
Faith is granted to them. Therefore these wretches ought to consider the
truth and power of the Catholic Faith, for the confirmation of which God
justly permits such crimes.
Thirdly, such an archer has to shoot three or four arrows in this
way, and as a consequence he is able to kill on any day just the same number
of men. Fourthly, they have the following assurance from the devil; that
though they must first actually set eyes on the man they wish to kill, and
must bend their whole will on killing him, yet it matter not where the man
may shut himself up, for he cannot be protected, but the arrows which have
been shot will be carried and struck into him by the devil.
Fifthly, they can shoot an arrow with such precision as to shoot a
penny from a person's head without hurting his head, and they can continue
to do this indefinitely. Sixthly, in order to gain this power they have to
offer homage of body and soul to the devil. We shall give some instances of
this sort of practice.
For a certain prince of the Rhineland, named Eberhard Longbeard
because he let his beard grow, had, before he was sixty years old, acquired
for himself some of the Imperial territory, and was besieging a certain
castle named Lendenbrunnen because of the raids which were made by the men
of the castle. And he had in his company a wizard of this sort, named
Puncker, who so molested the men of the castle that he killed them all in
succession with his arrows, except one. And this is how he proceeded.
Whenever he had looked at a man, it did not matter where that man went to or
hid himself, he had only to loose an arrow and that man was mortally wounded
and killed; and he was able to shoot three such arrows every day because he
had shot three arrows at the image of the Saviour. It is probable that the
devil favours the number three more than any other, because it represents an
effective denial of the Holy Trinity. But after he had shot those three
arrows, he could only shoot with the same uncertainty as other men. At last
one of the men of the castle called out to him mockingly, “Puncker, will you
not at least spare the ring which hangs in the gate?” And he answered from
outside in the night, “No; I shall take it away on the day that the castle
is captured.” And he fulfilled his promise: for when, as has been said, all
were killed except one, and the castle had been taken, he took that ring and
hung it in his own house at Rorbach in the diocese of Worms, where it can be
seen hanging to this day. But afterwards he was one night killed with their
spades by some peasants whom he had injured, and he perished in his sins.
It is told also of this man, that a very eminent person wished to
have proof of his skill, and for a test placed his little son before the
target with a penny on his cap, and ordered him to shoot the penny away
without removing the cap. The wizard said that he would do it, but with
reluctance, not being sure whether the devil was seducing him to his death.
But, yielding to the persuasions of the prince, he placed one arrow in
readiness in the cord which was slung over his should, fitted another to his
bow, and shot the penny from the cap without hurting the boy. Seeing this,
the prince asked him why he had placed the arrow in that cord; and he
answered: “If I had been deceived by the devil and had killed my son, since
I should have had to die I would quickly have shot you with the other arrow
to avenge my death.”
And though such wickedness is permitted by God for the proving and
chastisement of the faithful, nevertheless more powerful miracles are
performed by the Saviour's mercy for the strengthening and glory of the
Faith.
For in the diocese of Constance, near the castle of Hohenzorn and a
convent of nuns, there is a newly-built church where may be seen an image of
Our Saviour pierced with an arrow and bleeding. And the truth of this
miracle is shown as follows. A miserable wretch who wished to be assured by
the devil of having three or four arrows with which he could, in the manner
we have told, kill whom he pleased, shot and pierced with an arrow (just as
it is still seen) a certain Crucifix at a crossroad; and when it
miraculously began to bleed, the wretch was stuck motionless in his steps by
Divine power. And when he was asked by a passer-by why he stood fixed there,
he shook his head, and trembling in his arms and his hands, in which he held
the bow, and all over his body, could answer nothing. So the other looked
about him, and saw the Crucifix with the arrow and the blood, and said: “You
villain, you have pierced the image of Our Lord!” And calling some others,
he told them to see that he did not escape (although, as has been said, he
could not move), and ran to the castle and told what had happened. And they
came down and found the wretched man in the same place; and when they had
questioned him, and he had confessed his crime, he was removed from that
district by public justice, and suffered a miserable death in merited
expiation of his deeds.
But, alas! how horrible it is to think that human perversity is not
afraid to countenance such crimes. For it is said that in the halls of the
great such men are maintained to glory in their crimes in open contempt of
the Faith, to the heavy offence of the Divine Majesty, and in scorn of Our
Redeemer; and are permitted to boast of their deeds.
Wherefore such protectors, defenders and patrons are to be judged
not only heretics, but even apostates from the Faith, and are to be punished
in the manner that will be told. And this is the seventh deadly sin of these
wizards. For first they are by very law excommunicated; and if the patrons
are clerics they are degraded and deprived of all office and benefit, nor
can they be restored except by a special indulgence from the Apostolic See.
Also, if after their proscription such protectors remain obstinate in their
excommunication for the period of a year, they are to be condemned as
heretics.
This is in accordance with the Canon Law; for, in Book VI, it
touches on the question of direct or indirect interference with the
proceedings of Diocesans and Inquisitors in the cause of the Faith, and
mentions the aforesaid punishment to be inflicted after a year. For it say:
We forbid any interference from Potentates, temporal Lords and Rulers, and
their Officials, etc. Anyone may refer to the chapter.
And further, that witches and their protectors are by very law to be
excommunicated is shown in the Canon of the suppressing of the heresy of
witchcraft; especially where it says: We excommunicate and anathematize all
heretics, Catharists, Sectaries . . . and others, by whatever names they are
known, etc. And with these it includes all their sympathizers and
protectors, and others; saying later on: Also we excommunicate all
followers, protectors, defenders and patrons of such heretics.
The Canon Law prescribes various penalties which are incurred within
the space of a year by such heretics, whether laymen or clerics, where it
says: We place under the ban of excommunication all their protectors,
patrons and defenders, so that when any such has been so sentenced and has
scorned to recant his heresy, within a year from that time he shall be
considered an outlaw, and shall not be admitted to any office or council,
nor be able to vote in the election of such officers, nor be allowed free
opportunity of giving evidence; he shall not succeed to any inheritance, and
no one shall be held responsible for any business transaction with him. If
he be a judge, his judgement shall not stand, nor shall any case be brought
to his hearing. If he be an advocate, he shall not be allowed to plead. If
he be a notary, no instrument drawn up by him shall have any weight, but is
to be condemned together with its condemned author; and similar penalties
are decreed for the holders of other offices. But if he be a cleric, he is
to be degraded from all office and benefice; for, his guilt being the
greater, it is more heavily avenged. And if any such, after they have been
marked down by the Church, contemptuously try to ignore their punishment,
the sentence of excommunication is to be rigorously applied to them to the
extreme limits of vengeance. And the clergy shall not administer the
Sacraments of the Church to such heretics, nor presume to give them
Christian burial, nor accept their alms and oblations, on pain of being
deprived of their office, to which they can in no way be restored without a
special indulgence from the Apostolic See.
There are, finally, many other penalties incurred by such heretics
even when they do not persist in their obstinacy for a year, and also by
their children and grandchildren: for they can be degraded by a Bishop or by
an Inquisitor, declared deprived of all titles, possessions, honours and
ecclesiastical benefits, in fine of all public offices whatsoever. But this
is only when they are persistently and obstinately impenitent. Also their
sons to the second generation may be disqualified and unable to obtain
either ecclesiastical preferment or public office; but this is to be
understood only of the descendants on the father's side, and not on the
mother's, and only of those who are impenitent. Also all their followers,
protectors, fautors and patrons shall be denied all right of petition or
appeal; and this is explained as meaning that, after a verdict has been
returned that they are such heretics, then can they make no appeal before
their sentence, however much they may have been in any respect ill-used or
treated with undue severity. Much more could be adduced in support of our
standpoint, but this is sufficient.
Now for the better understanding of what has been said, some few
points are to be discussed. And first, if a prince or secular potentate
employ such a wizard as we have described for the destruction of some castle
in a just war, and with his help crushes the tyranny of wicked men; is his
whole army to be considered as protectors and patrons of that wizard, and to
be subjected to the penalties we have mentioned? The answer seems to be that
the rigour of justice must be tempered on account of their numbers. For the
leader, with his counsellors and advisers, must be considered to have aided
and abetted such witchcraft, and they are by law implicated in the aforesaid
penalties when, after being warned by their spiritual advisers, they have
persisted in their bad course; and then they are to be judged protectors and
patrons, and are to be punished. But the rest of the army, since they have
no part in their leaders' council, but are simply prepared to risk their
lives in defence of their country, although they may view with approval the
feats of the wizard, nevertheless escape the sentence of excommunication;
but they must in their confession acknowledge the guilt of the wizard, and
in their absolution by the confessor must receive a solemn warning to hold
all such practices for ever in detestation, and as far as they are able
drive from their land all such wizards.
It may be asked by whom such princes are to be absolved when they
come to their senses, whether by their own spiritual advisers or by the
Inquisitors? We answer that, if they repent, they may be absolved either by
their spiritual advisers, or by the Inquisitors. This is provided in the
Canon Law concerning the proceedings to be taken, in the fear of God and as
a warning to men, against heretics, their followers, protectors, patrons and
fautors, as also against those who are accused or suspected of heresy. But
if any of the above, forswearing his former lapse into heresy, wish to
return to the unity of the Church, he may receive the benefit of absolution
provided by Holy Church.
A prince, or any other, may be said to have returned to his senses
when he has delivered up the wizard to be punished for his offences against
the Creator; when he has banished from his dominions all who have been found
guilty of witchcraft or heresy; when he is truly penitent for the past; and
when, as becomes a Catholic prince, he is firmly determined in his mind not
to show any favour to any other such wizard.
But it may be asked to whom should such a man be surrendered, in
what court he should be tried, and whether he is to be judged as one openly
apprehended in heresy? The first difficulty is specially dealt with at the
beginning of the Third part; namely, whether it is the business of a secular
or of an ecclesiastical judge to punish such men. It is manifestly stated in
the Canon Law that no temporal magistrate or judge is competent to try a
case of heresy without a licence from the Bishops and Inquisitors, or at
least under the hand of someone who has authority from them. But when it
says that the secular courts have no jurisdiction in this matter because the
crime of heresy is exclusively ecclesiastical, this does not seem to apply
to the case of witches; for the crimes of witches are not exclusively
ecclesiastical, but are also civil on account of the temporal damage which
they do. Nevertheless, as will be shown later, although the ecclesiastical
judge must try and judge the case, yet it is for the secular judge to carry
out the sentence and inflict punishment, as is shown in the chapters of the
Canon no the abolition of heresy, and on excommunication. Wherefore, even if
he does surrender the witch to the Ordinary to be judged, the secular judge
has still the power of punishing him after he has been delivered back by the
Bishop; and with the consent of the Bishop, the secular judge can even
perform both offices, that is, he can both sentence and punish.
And it is no valid objection to say that such wizards are rather
apostates than heretics; for both these are offenders against the Faith; but
whereas a heretic is only in some partial or total doubt with regard to the
Faith, witchcraft in its very essence implies apostasy intent from the
Faith. For it is a heavier sin to corrupt the Faith, which is the life of
the soul, than to falsify money, which is a prop to the life of the body.
And if counterfeiters of money, and other malefactors, are immediately
sentenced to death, how much more just and equitable it is that such
heretics and apostates should be immediately put to death when they are
convicted.
Here was have also answered the second difficulty, namely, by what
court and judge such men are to be punished. But this will be more fully
considered in the Third Part of this work, where we treat of the methods of
sentencing the offenders, and how one taken in open heresy is to be
sentenced (see the eighth and twelfth methods), and of the question whether
one who becomes penitent is still to be put to death.
For if a simple heretic constantly backslides as often as he
repents, he is to be put to death according to the Canon Law; and this is
reasonable according to S. Thomas, as being for the general good. For if
relapsed heretics are often and often received back and allowed to live and
keep their temporal goods, it might prejudice the salvation of others, both
because they might infect others if they fell again, and because, if they
were to escape without punishment, others would have less fear in being
infected with heresy. And their very relapse argues that they are not
constant in the Faith, and they are therefore justly to be put to death. And
so we ought to say here that, if a mere suspicion of inconstancy is
sufficient warrant for an ecclesiastical judge to hand over such a
backslider to the secular court to be put to death, much more must he do so
in the case of one who refuses to prove his penitence and change of heart by
handing over to the secular court an apostate or any witch, but rather
leaves free and unchecked one whom the secular judge wishes to put to death
as a witch according to the law, on account of the temporal injuries of
which he has been guilty. But if the witch is penitent, the ecclesiastical
judge must first absolve him from the excommunication which he has incurred
because of the heresy of witchcraft. Also when a heretic is penitent, he can
be received back into the bosom of the Church for the salvation of his soul.
This matter is further discussed in the First Question of the Third Part,
and this is ample for the present. Only let all Rulers consider how strictly
and minutely they will be called to account by that terrible Judge; for
indeed there will be a severe judgement on those in authority who allow such
wizards to live and work their injuries against the Creator.
The other two classes of wizards belong to the general category of
those who can use incantations and sacrilegious charms so as to render
certain weapons incapable of harming or wounding them; and these are divided
into two kinds. For the first class resemble the archer-wizards of whom we
have just spoken, in that they also mutilate the image of Christ crucified.
For example, if they wish their head to be immune from any wound from a
weapon or from any blow, they take off the head of the Crucifix; if they
wish their neck to be invulnerable, they take off its neck; if their arm,
they take off, or at least shorten, the arm, and so on. And sometimes they
take away all above the waist, or below it. And in proof of this, hardly one
in ten of the Crucifixes set up at cross-roads or in the fields can be found
whole and intact. And some carry the limbs thus broken off about with them,
and others procure their invulnerability by means of sacred or unknown
words: therefore there is this difference between them. The first sort
resemble the archer-wizards in their contempt of the Faith and their
mutilation of the image of the Saviour, and are therefore to be considered
as true apostates, and so much be judged when they do not approach them in
wickedness. For they seem only to act for the protection of their own
bodies, either above the waist or below it, or of the whole body. Therefore
they are not to be judged as penitent heretics and not relapsed, when they
have been convicted as wizards and have repented; and they are to be imposed
a penance according to the eighth manner, with solemn adjuration and
incarceration, as is shown in the Third Part of this work.
The second sort can magically enchant weapons so that they can walk
on them with bare feet, and similar strange feats do they perform (for
according to S. Isidore, Etym. VIII, enchanters are those who have some
skill to perform wonders by means of words). And there is a distinction to
be made between them; for some perform their incantations by means of sacred
words, or charms written up over the sick, and these are lawful provided
that seven conditions are observed, as will be shown later where we deal
with the methods of curing those who are bewitched. But incantations made
over weapons by certain secret words, or cases where the charms written for
the sick have been taken down, are matters for the judge's attention. For
when they use words of which they do not themselves know the meaning, or
characters and signs which are not the sign of the Cross, such practices are
altogether to be repudiated, and good men should beware of the cruel arts of
these warlocks. And if they will not desist from such deeds, they must be
judges as suspects although lightly, and the manner of sentencing such after
the second method will be shown later. For they are not untainted with the
sin of heresy; for deeds of this kind can only be done with the help of the
devil, and, as we have shown, he who uses such help is judged to be an
apostate from the Faith. Yet on the plea of ignorance or of mending their
ways they may be dealt with more leniently than the archer-wizards.
It is more commonly found that traders and merchants are in the
habit of carrying about them such charms and runes; and since they partake
of the nature of incantations, a complete riddance must be made of them,
either by the father confessor in the box, or in open court by the
ecclesiastical judge. For these unknown words and characters imply a tacit
compact with the devil, who secretly uses such things for his own purpose,
granting their wearers their wishes, that he may lure them on to worse
things. Therefore in the court of law such men must be warned and sentenced
after the second method. In the box, the confessor must examine the charm,
and if he is unwilling to throw it away altogether, he must delete the
unknown words and signs, but may keep any Gospel words or the sign of the
Cross.
Now with regard to all these classes of wizards, and especially the
archers, it must be noted, as has been declared above, whether they are to
be judged as heretics openly taken in that sin; and we have touched on this
matter even before in the First Question of the First Part. And there it is
shown that S. Bernard says that there are three ways by which a man can be
convicted of heresy: either by the evidence of the fact when in simply
heresy he publicly preaches his errors, or by the credible evidence of
witnesses, or by a man's own confession. S. Bernard also explains the
meaning of some of the words of the Canon Law in this connexion, as was
shown in the First Question of the First Part of this work.
It is clear, therefore, that archer-wizards, and those mages who
enchant other weapons, are to be considered as manifestly guilty of flagrant
heresy, through some expressed pact with the devil, since it is obvious that
their feats would not be possible without the devil's help.
Secondly, it is equally clear that the patrons, protectors and
defenders of such men are manifestly to be judged in the same way, and
subjected to the prescribed punishments. For there is not in their case, as
there may be in that of several others, any doubt as to whether they are to
be regarded as lightly or strongly or gravely suspected; but they are always
very grave sinners against the Faith, and are always visited by God with a
miserable death.
For it is told that a certain prince used to keep such wizards in
his favour, and by their help unduly oppressed a certain city in matters of
commerce. And when one of his retainers remonstrated with him over this, he
threw away all fear of God and exclaimed, “God grant that I may die in this
place if I am oppressing them unjustly.” Divine vengeance quickly followed
these words, and he was stricken down with sudden death. And this vengeance
was not so much on account of his unjust oppression as because of his
patronage of heresy.
Thirdly, it is clear that all Bishops and Rulers who do not essay
their utmost to suppress crimes of this sort, with their authors and
patrons, are themselves to be judged as evident abettors of the crime, and
are manifestly to be punished in the prescribed manner.
QUESTION II
Question II The Methods of Destroying and Curing Witchcraft
Introduction, wherein is Set Forth the Difficulty of this Question.
Is it lawful to remove witchcraft by means of further witchcraft, or
by any other forbidden means?
It is argued that it is not; for it has already been shown that in
the Second Book of Sentences, and the 8th Distinction, all the Doctors agree
that it is unlawful to use the help of devils, since to do so involves
apostasy from the Faith. And, it is argued, no witchcraft can be removed
without the help of devils. For it is submitted that it must be cured either
by human power, or by diabolic, or by Divine power. It cannot be by the
first; for the lower power cannot counteract the higher, having no control
over that which is outside its own natural capacity. Neither can it be by
Divine power; for this would be a miracle, which God performs only at His
own will, and not at the instance of men. For when His Mother besought
Christ to perform a miracle to supply the need for wine, He answered: Woman,
what have I to do with thee? And the Doctors explain this as meaning, “What
association is there between you and me in the working of a miracle?” Also
it appears that it is very rarely that men are delivered from a bewitchment
by calling on God's help or the prayers of the Saints. Therefore it follows
that they can only be delivered by the help of devils; and it is unlawful to
seek such help.
Again it is pointed out that the common method in practice of taking
off a bewitchment, although it is quite unlawful, is for the bewitched
persons to resort to wise women, by whom they are very frequently cured, and
not by priests or exorcists. So experience shows that such curses are
effected by the help of devils, which it is unlawful to seek; therefore it
cannot be lawful thus to cure a bewitchment, but it must patiently be borne.
It is further argued that S. Thomas and S. Bonaventura, in Book IV,
dist. 34, have said that a bewitchment must be permanent because it can have
no human remedy; for if there is a remedy, it is either unknown to men or
unlawful. And these words are taken to mean that this infirmity is incurable
and must be regarded as permanent; and they add that, even if God should
provide a remedy by coercing the devil, and the devil should remove his
plague from a man, and the man should be cured, that cure would not be a
human one. Therefore, unless God should cure it, it is not lawful for a man
to himself to try in any way to look for a cure.
In the same place these two Doctors add that it is unlawful even to
seek a remedy by the superadding of another bewitchment. For they say that,
granting this to be possible, and that the original spell be removed, yet
the witchcraft is none the less to be considered permanent; for it is in no
way lawful to invoke the devil's help through witchcraft.
Further, it is submitted that the exorcisms of the Church are not
always effective in the repression of devils in the matter of bodily
afflictions, since such are cured only at the discretion of God; but they
are effective always against those molestations of devils against which they
are chiefly instituted, as, for example, against men who are possessed, or
in the matter of exorcising children.
Again, it does not follow that, because the devil has been given
power over someone on account of his sins, that power must come to an end on
the cessation of the sin. For very often a man may cease from sinning, but
his sins still remain. So it seems from these sayings that the two Doctors
we have cited were of the opinion that it is unlawful to remove a
bewitchment, but that it must be suffered, just as it is permitted by the
Lord God, Who can remove it when it seems good to Him.
Against this opinion it is argued that just as God and Nature do not
abound in superfluities, so also they are not deficient in necessities; and
it is a necessity that there should be given to the faithful against such
devils' work not only a means of protection (of which we treat in the
beginning of this Second Part), but also curative remedies. For otherwise
the faithful would not be sufficiently provided for by God, and the works of
the devil would seem to be stronger than God's work.
Also there is the gloss on that text in Job. There is no power on
earth, etc. The gloss says that, although the devil has power over all
things human, he is nevertheless subject to the merits of the Saints, and
even to the merits of saintly men in this life.
Again, S. Augustine (De moribus Ecclesiae) says: No Angel is more
powerful than our mind, when we hold fast to God. For if power is a virtue
in this world, then the mind that keeps close to God is more sublime than
the whole world. Therefore such minds can undo the works of the devil.
Answer. Here are two weighty opinions which, it seems, are at
complete variance with each other.
For there are certain Theologians and Canonists who agree that it is
lawful to remove witchcraft even by superstitious and vain means. And of
this opinion are Duns Scotus, Henry of Segusio, and Godfrey, and all the
Canonists. But it is the opinion of the other Theologians, especially the
ancient ones, and of some of the modern ones, such as S. Thomas, S.
Bonaventura, Blessed Albert, Peter a Palude, and many others, that in no
case must evil be done that good may result, and that a man ought rather to
die than consent to be cured by superstitious and vain means.
Let us now examine their opinions, with a view to bringing them as
far as possible into agreement. Scotus, in his Fourth Book, dist. 34, on
obstructions and impotence caused by witchcraft, says that it is foolish to
maintain that it is unlawful to remove a bewitchment even by superstitious
and vain means, and that to do so is in no way contrary to the Faith; for he
who destroys the work of the devil is not an accessory to such works, but
believes that the devil has the power and inclination to help in the
infliction of an injury only so long as the outward token or sign of that
injury endures. Therefore when that token is destroyed he puts an end to the
injury. And he adds that it is meritorious to destroy the works of the
devil. But, as he speaks of tokens, we will give an example.
There are women who discover a witch by the following token. When a
cow's supply of milk has been diminished by witchcraft, they hang a pail of
milk over the fire, and uttering certain superstitious words, beat the pail
with a stick. And though it is the pail that the women beat, yet the devil
carries all those blows to the back of the witch; and in this way both the
witch and the devil are made weary. But the devil does this in order that he
may lead on the woman who beats the pail to worse practices. And so, if it
were not for the risk which it entails, there would be no difficulty in
accepting the opinion of this learned Doctor. Many other examples could be
given.
Henry of Segusio, in his eloquent Summa on genital impotence caused
by witchcraft, says that in such cases recourse must be had to the remedies
of physicians; and although some of these remedies seem to be vain and
superstitious cantrips and charms, yet everyone must be trusted in his own
profession, and the Church may well tolerate the suppression of vanities by
means of others vanities.
Ubertinus also, in his Fourth Book, uses these words: A bewitchment
can be removed either by prayer or by the same art by which it was
inflicted.
Godfrey says in his Summa: A bewitchment cannot always be removed by
him who caused it, either because he is dead, or because he does not know
how to cure it, or because the necessary charm is lost. But if he knows how
to effect relief, it is lawful for him to cure it. Our author is speaking
against those who said that an obstruction of the carnal act could not be
caused by witchcraft, and that it could never be permanent, and therefore
did not annul a marriage already contracted.
Besides, those who maintained that no spell is permanent were moved
by the following reasons: they thought that every bewitchment could be
removed either by another magic spell, or by the exorcisms of the Church
which are ordained for the suppression of the devil's power, or by true
penitence, since the devil has power only over sinners. So in the first
respect they agree with the opinion of the others, namely, that a spell can
be removed by superstitious means.
But S. Thomas is of the contrary opinion when he says: If a spell
cannot be revoked except by some unlawful means, such as the devil's help or
anything of that sort, even if it is known that it can be revoked in that
way, it is nevertheless to be considered permanent; for the remedy is not
lawful.
Of the same opinion are S. Bonaventura, Peter a Palude, Blessed
Albert, and all the Theologians. For, touching briefly on the question of
invoking the help of the devil either tacitly or expressedly, they seem to
hold that such spells may only be removed by lawful exorcism or true
penitence (as is set down in the Canon Law concerning sortilege), being
moved, as it seems, by the considerations mentioned in the beginning of this
Question.
But it is expedient to bring these various opinions of the learned
Doctors as far as possible into agreement, and this can be done in one
respect. For this purpose it is to be noted that the methods by which a
spell of witchcraft can be removed are as follows: - either by the agency of
another witch and another spell; or without the agency of a witch, but by
means of magic and unlawful ceremonies. And this last method may be divided
into two; namely, the use of ceremonies which are both unlawful and vain, or
the use of ceremonies which are vain but not unlawful.
The first remedy is altogether unlawful, in respect both of the
agent and of the remedy itself. But it may be accomplished in two ways;
either with some injury to him who worked the spell, or without an injury,
but with magic and unlawful ceremonies. In the latter case it can be
included with the second method, namely, that by which the spell is removed
not by the agency of a witch, but by magic and unlawful ceremonies; and in
this case it is still to be judged unlawful, though not to the same extent
as the first method.
We may summarize the position as follows. There are three conditions
by which a remedy is rendered unlawful. First, when a spell is removed
through the agency of another witch, and by further witchcraft, that is, by
the power of some devil. Secondly, when it is not removed by a witch, but by
some honest person, in such a way, however, that the spell is by some
magical remedy transferred from one person to another; and this again is
unlawful. Thirdly, when the spell is removed without imposing it on another
person, but some open or tacit invocation of devils is used; and then again
it is unlawful.
And it is with reference to these methods that the Theologians say
that it is better to die than to consent to them. But there are two other
methods by which, according to the Canonists, it is lawful, or not idle and
vain, to remove a spell; and that such methods may be used when all the
remedies of the Church, such as exorcisms and the prayers of the Saints and
true penitence, have been tried and have failed. But for a clearer
understanding of these remedies we will recount some examples known to our
experience.
In the time of Pope Nicolas there had come to Rome on some business
a certain Bishop from Germany, whom it is charitable not to name although he
had now paid the debt of all nature. There he fell in love with a girl, and
sent her to his diocese in charge of two servants and certain other of his
possessions, including some rich jewels, which were indeed very valuable,
and began to think in her heart that, if only the Bishop were to die through
some witchcraft, she would be able to take possession of the rings, the
pendants and carcanets. The next night the Bishop suddenly fell ill, and the
physicians and his servants gravely suspected that he had been poisoned; for
there was such a fire in his breast that he had to take continual draughts
of cold water to assuage it. On the third day, when there seemed no hope of
his life, an old woman came and begged that she might see him. So they let
her in, and she promised the Bishop that she could heal him if he would
agree to her proposals. When the Bishop asked what it was to which he had to
agree in order to regain his health, as he so greatly desired, the old woman
answered: Your illness has ben caused by a spell of witchcraft, and you can
only be healed by another spell, which will transfer the illness from you to
the witch who caused it, so that she will die. The Bishop was astounded; and
seeing that he could be healed in no other way, and not wishing to come to a
rash decision, decided to ask the advice of the Pope. Now the Holy Father
loved him very dearly, and when he learned that he could only be healed by
the death of the witch, he agreed to permit the lesser of two evils, and
signed this permission with his seal. So the old woman was again approached
and told that both he and the Pope had agreed to the death of the witch, on
condition that he was restored to his former health; and the old woman went
away, promising him that he would be healed on the following night. And
behold! when about the middle of the night he felt himself cured and free
from all illness, he sent a messenger to learn what had happened to the
girl; and he came back and reported that she had suddenly been taken ill in
the middle of the night while sleeping by her mother's side.
It is to be understood that at the very same hour and moment the
illness left the Bishop and afflicted the girl witch, through the agency of
the old witch; and so the evil spirit, by ceasing to plague the Bishop,
appeared to restore him to health by chance, whereas it was not he but God
who permitted him to afflict im, and it was God Who properly speaking
restored him; and the devil, by reason of his compact with the second witch,
who envied the fortune of the girl, has to afflict the Bishop's mistress.
And it must be thought that those two evil spells were not worked by one
devil serving two persons, but by two devils serving two separate witches.
For the devils do not work against themselves, but work as much as possible
in agreement for the perdition of souls.
Finally, the Bishop went out of compassion to visit the girl; but
when he entered the room, she received him with horrible execrations, crying
out: May you and she who wrought your cure be damned for ever! And the
Bishop tried to soften her mind to penitence, and told her that he forgave
her all her wrongs; but she turned her face away and said: I have no hope of
pardon, but commend my soul to all the devils in hell; and died miserably.
But the Bishop returned home with joy and thankfulness.
Here it is to be noted that a privilege granted to one does not
construe a precedent for all, and the dispensation of the Pope in this case
does not argue that it is lawful in all cases.
Nider in his Formicarius refers to the same master, for he says: The
following method is sometimes employed for removing or taking vengeance for
a spell of witchcraft. Someone who has been bewitched either in himself or
in his possessions comes to a witch desiring to know how has injured him.
Then the witch pours molten lead into water until, by the work of the devil,
some image is formed by the solidified lead. On this, the witch asks his
enemy to be hurt, so that he may recognize him by that hurt. And when he has
chosen, the witch immediately pierces or wounds with a knife the leaden
image in the same part, and shows him the place by which he can recognize
the guilty person. And it is found by experience that, just in the same way
as the leaden image is hurt, so is the witch hurt who cast the spell.
But of this sort of remedy I say, and of others like it, that
generally they are unlawful; although human weakness, in the hope of
obtaining pardon from God, is very often ensnared in such practices, being
more careful for the health of the body than for that of the soul.
The second kind of cure which is wrought by witches who remove a
spell again requires an expressed pact with the devil, but is not
accompanied by any injury to another person. And in what light such witches
should be considered, and how they are to be recognized, will be shown later
in the fifteenth method of sentencing witches, for they are always found at
intervals of one or two German miles, and these seem to be able to cure any
who have been bewitched by another witch in their own district. Some of them
claim to be able to effect such cures at all times; some that they can only
cure those bewitched in the neighbouring signiory; others that they can only
perform their cures with the consent of the witch who cast the original
spell.
And it is known that these women have entered into an open pact with
the devil, because they reveal secret matters to those who come to them to
be cured. For they suddenly disclose to such a person the cause of his
calamity, telling him that he has been bewitched either in his own person or
in his possessions because of some quarrel he has had with a neighbour or
with some other woman or man; and at times, in order to keep their criminal
practices secret, they enjoin upon their clients some pilgrimage or other
pious work. But to approach such women in order to be cured is all the more
pernicious because they seem to bring greater contempt upon the Faith than
others who effect their cures by means of a merely tacit compact with the
devil.
For they who resort to such witches are thinking more of their
bodily health than of God, and besides that, God cuts short their lives to
punish them for taking into their own hands the vengeance for their wrongs.
For so the Divine vengeance overtook Saul, because he first cast out of the
land all magicians and wizards, and afterwards consulted a witch; wherefore
he was slain in battle with his sons, I. Samuel xxviii, and I. Paralipomenon
x. And for the same reason the sick Ochozias had to die, IV. Kings i
(Ahaziah; II. Kings i. A.V.).
Also the who consult such witches are regarded as defamed, and
cannot be allowed to bring an accusation, as will be shown in the Third
Part; and they are by law to be sentenced to capital punishment, as was said
in the First Question of this work.
But alas! O Lord God, Who art just in all Thy judgements, who shall
deliver the poor who are bewitched and cry out in their ceaseless pains? For
our sins are so great, and the enemy is so strong; and where are they who
can undo the works of the devil by lawful exorcisms? This one remedy appears
to be left; that judges should, by various penalties, keep such wickedness
as far as possible in check by punishing the witches who are the cause of
it; that so they may deprive the sick of the opportunity of consulting
witches. But, alas! no one understands this in his heart; but they all seek
for their own gain instead of that of JESUS Christ.
For so many people used to go to be freed from spells to that witch
in Reichshofen, whom we have already mentioned, that the Count of the castle
set up a toll-booth, and all who were bewitched in their own persons or in
their possessions had to pay a penny before they could visit her house; and
he boasted that he made a substantial profit by this means.
We know from experience that there are many such witches in the
diocese of Constance: not that this diocese is more infected than others,
since this form of infidelity is general in all dioceses; but this diocese
has been more thoroughly sifted. It was found that daily resort was being
made to a man named Hengst by a very large concourse of poor folk who had
been bewitched, and with our own eyes we saw such crowds in the village of
Eningen, that certainly the poor never flocked to any shrine of the Blessed
Virgin, or to a Holy Well or a Hermitage, in such numbers as they went to
that sorcerer. For in the very coldest winter weather, when all the highways
and byways were snow-bound, they came to him from two or three miles round
in spite of the greatest difficulties; and some were cured, but others not.
For I suppose that all spells are not equally easy to remove, on account of
various obstacles, as has been said before. And these witches remove spells
by means of an open invocation of devils after the manner of the second kind
of remedies, which are unlawful, but not to the same extent as the first
kind.
The third kind of remedy is that which is wrought by means of
certain superstitious ceremonies, but without any injury to anyone, and not
by an overt witch. An example of this method is as follows:
A certain market merchant in the town of Spires deposed that the
following experience had happened to him. I was staying, he said, in Swabia
in a well-known nobleman's castle, and one day after dinner I was strolling
at my ease with two of the servants in the fields, when a woman met us. But
while she was still a long way off my companions recognized her, and one of
them said to me, “Cross yourself quickly,” and the other one urged me in
like manner. I asked them what they feared, and they answered, “The most
dangerous witch in the whole Province is coming to meet us, and she can cast
a spell on men by only looking at them.” But I obstinately boasted that I
had never been afraid of such; and hardly had I uttered the words before I
felt myself grievously hurt in the left foot, so that I could not move it
from the ground or take a step without the greatest pain. Whereupon they
quickly sent to the castle for a horse for me, and thus led me back. But the
pains went on increasing for three days.
The people of the castle, understanding that I had been bewitched,
related what had happened to a certain peasant who lived about a mile away,
whom they knew to have skill in removing spells. This man quickly came and,
after examining my foot, said, “I will test whether these pains are due to a
natural cause; and if I find that they are due to witchcraft, I will cure
you with the help of God; but if they are not, you must have recourse to
natural remedies.” Whereupon I made reply, “If I can be cured without any
magic, and with the help of God, I will gladly agree; but I will have
nothing to do with the devil, nor do I wish for his help.” And the peasant
promised that he would use none except lawful means, and that he would cure
me by the help of God, provided that he could make certain that my pains
were due to witchcraft. So I consented to his proposals. Then he took molten
lead (in the manner of another witch whom we have mentioned), and held it in
an iron ladle over my foot, and poured it into a bowl of water; and
immediately there appeared the shapes of various things, as if thorns and
hairs and bones and such things had been put into the bowl. “Now,” he said,
“I see that this infirmity is not natural, but certainly due to witchcraft.”
And when I asked him how he could tell this from the molten lead, he
answered, “There are seven metals belonging to the seven planets; and since
Saturn is the Lord of lead, when lead is poured out over anyone who has been
bewitched, it is his property to discover the witchcraft by his power. And
so it has surely proved, and you will soon be cured; yet I must visit you
for as many days as you have been under this spell.” And he asked me how
many days had passed; and when I told him that was the third day, he came to
see me on each of the next three days, and merely by examining and touching
my foot and by saying over to himself certain words, he dissolved the charm
and restored me to complete health.
In this case it is clear that the healer is not a witch, although
his method is something superstitious. For in that he promised a cure by the
help of God, and not by devils' work, and that he alleged the influence of
Saturn over lead, he was irreproachable and rather to be commended. But
there remains some small doubt as to the power by which the witch's spell
was removed, and the figures caused in the lead. For no witchcraft can be
removed by any natural power, although it may be assuaged, as will be proved
later where we speak of the remedies for those who are possessed: therefore
it seems that he performed this cure by means of at least some tacit pact
with a devil. And we call such a pact tacit when the practitioner agrees
tacitly, at any rate, to employ the devil's aid. And in this way many
superstitious works are done, but with a varying degree of offence to the
Creator, since there may be far more offence to Him in one operation than in
another.
Yet because this peasant was certain of effecting a cure, and
because he had to visit the patient for as many days as he had been ill, and
although he used no natural remedies, yet cured him according to the promise
made; for these reasons, although he had entered into no open pact with the
devil, he is to be judged not only as a suspect, but as one plainly guilty
of heresy, and must be considered as convicted and subject at least to the
penalties set out below in the second method of sentencing; but his
punishment must be accompanied with a solemn adjuration, unless he is
protected by other laws which seem to be of a contrary intention; and what
the Ordinary should do in such a case will be shown later in the solution of
the arguments.
The fourth class of remedies, concerning which the Canonists are in
partial agreement with some of the Theologians, is said to be no worse than
idle and vain; since it is superstitious only, and there is no pact either
open or tacit with the devil as regards the intention or purpose of the
practitioner. And I say that the Canonists and some Theologians are only
partially agreed that this sort of remedy is to be tolerated; for their
agreement or non-agreement depends upon whether or not they class this sort
of remedies together with the third sort. But this sort of vain remedy is
exemplified above in the case of the women who beat the pail hung over the
fire in order that the witch may be beaten who has caused a cow to be
drained of milk; although this may be done either in the name of the devil
or without any reference to him.
We may adduce other examples of the same kind. For sometimes when a
cow has been injured in this way, and they wish to discover who has
bewitched it, they drive it out into the fields with a man's trousers, or
some unclean thing, upon its head or back. And this they do chiefly on Feast
Days and Holy Days, and possibly with some sort of invocation of the devil;
and they beat the cow with a stick and drive it away. Then the cow runs
straight to the house of the witch, and beats vehemently upon the door with
its horns, lowing loudly all the while; and the devil causes the cow to go
on doing this until it is pacified by some other witchcraft.
Actually, and according to the aforesaid Doctors, such remedies can
be tolerated, but they are not meritorious, as some try to maintain. For S.
Paul says that everything which we do, in word or deed, must be done in the
name of Our Lord JESUS Christ. Now in this sort of remedy there may be no
direct invocation of the devil, and yet the devil's name may be mentioned:
and again there may be no intention to do such things by means of any open
or tacit pact with the devil, yet a man may say, “I wish to do this, whether
the devil has any part in it or not”; and that very temerity, by putting
aside the fear of God, offends God, Who therefore grants the devil power to
accomplish such cures. Therefore they who use such practices must be led
into the way of penitence, and urged to leave such things and turn rather to
the remedies of which we shall speak later, though we have touched upon them
before, namely, the use of Holy Water and Blessed Salt and exorcisms, etc.
In the same light should be regarded those who use the following
method. When an animal has been killed by witchcraft, and they wish to find
out the witch, or to make certain whether its death was natural or due to
witchcraft, they go to the place where dead animals are skinned, and drag
the intestines along the ground up to their house; not into the house
through the main door, but over the threshold of the back entrance into the
kitchen; and then they make a fire and put the intestines over it on a
hurdle. Then, according to what we have very often been told, just as the
intestines get hot and burn, so are the intestines of the witch afflicted
with burning pains. But when they perform this experiment they take great
care that the door is securely locked; because the witch is compelled by her
pains to try to enter the house, and if she can take a coal from the fire,
all her pains will disappear. And we have often been told that, when she is
unable to enter the house, she surrounds it inside and out with the densest
fog, with such horrible shrieks and commotions that at last all those in the
house think the roof is verily going to fall down and crush them unless they
open the door.
Certain other experiments are of the same nature. For sometimes
people pick out the witches from a number of women in church by causing the
witches to be unable to leave the church without their permission, even
after the service is finished. And they do it in this way. On a Sunday they
smear the shoes of the young men with grease, lard or pigs' fat, as is their
wont when they wish to repair and renew the freshness of the leather, and
thus the juvenals enter the church, whence it is impossible for any witches
who are present to make their way out or depart until those who are anxious
to espy them either go away themselves or give them express leave to make
their way to their homes (see note).
It is the same with certain words, which it is not expedient to
mention lest anyone should be seduced by the devil to use them. For judges
and magistrates should not attach too much weight to the evidence of those
who pretend to discover witches by this means, for fear lest the devil, that
wily enemy, should induce them under this pretext to defame innocent women.
Therefore such persons must be enjoined to seek the remedy of penitence.
However, practices of this kind are on occasion to be tolerated and allowed.
In this way we have answered the arguments that no spell of
witchcraft must be removed. For the first two remedies are altogether
unlawful. The third remedy is tolerated by the law, but needs very careful
examination on the part of the ecclesiastical judge. And what the civil law
tolerates is shown in the chapter on witches, where it is said that those
who have skill to prevent men's labours from being vitiated by tempests and
hailstorms are worthy, not of punishment, but of reward. S. Antoninus also,
in his Summa, points out this discrepancy between the Canon Law and civil
law. Therefore it seems that the civil law concedes the legality of such
practices for the preservation of crops and cattle, and that in any event
certain men who use such arts are not only to be tolerated but even
rewarded. Wherefore the ecclesiastical judge must take particular note
whether the methods used in counteraction of hailstorms and tempests are
within the spirit of the law, or whether they are in any way superstitious;
and then, if no scandal to the Faith is involved, they can be tolerated. But
actually this does not belong to the third method, but to the fourth, and
also to the fifth, of which we shall speak later in the following chapters,
where we deal with the ecclesiastical and lawful remedies, with which are
sometimes included certain superstitious practices belonging to the fourth
method.
Chapter I The Remedies prescribed by the Holy Church against Incubus and
Succubus Devils.
IN the foregoing chapters on the First Question we have treated of
the methods of bewitching men, animals and the fruits of the earth, and
especially of the behaviour of witches in their own persons; how they seduce
young girls in order to increase their numbers; what is their method of
profession and of offering homage; how they offer to devils their own
children and the children of others; and how they are transported from place
to place. Now I say that there is no remedy for such practises, unless
witches be entirely eradicated by the judges, or at least punished as an
example to all who may wish to imitate them; but we are not immediately
treating of this point, which will be dealt with in the last Part of this
work, where we set forth the twenty ways of proceeding against and
sentencing witches.
For the present we are concerned only with the remedies against the
injuries which they inflict; and first how men who are bewitched can be
cured; secondly, beasts, and thirdly, how the fruits of the earth may be
secured from blight or phylloxera.
With regard to the bewitchment of human beings by means of Incubus
and Succubus devils, it is to be noted that this can happen in three ways.
First, when women voluntarily prostitute themselves to Incubus devils.
Secondly, when men have connexion with Succubus devils; yet it does not
appear that men thus devilishly fornicate with the same full degree of
culpability; for men, being by nature intellectually stronger than women,
are more apt to abhor such practises.
There is in the town of Coblenz a poor man who is bewitched in this
way. In the presence of his wife he is in the habit of acting after the
manner of men with women, that is to say, of practising coition, as it were,
and he continues to do this repeatedly, nor have the cries and urgent
appeals of his wife any effect in making him desist. And after he has
fornicated thus two or three times, he bawls out, “We are going to start all
over again”; when actually there is no person visible to mortal sight lying
with him. And after an incredible number of such bouts, the poor man at last
sinks to the floor utterly exhausted. When he has recovered his strength a
little and is asked how this happened to him, and whether he has had any
women with him, he answers that he saw nothing, but his mind is in some way
possessed so that he can by no means refrain from such priapism. And indeed
he harbours a great suspicion that a certain woman bewitched him in this
way, because he had offended her, and she had cursed him with threatening
words, telling him what she would like to happen to him.
But there are no laws or ministers of justice which can proceed to
the avenging of so great a crime with no other warrant than a vague charge
or a grave suspicion; for it is held that no one ought to be condemned
unless he has been convicted by his own confession, or by the evidence of
three trustworthy witnesses, since the mere fact of the crime coupled with
even the gravest suspicions against some person is not sufficient to warrant
the punishment of that person. But this matter will be dealt with later.
As for instances where young maidens are molested by Incubus devils
in this way, it would take too long to mention even those that have been
known to happen in our own time, for there are very many well-attested
stories of such bewitchments. But the great difficulty of finding a remedy
for such afflictions can be illustrated from a story told by Thomas of
Brabant in his Book on Bees.
I saw, he writes, and heard the confession of a virgin in a
religious habit, who said at first that she had never been a consenting
party to fornication, but at the same time have been known in this way. This
I could not believe, but narrowly charged and exhorted her, with the most
solemn adjurations, to speak the truth on peril of her very soul. At last,
weeping bitterly, she acknowledged that she had been corrupted rather in
mind than in body; and that though she had afterwards grieved almost to
death, and had daily confessed with tears, yet by no device or study or art
could she be delivered from an Incubus devil, nor yet by the sign of the
Cross, nor by Holy Water, which are specially ordained for the expulsion of
devils, nor even by the Sacrament of the Body of Our Lord, which even the
Angels fear. But at last after many years of prayer and fasting she was
delivered.
It may be believed (saving a better judgement) that, after she
repented and confessed her sin, the Incubus devil should be regarded rather
in the light of a punishment for sin than as a sin in itself.
A devout nun, named Christina, in the Low Country of the Duchy of
Brabant, told me the following concerning this same woman. On the vigil of
one Pentacost the woman came to her complaining that she dared not take the
Sacrament because of the importunate molestation of a devil. Christina,
pitying her, said: “Go, and rest assured that you will receive the Body of
Our Lord to-morrow; for I will take your punishment upon myself.” So she
went away joyfully, and after praying the night slept in peace, and rose up
in the morning and communicated in all tranquility of the soul. But
Christina, not thinking of the punishment she had taken upon herself, went
to her rest in the evening, and as she lay in bed hear, as it were, a
violent attack being made upon her; and, seizing whatever it was by the
throat, tried to throw it off. She lay down again, but was again molested,
and rose up in terror; and this happened many times, whilst all the straw of
her bed was turned over and thrown about everywhere, so at length she
perceived that she was being persecuted by the malice of a devil. Thereupon
she left her pallet, and passed a sleepless night; and when she wished to
pray, she was so tormented by the devil that she said she had never suffered
so much before. In the morning, therefore, saying to the other woman, “I
renounce your punishment, and I am hardly alive to renounce it,” she escaped
from the violence of that wicked tempter. From this it can be seen how
difficult it is to cure this sort of evil, whether or not it is due to
witchcraft.
However, there are still some means by which these devils may be
driven away, of which Nider writes in his Formicarius. He says that there
are five ways by which girls or men can be delivered: first, by Sacramental
Confession; second, by the Sacred Sign of the Cross, or by the recital of
the Angelic Salutation; third, by the use of exorcisms; fourth, by moving to
another place; and fifth, by means of excommunication prudently employed by
holy men. It is evident from what has been said that the first two methods
did not avail the nun; but they are not on that account to be neglected, for
that which cures one person does not necessarily cure another, and
conversely. And it is a recorded fact that Incubus devils have often been
driven away by the Lord's Prayer, or by the sprinkling of Holy Water, and
also especially by the Angelic Salutation.
For S. Caesarius tells in his Dialogue that, after a certain priest
had hanged himself, his concubine entered a convent, where she was carnally
solicited by an Incubus. She drove him away by crossing herself and using
Holy Water, yet he immediately returned. But when she recited the Angelic
Salutation, he vanished like an arrow shot from a bow; still he came back,
although he did not dare to come near her, because of the Ave MARIA.
S. Caesarius also refers to the remedy of Sacramental Confession.
For he says that the aforesaid concubine was entirely abandoned by the
Incubus after she was clean confessed. He tells also of a man in Leyden who
was plagued by a Succubus, and was entirely delivered after Sacramental
Confession.
He adds yet another example, of an enclosed nun, a contemplative,
whom an Incubus would not leave in spite of prayers and confession and other
religious exercises. For he persisted in forcing his way to her bed. But
when, acting on the advice of a certain religious man, she uttered the word
Benedicite, the devil at once left her.
Of the fourth method, that of moving to another place, he says that
a certain priest's daughter had been defiled by an Incubus and driven
frantic with grief; but when she went away across the Rhine, she was left in
peace by the Incubus. Her father, however, because he had sent her away, was
so afflicted by the devil that he died within three days.
He also maintains a woman who was often molested by an Incubus in
her own bed, and asked a devout friend of hers to come and sleep with her.
She did so, and was troubled all night with the utmost uneasiness and
disquiet, and then the first woman was left in peace. William of Paris notes
also that Incubus seem chiefly to molest women and girls with beautiful
hair; either because they devote themselves too much to the care and
adornment of their hair, or because they are boastfully vain about it, or
because God in His goodness permits this so that women may be afraid to
entice men by the very means by which the devils wish them to entice men.
The fifth method, that of excommunication, which is perhaps the same
as exorcism, is exemplified in a history of S. Bernard. In Aquitaine a woman
had for six years been molested by an Incubus with incredible carnal abuse
and lechery; and she heard the Incubus threaten her that she must not go
near the holy man, who was coming that way, saying: “It will avail you
nothing: for when he was gone away, I, who have till now been your lover,
will become the cruellest of tyrants to you.” None the less she went to S.
Bernard, and he said to her: “Take my staff and set it in your bed, and may
the devil do what he can.” When she had done this, the devil did not dare to
enter the woman's room, but threatened her terribly from outside, saying
that he would persecute her when S. Bernard had gone away. When S. Bernard
heard this from the woman, he called the people together, bidding them carry
lighted candles in their hands, and, with the whole assembly which was
gathered, excommunicated the devil, forbidding him evermore to approach that
woman or any other. And so she was delivered from that punishment.
Here it is to be noted that the power of the Keys granted to S.
Peter and his successors, which resounds on the earth, is really a power of
healing granted to the Church on behalf of travellers who are subject to the
jurisdiction of the Papal power; therefore is seems wonderful that even the
Powers of the air can be warded off by this virtue. But it must be
remembered that persons who are molested by devils are under the
jurisdiction of the Pope and his Keys; and therefore it is not surprising if
such Powers are indirectly kept at bay by the virtue of the Keys, just as by
the same virtue the souls in purgatory can indirectly by delivered from the
pains of fire; insasmuch as this Power availeth upon the earth, ay, and to
the relief of souls that are under the earth.
But it is not seemly to discuss the Power of the Keys granted to the
Head of the Church as Christ's Vicar; since it is know that, for the use of
the Church, Christ granted to the Church and His Vicar as much power as it
is possible for God to grant to mere man.
And it is piously to be believed that, when infirmities inflicted by
witches through the power of devils, together with the witches and devils
themselves, are excommunicated, those who were afflicted will no longer be
tormented; and that they will be delivered all the sooner by the use of
other lawful exorcisms in addition.
There is a common report current in the districts of the river
Etsch, as also in other places, that by the permission of God a swarm of
locusts came and devoured all the vines, green leaves and crops; and that
they were suddenly put to flight and dispersed by means of this kind of
excommunication and cursing. Now it any wish that this should ascribed to
some holy man, and not to the virtue of the Keys, let ie be so, in the name
of the Lord; but of one thing we are certain, that both the power to perform
miracles and the power of the Keys necessarily presuppose a condition of
grace in him who performs that act of grace, since both these powers proceed
from grace granted to men who are in a state of grace.
Again, it is to be noted that, if none of the aforesaid remedies are
of any avail, then recourse must be had to the usual exorcisms, of which we
shall treat later. And if even these are not sufficient to banish the
iniquity of the devil, then that affliction must be considered to be an
expiatory punishment for sin, which should be borne in all meekness, as are
other ills of this sort which oppress us that they may, as it were, drive us
to seek God.
But it must also be remarked that sometimes persons only think they
are molested by an Incubus when they are not so actually; and this is more
apt to be the case with women than with men, for they are more timid and
liable to imagine extraordinary things.
In this connexion William of Paris is often quoted. He says: Many
phantastical apparitions occur to person suffering fro a melancholy disease,
especially to women, as is shown by their dreams and visions. And the reason
for this, as physicians know, is that women's souls are by nature far more
easily and lightly impressionable than men's souls. And he adds: I know that
I have seen a woman who thought that a devil copulated with her from inside,
and said she was physically conscious of such incredible things.
At time also women think they have been made pregnant by an Incubus,
and their bellies grow to an enormous size; but when the time of parturition
comes, their swelling is relieved by no more than the expulsion of a great
quantity of wind. For by taking ants' eggs in drink, or the seeds of spurge
or of the black pine, an incredible amount of wind and flatulence is
generated in the human stomach. And it is very easy for the devil to cause
these and even greater disorders in the stomach. This has been set down in
order that too easy credence should not be given to women, but only to those
whom experience has shown to be trustworthy, and to those who, by sleeping
in their beds or near them, know for a fact that such things as we have
spoken of are true.
Chapter II Remedies prescribed for Those who are Bewitched by the
Limitation of the Generative Power.
Although far more women are witches than men, as was shown in the
First Part of the work, yet men are more often bewitched than women. And the
reason for this lies in the fact that God allows the devil more power over
the venereal act, by which the original sin is handed down, than over other
human actions. In the same way He allows more witchcraft to be performed by
means of serpents, which are more subject to incantations than other
animals, because that was the first instrument of the devil. And the
venereal act can be more readily and easily bewitched in a man than in a
woman, as has been clearly shown. For there are five ways in which the devil
can impede the act of generation, and they are more easily operated against
men.
As far as possible we shall set out the remedies which can be
applies in each separate kind of obstruction; and let him who is bewitched
in this faculty take note to which class of obstruction he belongs. For
there are five classes, according to Peter a Palude in his Fourth Book,
dist. 34, of the trial of this sort of bewitchment.
For the devil, being a spirit, has by his very nature power, with
God's permission, over a bodily creature, especially to promote or to
prevent local motion. So by this power they can prevent the bodies of men
and women from approaching each other; and this either directly or
indirectly. Directly, when they remove one to a distance from another, and
do not allow him to approach the other. Indirectly, when they cause some
obstruction, or when they interpose themselves in an assumed body. So it
happened that a young Pagan who had married an idol, but none the less
contracted a marriage with a girl; but because of this he was unable to
copulate with her, as has been shown above.
Secondly, the devil can inflame a man towards one woman and render
him impotent towards another; and this he can secretly cause by the
application of certain herbs or other matters of which he well knows the
virtue for this purpose.
Thirdly, he can disturb the apperception of a man or a woman, so
that he makes one appear hideous to the other; for, as has been shown, he
can influence the imagination.
Fourthly, he can suppress the vigour of that member which is
necessary for procreation; just as he can deprive any organ of the power of
local motion.
Fifthly, he can prevent the flow of the semen to the members in
which is the motive power, by as it were closing the seminal duct so that it
does not descend to the genital vessels, or does not ascend again from them,
or cannot come forth, or is spent vainly.
But if a man should say: I do not know by which of these different
methods I have been bewitched; all I know is that I cannot do anything with
my wife: he should be answered in this way. If he is active and able with
regard to other women, but not with his wife, then he is bewitched in the
second way; for he can be certified as to the first way, that he is being
deluded by Succubus or Incubus devils. Moreover, if he does not find his
wife repellent, and yet cannot know her, but can know other women, then
again it is the second way; but if he finds her repellent and cannot
copulate with her, then it is the second and the third way. If he does not
find her repellent and wishes to have connexion with her, but has no power
in his member, then it is the fourth way. But if he has power in his member,
yet cannot emit his semen, then it is the fifth way. The method of curing
these will be shown where we consider whether those who live in grace and
those who do not are equally liable to be bewitched in these manners; and we
answer that they are not, with the exception of the fourth manner, and even
then very rarely. For such an affliction can happen to a man living in grace
and righteousness; but the reader must understand that in this case we speak
of the conjugal act between married people; for in any other case they are
all liable to bewitchment; for every venereal act outside wedlock is a
mortal sin, and is only committed by those who are not in a state of grace.
We have, indeed, the authority of the whole of Scriptural teaching
that God allows the devil to afflict sinners more than the just. For
although that most just man, Job, was stricken, yet he was not so
particularly or directly in respect of the procreant function. And it may be
said that, when a married couple are afflicted in this way, either both the
parties or one of them is not living in a state of grace; and this opinion
is substantiated in the Scriptures both by authority and by reason. For the
Angel said to Tobias: The devil receives power against those who are given
over to lust: and he proved it in the slaying of the seven husbands of the
virgin Sara.
Cassian, in his Collation of the Fathers, quotes S. Antony as saying
that the devil can in no way enter our mind or body unless he has first
deprived it of all holy thoughts and made it empty and bare of spiritual
contemplation. These words should not be applies to an evil affliction over
the whole of the body, for when Job was so afflicted he was not denuded of
Divine grace; but they have particular reference to a particular infirmity
inflicted upon the body for some sin. And the infirmity we are considering
can only be due to the sin of incontinence. For, as we have said, God allows
the devil more power over that act than over other human acts, because of
its natural nastiness, and because by it the first sin was handed down to
posterity. Therefore when people joined in matrimony have for some sin been
deprived of Divine help, God allows them to be bewitched chiefly in their
procreant functions.
But if it is asked of what sort are those sins, it can be said,
according to S. Jerome, that even in a state of matrimony it is possible to
commit the sin of incontinence in various ways. See the text: He who loves
his wife to excess is an adulterer. And they who love in this way are more
liable to be bewitched after the manner we have said.
The remedies of the Church, then, are twofold: one applicable in the
public court, the other in the tribunal of the confessional. As for the
first, when it has been publicly found that the impotence is due to
witchcraft, then it must be distinguished whether it is temporary or
permanent. If it is only temporary, it does not annul the marriage. And it
is assumed to be temporary if, within the space of three years, by using
every possible expedient of the Sacraments of the Church and other remedies,
a cure can be caused. But if, after that time, they cannot be cured by any
remedy, then it is assumed to be permanent.
Now the disability either precedes both the contract and the
consummation of marriage; and in this case it impedes the contract: or it
follows the contract but precedes the consummation; and in this case it
annuls the contract. For men are very often bewitched in this way because
they have cast off their former mistresses, who, hoping that they were to be
married and being disappointed, so bewitch the men that they cannot copulate
with another woman. And in such a case, according to the opinion of many,
the marriage already contracted is annulled, unless, like Our Blessed Lady
and S. Joseph they are willing to live together in holy continence. This
opinion is supported by the Canon where it says (23, q. I) that a marriage
is confirmed by the carnal act. And a little later it says that impotence
before such confirmation dissolves the ties of marriage.
Or else the disability follows the consummation of a marriage, and
then it does not dissolve the bonds of matrimony. Much more to this effect
is noted by the Doctors, where in various writings they treat of the
obstruction due to witchcraft; but since it is not precisely relevant to the
present inquiry, it is here omitted.
But some may find it difficult to understand how this function can
be obstructed in respect of one woman but not of another. S. Bonaventura
answers that this may be because some witch has persuaded the devil to
effect this only with respect to one woman, or because God will not allow
the obstruction to apply save to some particular woman. The judgement of God
in this matter is a mystery, as in the case of the wife of Tobias. But how
the devil procures this disability is plainly shown by what has already been
said. And S. Bonaventura says that he obstructs the procreant function, not
intrinsically by harming the organ, but extrinsically by impeding its use;
and it is an artificial, not a natural impediment; and so he an cause it to
apply to one woman and not to another. Or else he takes away all desire for
one or another woman; and this he does by his own power, or else by means of
some herb or stone or some occult creature. And in this he is in substantial
agreement with Peter a Palude.
The ecclesiastical remedy in the tribunal of God is set forth in the
Canon where it says: If with the permission of the just and secret judgement
of God, through the arts of sorceresses and witches and the preparation of
the devil, men are bewitched in their procreant function, they are to be
urged to make clean confession to God and His priest of all their sins with
a contrite heart and a humble spirit; and to make satisfaction to God with
many tears and large offerings and prayers and fasting.
From these words it is clear that such afflictions are only on
account of sin, and occur only to those who do not live in a state of grace.
It proceeds to tell how the ministers of the Church can effect a cure by
means of exorcisms and the other protections and cures provided by the
Church. In this way, with the help of God, Abraham cured by his prayers
Abimelech and his house.
In conclusion we may say that there are five remedies which may
lawfully be applied to those who are bewitched in this way: namely, a
pilgrimage to some holy and venerable shrine; true confession of their sins
with contrition; the plentiful use of the sign of the Cross and devout
prayer; lawful exorcism by solemn words, the nature of which will be
explained later; and lastly, a remedy can be effected by prudently
approaching the witch, as was shown in the case of the Count who for three
years was unable to cohabit carnally with a virgin whom he had married.
Chapter III Remedies prescribed for those who are Bewitched by being
Inflamed with Inordinate Love or Extraordinary Hatred.
JUST as the generative faculty can be bewitched, so can inordinate
love or hatred be caused in the human mind. First we shall consider the
cause of this, and then, as far as possible, the remedies.
Philocaption, or inordinate love of one person for another, can be
caused in three ways. Sometimes it is due merely to a lack of control over
the eyes; sometimes to the temptation of devils; sometimes to the spells of
necromancers and witches, with the help of devils.
The first is spoken of in S. James i. 14, 15: Every man is tempted
by his own concupiscence, being drawn away and allured. Then when
concupiscence hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: but sin, when it is
completed, begetteth death. And so, when Shecham saw Dinah going out to see
the daughters of the land, he loved her, and ravished her, and lay with her,
and his soul clave unto her (Genesis xxxiv). And here the gloss says that
this happened to an infirm spirit because she left her own concerns to
inquire into those of other people; and such a soul is seduced by bad
habits, and is led to consent to unlawful practices.
The second cause arises from the temptation of devils. In this way
Amnon loved his beautiful sister Tamar, and was so vexed that he fell sick
for love of her (II. Samuel xiii). For he could not have been so totally
corrupt in his mind as to fall into so great a crime of incest unless he had
been grievously tempted by the devil. The book of the Holy Fathers refers to
this kind of love, where it says that even in their hermitages they were
exposed to every temptation, including that of carnal desires; for some of
them were at times tempted with the love of women more than it is possible
to believe. S. Paul also says, in II. Corinthians xii: There was given to me
a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me: and the gloss
explains this as referring to the temptation of lust.
But it is said that when a man does not give way to temptation he
does not sin, but it is an exercise for his virtue; but this is to be
understood of the temptation of the devil, not of that of the flesh; for
this is a venial sin even if a man does not yield to it. Many examples of
this are to be read.
As for the third cause, by which inordinate love proceeds from
devils' and witches' works, the possibility of this sort of witchcraft has
been exhaustively considered in the Questions of the First Part as to
whether devils through the agency of witches can turn the minds of men to
inordinate love or hatred, and it was proved by examples which had fallen
within our own experience. Indeed this is the best known and most general
form of witchcraft.
But the following question may be asked: Peter has been seized with
an inordinate love of this description, but he does not know whether it is
due to the first or the second or the third cause. It must be answered that
it can be by the work of the devil that hatred is stirred up between married
people so as to cause the crime of adultery. But when a man is so bound in
the meshes of carnal lust and desire that he can be made to desist from it
by no shame, words, blows or action; and when a man often puts away his
beautiful wife to cleave to the most hideous of women, and when he cannot
rest in the night, but is so demented that he must go by devious ways to his
mistress; and when it is found that those of noblest birth, Governors, and
other rich men, are the most miserably involved in this sin (for this age is
dominated by women, and was foretold by S. Hildegard, as Vincent of Beauvais
records in the Mirror of History, although he said it would note endure for
as long as it already has); and when the world is now full of adultery,
especially among the most highly born; when all this is considered, I say,
of what use is it to speak of remedies to those who desire no remedy?
Nevertheless, for the satisfaction of the pious reader, we will set down
briefly some of the remedies for Philocaption when it is not due to
witchcraft.
Avicenna mentions seven remedies which may be used when a man is
made physically ill by this sort of love; but they are hardly relevant to
our inquiry except in so far as they may be of service to the sickness of
the soul. For he says, in Book III, that the root of the sickness may be
discovered by feeling the pulse and uttering the name of the object of the
patient's love; and then, if the law permits, he may be cured by yielding to
nature. Or certain medicines may be applied, concerning which he gives
instructions. Or the sick man may be turned from his love by lawful remedies
which will cause him to direct his love to a more worthy object. Or he may
avoid her presence, and so distract his mind from her. Or, if he is open to
correction, he may be admonished and expostulated with, to the effect that
such love is the greatest misery. Or he may be directed to someone who, as
far as he may with God's truth, will vilify the body and disposition of his
love, and so blacken her character that she may appear to him altogether
base and deformed. Or, finally, he is to be set to arduous duties which may
distract his thoughts.
Indeed, just as the animal nature of man may be cured by such
remedies, so may they all be of use in reforming his inner spirit. Let a man
obey the law of his intellect rather than that of nature, let him turn his
love to safe pleasures, let him remember how momentary is the fruition of
lust and how eternal the punishment, let him seek his pleasure in that life
where joys begin never to end, and let him consider that if he cleaves to
this earthly love, that will be his sole reward, but he will lose the bliss
of Heaven, and be condemned to eternal fire: behold! the three irrevocable
losses which proceed from inordinate lust.
With regard to Philocaption caused by witchcraft, the remedies
detailed in the preceding chapter may not inconveniently be applied here
also; especially the exorcisms by sacred words which the bewitched person
can himself use. Let him daily invoke the Guardian Angel deputed to him by
God, let him use confession and frequent the shrines of the Saints,
especially of the Blessed Virgin, and without doubt he will be delivered.
But how abject are those strong men who, discarding their natural
gifts and the armour of virtue, cease to defend themselves; whereas the
girls themselves in their invincible frailty use those very rejected weapons
to repel this kind of witchcraft. We give one out of many examples in their
praise.
There was in a country village near Lindau in the diocese of
Constance a grown maid fair to see and of even more elegant behaviour, at
sight of whom a certain man of loose principles, a cleric in sooth, but not
a priest, was smitten with violent pangs of love. And being unable to
conceal the wound in his heart any longer, he went to the place where the
girl was working, and with fair words showed that he was in the net of the
devil, beginning by venturing in words only to persuade the girl to grant
him her love. She, perceiving by Divine instinct his meaning, and being
chaste in mind and body, bravely answered him: Master, do not come to my
house with such words, for modesty itself forbids. To this he replied:
Although you will not be persuaded by gentle words to love me, yet I promise
you that soon you will be compelled by my deeds to love me. Now that man was
a suspected enchanter and wizard. The maiden considered his words as but
empty air, and until then felt in herself no spark of carnal love for him;
but after a short time she began to have amorous thoughts. Perceiving this,
and being inspired by God, she sought the protection of the Mother of Mercy,
and devoutly implored Her to intercede with Her Son to help her. Anxious,
moreover, she went on a pilgrimage to a hermitage, where there was a church
miraculously consecrated in that diocese to the Mother of God. There she
confessed her sins, so that no evil spirit could enter her, and after her
prayers to the Mother of Pity all the devil's machinations against her
ceased, so that these evil crafts thenceforth never afflicted her.
None the less there are still some strong men cruelly enticed by
witches to this sort of love, so that it would seem that they could never
restrain themselves from their inordinate lust for them, yet these often
most manfully resist the temptation of lewd and filthy enticements, and by
the aforesaid defences overcome all the wiles of the devil.
A rich young man in the town of Innsbruck provides us with a notable
pattern of this sort of struggle. He was so importuned by witches that it is
hardly possible for pen to describe his strivings, but he always kept a
brave heart, and escaped by means of the remedies we have mentioned.
Therefore it may justly be concluded that these remedies are infallible
against this disease, and that they who use such weapons will most surely be
delivered.
And it must be understood that what we have said concerning
inordinate love applies also to inordinate hatred, since the same discipline
is of benefit for the two opposite extremes. But though the degree of
witchcraft is equal in each, yet there is this difference in the case of
hatred; the person who is hated must seek another remedy. For the man who
hates his wife and puts her out of his heart will not easily, if he is an
adulterer, be turned back again to his wife, even though he go on many a
pilgrimage.
Now it has been learned from witches that they cause this spell of
hatred by means of serpents; for the serpent was the first instrument of the
devil, and by reason of its curse inherits a hatred of women; therefore they
cause such spells by placing the skin or head of a serpent under the
threshold of a room or house. For this reason all the nooks and corners of
the house where such a woman lives are to be closely examined and
reconstructed as far as possible; or else she must be lodged in the houses
of others.
And when it is said the bewitched men can exorcise themselves, it is
to be understood that they can wear the sacred words or benedictions of
incantations round their necks, if they are unable to read or pronounce the
benedictions; but it will be shown later in what way this should be done.
Chapter IV Remedies presribed for those who by Prestidigitative Art have
lost their Virile Members or have seemingly been Transformed into the Shapes
of Beasts.
In what has already been written it has clearly enough been shown
the remedies which are available for the relief of those who are deluded by
a glamour, and think that they have lost their virile member, or have been
metamorphosed into animals. For since such men are entirely destitute of
Divine grace, according to the essential condition of those who are so
bewitched, it is not possible to apply a healing salve while the weapon
still remains in the wound. Therefore before all things they must be
reconciled to God by a good confession. Again, as was shown in the seventh
chapter of the First Question of the Second Part, such members are never
actually taken away from the body, but are only hidden by a glamour from the
senses of sight and touch. It is clear, too, that those who live in grace
are not so easily deluded in this way, either actively or passively, in such
a manner, that is, that they seem to lose their members, or that those of
others should appear to them to be missing. Therefore the remedy as well as
the disease is explained in that chapter, namely, that they should as far as
possible come to an amicable agreement with the witch herself.
As to those who think that they have been changed into beasts, it
must be known that this kind of witchcraft is more practised in Easter
countries than in the West; that is to say, in the East witches more often
bewitch other people in this way, but it appears that the witches so
transform themselves more frequently in our part of the world; namely, when
they change themselves, in full sight, into the shapes of animals, as was
told in the eighth chapter. Therefore in their case the remedies to be used
are those set out in the Third Part of this work, where we deal with the
extermination of witches by the secular arm of the law.
But in the East the following remedy is used for such delusions. For
we have learned much of this matter from the Knights of the Order of S. John
of Jerusalem in Rhodes; and especially this case which happened in the city
of Salamis in the kingdom of Cyprus. For that is a seaport, and once when a
vessel was being laden with merchandise suitable for a ship which is sailing
into foreign parts, and all her company were providing themselves with
victuals, one of them, a strong young man, went to the house of a woman
standing outside the city on the seashore, and asked her if she had any eggs
to sell. The woman, seeing that he was a strong young man, and a merchant
far away from his own country, thought that on that account the people of
the city would feel less suspicion if he were to be lost, and said to him:
“Wait a little, and I will get you all that you want.” And when she went in
and shut the door and kept him waiting, the young man outside began to call
out to her to hurry, lest he should miss the ship. Then the woman brought
some eggs and gave them to the young man, and told him to hurry back tot he
ship in case he should miss it. So he hastened back to the ship, which was
anchored by the shore, and before going on board, since the full company of
his companions was not yet returned, he decided to eat the eggs there and
refresh himself. And behold! an hour later he was made dumb as if he had no
power of speech; and, as he afterwards said, he wondered what could have
happened to him, but was unable to find out. Yet when he wished to go on
board, he was driven off with sticks by those who yet remained ashore, and
who all cried out: “Look what this ass is doing! Curse the beast, you are
not coming on board.” The young man being thus driven away, and
understanding from their words that they thought he was an ass, reflected
and began to suspect that he had been bewitched by the woman, especially
since he could utter no word, although he understood all that was said. And
when, on again trying to board the ship, he was driven off with heavier
blows, he was in bitterness of heart compelled to remain and watch the ship
sail away. And so, as he ran here and there, since everybody thought he was
an ass, he was necessarily treated as such. At last, under compulsion, he
went back to the woman’s house, and to keep himself alive served her at her
pleasure for three years, doing no work but to bring to the house such
necessities as wood and corn, and to carry away what had to be carried away
like a beast of burden: the only consolation that was left to him being that
although everyone else took him for an ass, the witches themselves,
severally and in company, who frequented the house, recognized him as a man,
and he could talk and behave with them as a man should.
Now if it is asked how burdens were placed upon him as if he were a
beast, we must say that this case is analogous to that of which S. Augustine
speaks in his De Ciuitate Dei, Book XVIII, chapter 17, where he tells of the
tavern women who changed their guests into beasts of burden; and to that of
the father Praestantius, who thought he was a pack-horse and carried corn
with other animals. For the delusion caused by this glamour was threefold.
First in its effect on the men who saw the young man not as a man
but as an ass; and it is shown above in Chapter VIII how devils can easily
cause this. Secondly, those burdens were no illusion; abut when they were
beyond the strength of the young man, the devil invisible carried them.
Thirdly, that when he was consorting with others, the young man himself
considered in his imagination and perceptive faculties at least, which are
faculties belonging to the bodily organs, that he was an ass; but not in his
reason: for he as not so bound but that he knew himself to be a man,
although he was magically deluded into imagining himself a beast.
Nabuchodonosor provides an example of the same delusion.
After three years had passed in this way, in the fourth year it
happened that the young man went one morning into the city, with the woman
following a long way behind; and he passed by a church where Holy Mass was
being celebrated, and heard the sacred-bell ring at the elevation of the
Host (for in that kingdom the Mass is celebrated according to the Latin, and
not according to the Greek rite). And he turned towards the church, and, not
daring to enter for fear of being driven off with blows, knelt down outside
by bending the knees of his hind legs, and lifted his forelegs, that is, his
hands, joined together over his ass’s head, as it was thought to be, and
looked upon the elevation of the Sacrament. And when some Genoese merchants
saw this prodigy, they followed the ass in astonishment, discussing this
marvel among themselves; and behold! the witch came and belaboured the ass
with her stick. And because, as we have said, this sort of witchcraft is
better known in those parts, at the instance of the merchants the ass and
the witch were taken before the judge; where, being questioned and tortured,
she confessed her crime and promised to restore the young man to his true
shape if she might be allowed to return to her house. So she was dismissed
and went back to her house, where the young man was restored to his former
shape; and being again arrested, she paid the debt which her crimes merited.
And the young man returned joyfully to his own country.
Chapter V Prescribed Remedies for those who are Obsessed owing to some
Spell.
We have shown in Chapter X of the preceding Question that sometimes
devils, through witchcraft, substantially inhabit certain men, and why they
do this: namely, that it may be for some grave crime of the man himself, and
for his own ultimate benefit; or sometimes for the slight fault of another
man; sometimes for a man's own venial sin; and sometimes for another man's
grave sin. For any of these reasons a man may in varying degrees be
possessed by a devil. Nider in his Formicarius states that there is no cause
for wonder if devils, at the instance of witches and with God's permission,
substantially take possession of men.
It is clear also from the details given in that chapter what are the
remedies by which such men can be liberated; namely, by the exorcisms of the
Church; and by true contrition and confession, when a man is possessed for
some mortal sin. An example is the manner in which that Bohemian priest was
set free. But there are three other remedies besides, which are of virtue;
namely, the Holy Communion of the Eucharist, the visitation of shrines and
the prayers of holy men, and by lifting the sentence of excommunication. Of
these we shall speak, although they are plainly set out in the discourses of
the Doctors, since all have not easy access to the necessary treatises.
Cassian, in his Collation of the Abbots, speaks in these words of
the Eucharist: We do not remember that our elders ever forbade the
administration of the Holy Communion to those possessed by evil spirits; it
should even be given to them every day if possible. For it must be believed
that It is of great virtue in the purgation and protection of both soul and
body; and that when a man receives It, the evil spirit which afflicts his
members or lurks hidden in them is driven away as if it were burned with
fire. And lately we saw the Abbot Andronicus healed in this way; and the
devil will rage with mad fury when he feels himself shut out by the heavenly
medicine, and he will try the harder and the oftener to inflict his
tortures, as he feels himself driven farther off by this spiritual remedy.
So says S. John Cassian.
And again he adds: Two things must be steadfastly believed. First,
that without the permission of God no one is altogether possessed by these
spirits. Second, that everything which God permits to happen to us, whether
it seem to be sorrow or gladness, is sent for out good as from a pitying
Father and merciful Physician. For the devils are, as it were, schoolmasters
of humility, so that they who descend from this world may either be purged
for the eternal life or be sentenced to the pain of their punishment; and
such, according to S. Paul, are in the present life delivered unto Satan for
the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the
Lord Jesus Christ.
But here there arises a doubt. For S. Paul says: Let a man examine
himself, and so eat of the Bread: then how can a man who is possessed
communicate, since he has not the use of his reason? S. Thomas answers this
in his Third Part, Question 80, saying that there are distinct degrees in
madness. For to say that a man has not the use of his reason may mean two
things. In one case he has some feeble power of reason; as a man is said to
be blind when he can nevertheless see imperfectly. And since such men can to
some extent join in the devotion of this Sacrament, it is not to be denied
to them.
But others are said to be mad because they have been so from birth;
and such may not partake of the Sacrament, since they are in no way able to
engage in devout preparation for it.
Or perhaps they have not always been without the use of their
reason; and then, if when they were sane they appeared to appreciate the
devotion due to the Sacrament, It should be administered to them when they
are at the point of death, unless it is feared that they may vomit or spew
It out.
The following decision is recorded by the Council of Carthage (26,
q. 6). When a sick man wishes to confess, and if on the arrival of the
priest he is rendered dumb by his infirmity, or falls into a frenzy, those
who have heard him speak must give their testimony. And if he is thought to
be at the point of death, let him be reconciled with God by the laying on of
hands and the placing of the Sacrament in his mouth. S. Thomas also says
that the same procedure may be used with baptized people who are bodily
tormented by unclean spirits, and with other mentally distracted persons.
And he adds, in Book IV, dist. 9, that the Communion must not be denied to
demoniacs unless it is certain that they are being tortured by the devil for
some crime. To this Peter of Palude adds: In this case they are to be
considered as persons to be excommunicated and delivered up to Satan.
From this it is clear that, even if a man be possessed by a devil
for his own crimes, yet if he has lucid intervals and, while he has the use
of his reason, is contrite and confesses his sins, since he is absolved in
the sight of God, he must in no way be deprived of the Communion of the
Divine Sacrament of the Eucharist.
How those who are possessed may be delivered by the intercessions
and prayers of the Saints is found in the Legends of the Saints. For by the
merits of Saints, Martyrs, Confessors and Virgins the unclean spirits are
subdued by their prayers in the land where they live, just as the Saints in
their earthly journey subdued them.
Likewise we read that the devout prayers of wayfarers have often
obtained the deliverance of those possessed. And Cassian urges them to pray
for them, saying: If we hold the opinion or rather faith of which I have
written above, that everything is sent by the Lord for the good of our souls
and the betterment of the universe, we shall in no way despise those who are
possessed; but we shall incessantly pray for them as for our own selves, and
pity them with our whole heart.
As for the last method, that of releasing the sufferer from
excommunication, it must be known that this is rare, and only lawfully
practised by such as have authority and are informed by revelation that the
man has become possessed on account of the excommunication of the Church:
such was the case of the Corinthian fornicator (I. Corinthians v) who was
excommunicated by S. Paul and the Church, and delivered unto Satan for the
destruction of the flesh, that his spirit might be saved in the day of our
Lord JESUS Christ; that is, as the gloss says, either for the illumination
of grace by contrition or for judgement.
And he delivered to Satan false teachers who had lost the faith,
such as Hymenaeus and Alexander, that they might learn not to blaspheme (I.
Timothy i). For so great was the power and the grace of S. Paul, says the
gloss, that by the mere words of his mouth he could deliver to Satan those
who fell away from the faith.
S. Thomas (IV. 18) teaches concerning the three effects of
excommunication as follows. If a man, he says, is deprived of the prayers of
the Church, he suffers a threefold loss corresponding with the benefits
which accrue to one who is in communion with the Church. For those who are
excommunicated are bereft of the source from which flows an increase of
grace to those who have it, and a mean to obtain grace for those who have it
not; and, being deprived of grace, they lose also the power of preserving
their uprightness; although it must not be thought that they are altogether
shut out from God's providence, but only from that special providence which
watches over the sons of the Church; and they lose also a strong source of
protection against the Enemy, for greater power is granted to the devil to
injure such men, both bodily and spiritually.
For in the primitive Church, when men had to be drawn into the faith
by signs, just as the Holy Spirit was made manifest by a visible sign, so
also a bodily affliction by the devil was the visible sign of a man who was
excommunicated. And it is not unfitting that a man whose case is not quite
desperate should be delivered to Satan; for he is not given to the devil as
one to be damned, but to be corrected, since it is in the power of the
Church, when she pleases, to deliver him again from the hands of the devil.
So says S. Thomas. Therefore the lifting of the ban of excommunication, when
prudently used by a discreet exorcist, is a fitting remedy for those who are
possessed.
But Nider adds that the exorcist must particularly beware of making
too presumptive a use of his powers, or of mingling any ribaldry or jesting
with the serious work of God, or adding to it anything that smacks of
superstition or witchcraft; for otherwise he will hardly escape punishment,
as he shows by an example.
For Blessed Gregory, in his First Dialogue, tells of a certain woman
who, against her conscience, yielded to her husband's persuasions to take
pare in the ceremonies at the vigil of the dedication of the Church of S.
Sebastian. And because she joined in the Church's procession against her
conscience, she became possessed and raged publicly. When the priest of that
church saw this, he took the cloth from the altar and covered her with it;
and the devil suddenly entered into the priest. And because he had presumed
beyond his strength, he was constrained by his torments to reveal who he
was. So says S. Gregory.
And to show that no spirit of ribaldry must be allowed to enter into
the holy office of exorcism, Nider tells that he saw in a monastery at
Cologne a brother who was given to speaking jestingly, but was a very famous
expeller of devils. This man was casting a devil out of a man possessed in
the monastery, and the devil asked him to give him some place to which he
could go. This pleased the Brother, and he jokingly said, “Go to my privy.”
So the devil went out; and when in the night the Brother wished to go and
purge his belly, the devil attacked him so savagely in the privy that he
with difficulty escaped with his life.
But especial care is to be taken that those who are obsessed through
witchcraft should not be induced to go to witches to be healed. For S.
Gregory goes on to say of the woman we have just mentioned: Her kindred and
those who loved her in the flesh took her to some witches to be healed, by
whom she was taken to a river and dipped in the water with many incantation;
and upon this she was violently shaken, and instead of one devil being cast
out, a legion entered into her, and she began to cry out in their several
voices. Therefore her kindred confessed what they had done, and in great
grief brought her to the holy Bishop Fortunatus, who by daily prayers and
fasting entirely restored her to health.
But since it has been said that exorcists must beware lest they make
use of anything savouring of superstition or witchcraft, some exorcist may
doubt whether it is lawful to use certain unconsecrated herbs and stones. In
answer we say that it is so much the better if the herbs are consecrated;
but that if they are not, then it is not superstitious to use a certain herb
called Demonifuge, or even the natural properties of stones. But he must not
think that he is casting out devils by the power of these; for then he would
fall into the error of believing that he could use other herbs and
incantations in the same way; and this is the error of necromancers, who
think that they can perform this kind of work through the natural and
unknown virtues of such objects.
Therefore S. Thomas says, Book IV. dist. 7, art. the last: It must
not be any corporeal powers; and therefore they are not to be influenced by
invocations or any acts of sorcery, except in so far as they have entered
into a pact with a witch. Of this Esaias (xxviii) speaks: We have made a
covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement. And he thus explains
the passage in Job xli: Canst thou draw out Leviathan with an hook? and the
following words. For he says: If one rightly considers all that has been
said before, it will seem that it belongs to the heretical presumption of
necromancers when anyone tries to make an agreement with devils, or to
subject them in any way to his own will.
Having, then, shown that man cannot of his own power overcome the
devil, he concludes by saying: Place your hand upon him; but understand
that, if you have any power, it is yet by Divine virtue that he is overcome.
And he adds: Remember the battle which I wage against him; that is to say,
the present being put for the future, I shall fight against him on the
Cross, where Leviathan will be taken with an hook, that is, by the divinity
hidden under the bait of humanity, since he will think our Saviour to be
only a man. And afterwards it says: There is no power on earth to be
compared with him: by which it is meant that no bodily power can equal the
power of the devil, which is a purely spiritual power. So says S. Thomas.
But a man possessed by a devil can indirectly be relieved by the
power of music, as was Saul by David's harp, or of a herb, or of any other
bodily matter in which there lies some natural virtue. Therefore such
remedies may be used, as can be argued both from authority and by reason.
For S. Thomas, XXVI. 7, says that stones and herbs may be used for the
relief of a man possessed by a devil. And there are the words of S. Jerome.
And as for the passage in Tobias, where the Angel says: Touching the
heart and the liver (which you took from the fish), if a devil or an evil
spirit trouble any, we must make a smoke thereof before the man or the
woman, and the party shall be no more vexed; S. Thomas says: We ought not to
marvel at this, for the smoke of a certain tree when it is burned seems to
have the same virtue, as if it has in it some spiritual sense, or power of
spiritual prayer for the future.
Of the same opinion are Blessed Albert, in his commentary on S. Luke
ix, and Nicolas of Lyra and Paul of Burgos, on I. Samuel xvi. The last-named
homilist comes to this conclusion: that it must be allowed that those
possessed by a devil can not only be relieved, but even entirely delivered
by means of material things, understanding that in the latter case they are
not very fiercely molested. And he proves this by reasoning as follows:
Devils cannot alter corporeal matter just at their will, but only by
bringing together complementary active and passive agents, as Nicolas says.
In the same way some material object can cause in the human body a
disposition which makes it susceptible to the operations of the devil. For
example, according to physicians, mania very much predisposes a man to
dementia, and consequently to demoniac obsession: therefore if, in such a
case, the predisposing passive agent be remove, it will follow that the
active affliction of the devil will be cured.
In this light we may consider the fish's liver; and the music of
David, by which Saul was at first relieved and then entirely delivered of
the evil spirit; for it says: And the evil spirit departed from him. But it
is not consonant with the meaning of the Scripture to say that this was done
by the merits or prayers of David; for the Scripture says nothing of any
such matter, whereas it would have spoken notably in his praise if this had
been so. This reasoning we take fro Paul of Burgos. There is also the reason
which we gave in Question V of the First Part: that Saul was liberated
because by the harp was prefigured the virtue of the Cross on which were
stretched the Sacred Limbs of Christ's Body. And more is written there which
may be considered together with the present inquiry. But we shall only
conclude by saying that the use of material things in lawful exorcisms is
not superstitious. And now it is expedient that we should speak about the
exorcisms themselves.
Chapter VI Prescribed Remedies; to wit, the Lawful Exorcisms of the Church,
for all Sorts of Infirmities and Ills due to Witchcraft; and the Method of
Exorcising those who are Bewitched.
It has already been stated that witches can afflict men with every
kind of physical infirmity; therefore it can be taken as a general rule that
the various verbal or practical remedies which can be applied in the case of
those infirmities which we have just been discussing are equally applicable
to all other infirmities, such as epilepsy or leprosy, for example. And as
lawful exorcisms are reckoned among the verbal remedies and have been most
often considered by us, they may be taken as a general type of such
remedies; and there are three matters to be considered regarding them.
First, we must judge whether a person who has not been ordained as
an exorcist, such as a layman or a secular cleric, may lawfully exorcise
devils and their works. Bound up with this question are three others:
namely; first, what constitutes the legality of this practice; secondly, the
seven conditions which must be observed when one wishes to make private use
of charms and benedictions; and thirdly, in what way the disease is to be
exorcised and the devil conjured.
Secondly, we must consider what is to be done when no healing grace
results from the exorcism.
Thirdly, we must consider practical and not verbal remedies;
together with the solution of certain arguments.
For the first, we have the opinion of S. Thomas in Book IV, dist.
23. He says: When a man is ordained as an exorcist, or into any of the other
minor Orders, he has conferred upon him the power of exorcism in his
official capacity; and this power may even lawfully be used by those who
belong to no Order, but such do not exercise it in their official capacity.
Similarly the Mass can be said in an unconsecrated house, although the very
purpose of consecrating a church is that the Mass may be said there; but
this is more on account of the grace which is in the righteous than of the
grace of the Sacrament.
From these words we may conclude that, although it is good that in
the liberation of a bewitched person recourse should be had to an exorcist
having authority to exorcise such bewitchments, yet at times other devout
persons may, either with or without any exorcism, cast out this sort of
diseases.
For we hear of a certain poor and very devout virgin, one of whose
friends has been grievously bewitched in his foot, so that it was clear to
the physicians that he could be cured by no medicines. But it happened that
the virgin went to visit the sick man, and he at once begged her to apply
some benediction to his foot. She consented, and did no more than silently
say the Lord's Prayer and the Apostles' Creed, at the same time making use
of the sign of the life-giving Cross. The sick man then felt himself at once
cured, and, that he might have a remedy for the future, asked the virgin
what charms she had used. But she answered: You are of little faith and do
not hold to the holy and lawful practices of the Church, and you often apply
forbidden charms and remedies for your infirmities; therefore you are rarely
healthy in your body, because you are always sick in your soul. But if you
would put your trust in prayer and in the efficacy of lawful symbols, you
will often be very easily cured. For I did nothing but repeat the Lord's
Prayer and the Apostles' Creed, and you are now cured.
This example gives rise to the question, whether there is not any
efficacy in other benedictions and charms, and even conjurations by way of
exorcism; for they seem to be condemned in this story. We answer that the
virgin condemned only unlawful charms and unlawful conjurations and
exorcisms.
To understand these last we must consider how they originated, and
how they came to be abused. For they were in their origin entirely sacred;
but just as by the means of devils and wicked men all things can be defiled,
so also were these sacred words. For it is said in the last chapter of S.
Mark, of the Apostles and holy men: In My Name shall they cast out devils;
and they visited the sick, and prayed over them with sacred words; and in
after times priests devoutly used similar rites; and therefore there are to
be found to-day in ancient Churches devout prayers and holy exorcisms which
men can use or undergo, when they are applied by pious men as they used to
be, without any superstition; even as there are now to be found learned men
and Doctors of holy Theology who visit the sick and use such words for the
healing not only of demoniacs, but of other diseases as well.
But, alas! superstitious men have, on the pattern of these, found
for themselves many vain and unlawful remedies which they employ these days
for sick men and animals; and the clergy have become too slothful to use any
more the lawful words when they visit the sick. On this account Gulielmus
Durandus, the commentator on S. Raymond, says that such lawful exorcisms may
be used by a religious and discreet priest, or by a layman, or even by a
woman of good life and proved discretion; by the offering of lawful prayers
over the sick: not over fruits or animals, but over the sick. For the Gospel
says: They shall place their hands upon the sick, etc. And such persons are
not to be prevented from practising in this way; unless perhaps it is feared
that, following their example, other indiscreet and superstitious persons
should make improper use of incantations. It is these superstitious diviners
whom that virgin we have mentioned condemned, when she said that they who
consulted with such had weak, that is to say bad, faith.
Now for the elucidation of this matter it is asked how it is
possible to know whether the words of such charms and benedictions are
lawful or superstitious, and how they ought to be used; and whether the
devil can be conjured and diseases exorcised.
In the first place, that is said to be lawful in the Christian
religion which is not superstitious; and that is said to be superstitious
which is over and above the prescribed form of religion. See Colossians ii:
which things indeed have a show of wisdom in superstition: on which the
gloss says: Superstition is undisciplined religion, that is, religion
observed with defective methods in evil circumstance.
Anything, also, is superstition which human tradition without higher
authority has caused to usurp the name of religion; such is the
interpolation of hymns at Holy Mass, the alteration of the Preface for
Requiems, the abbreviation of the Creed which it to be sung at Mass, the
reliance upon an organ rather than upon the choir for the music, neglect to
have a Server on the Altar, and such practices. But to return to our point,
when a work is done by virtue of the Christian religion, as when someone
wishes to heal the sick by means of prayer and benediction and sacred words,
which is the matter we are considering), such a person must observe seven
conditions by which such benedictions are rendered lawful. And even if he
uses adjurations, through the virtue of the Divine Name, and by the virtue
of the works of Christ, His Birth, Passion and Precious Death, by which the
devil was conquered and cast out; such benedictions and charms and exorcisms
shall be called lawful, and they who practise them are exorcists or lawful
enchanters. See S. Isidore, Etym. VIII, Enchanters are they whose art and
skill lies in the use of words.
And the first of these conditions, as we learn from S. Thomas, is
that there must be nothing in the words which hints at any expressed or
tacit invocation of devils. If such were expressed, it would be obviously
unlawful. If it were tacit, it might be considered in the light of
intention, or in that of fact: in that of intention, when the operator has
no care whether it is God or the devil who is helping him, so long as he
attains his desired result; in that of fact, when a person has no natural
aptitude for such work, but creates some artificial means. And of such not
only must physicians and astronomers be the judges, but especially
Theologians. For in this way do necromancers work, making images and rings
and stones by artificial means; which have no natural virtue to effect the
results which they very often expect: therefore the devil must be concerned
in their works.
Secondly, the benedictions or charms must contain no unknown names;
for according to S. John Chrysostom such are to be regarded with fear, lest
they should conceal some matter of superstition.
Thirdly, there must be nothing in the words that is untrue; for if
there is, the effect of them cannot be from God, Who is not a witness to a
lie. But some old women in their incantations use some such jingling
doggerel as the following:
Blessed MARY went a-walking
Over Jordan river.
Stephen met her, and fell a-talking, etc.
Fourthly, there must be no vanities, or written characters beyond
the sign of the Cross. Therefore the charms which soldiers are wont to carry
are condemned.
Fifthly, no faith must be placed in the method of writing or reading
or binding the charm about a person, or in any such vanity, which has
nothing to do with the reverence of God, without which a charm is altogether
superstitious.
Sixthly, in the citing and uttering of Divine words and of Holy
Scripture attention must only be paid to the sacred words themselves and
their meaning, and to the reverence of God; whether the effect be looked for
from the Divine virtue, or from the relics of Saints, which are a secondary
power, since their virtue springs originally from God.
Seventhly, the looked-for effect must be left tot he Divine Will;
for He knows whether it is best for a man to be healed or to be plagued, or
to die. This condition was set down by S. Thomas.
So we may conclude that if none of these conditions be broken, the
incantation will be lawful. And S. Thomas writes in this connexion on the
last chapter of S. Mark: And these signs shall follow them that believe; in
my name shall they cast out devils; they shall take up serpents. From this
it is clear that, provided the above conditions are observed, it is lawful
by means of sacred words to keep serpents away.
S. Thomas says further: The words of God are not less holy than the
Relics of the Saints. As S. Augustine says: The word of God is not less than
the Body of Christ. But all are agreed that it is lawful to carry reverently
about the person the Relics of the Saints: therefore let us by all means
invoke the name of God by duly using the Lord's Prayer and the Angelic
Salutation, by His Birth and Passion, by His Five Wounds, and by the Seven
Words which He spoke on the Cross, by the Triumphant Inscription, by the
three nails, and by the other weapons of Christ's army against the devil and
his works. By all these means it is lawful to work, and our trust may be
placed in them, leaving the issue to God's will.
And what has been said about the keeping off of serpents applies
also to other animals, provided that the attention is fixed only on the
sacred words and the Divine virtue. But great care is to be used in
incantations of this nature. For S. Thomas says: Such diviners often use
unlawful observances, and obtain magic effects by means of devils,
especially in the case of serpents; for the serpent was the devil's first
instrument by which he deceived mankind.
For in the town of Salzburg there was a certain mage who one day, in
open view of all, wanted to charm all the snakes into a particular pit, and
kill them all within an area of a mile. So he gathered all the snakes
together, and was himself standing over the pit, when last of all there came
a huge and horrible serpent which would not go into the pit. This serpent
kept making signs to the man to let it go away and crawl where it would; but
he would not cease from his incantation, but insisted that, as all the other
snakes had entered the pit and there died, so also must this horrible
serpent. But it stood on the opposite side to the warlock, and suddenly
leapt over the pit and fell upon the man, wrapping itself round his belly,
and dragged him with itself into the pit, where they both died. From this it
may be seen that only for a useful purpose, such as driving them away from
men's houses, are such incantations to be practised, and they are to be done
by the Divine virtue, and in the fear of God, and with reverence.
In the second place we have to consider how exorcisms or charms of
this kind ought to be used, and whether they should be worn round the neck
or sewn into the clothing. It may seem that such practices are unlawful; for
S. Augustine says, in the Second Book on the Christian Doctrine: There are a
thousand magic devices and amulets and charms which are all superstitious,
and the School of Medicine utterly condemns them all, whether they are
incantations, or certain marks which are called characters, or engraved
charms to be hung round the neck.
Also S. John Chrysostom, commenting on S. Matthew, says: Some
persons wear round their neck some written portion of the Gospel; but is not
the Gospel every day read in the church and heard by all? How then shall a
man be helped by wearing the Gospel round his neck, when he has reaped no
benefit from hearing it with his ears? For in what does the virtue of the
Gospel consist; in the characters of its letters, or in the meaning of its
words? If in the characters, you do well to hang it round your neck; but if
in the meaning, surely it is of more benefit when planted in the heart than
when worn round the neck.
But, on the other hand, the Doctors answer as follows, especially S.
Thomas where he asks whether it is unlawful to hang sacred words round the
neck. Their opinion is that, in all charms and writings so worn, there are
two things to be avoided.
First, in whatever is written there must be nothing that savours of
an invocation of devils; for then it is manifestly superstitious and
unlawful, and must be judged as an apostasy from the faith, as has often
been said before.
Similarly, in accordance with the above seven conditions, it must
not contain any unknown names. But if these two snares be avoided, it is
lawful both to place such charms on the lips of the sick, and for the sick
to carry them with them. But the Doctors condemn their use in one respect,
that is, when a man pays greater attention to and has more reliance upon the
mere signs of the written letters than upon their meaning.
It may be said that a layman who does not understand the words
cannot pay any attention to their meaning. But it is enough if such a man
fixes his thoughts on the Divine virtue, and leaves it to the Divine will to
do what seems good to His mercy.
In the third place we have to consider whether the devil is to be
conjured and the disease exorcised at the same time, or whether a different
order should be observed, or whether one of these operations can take place
without the other. Here there are several points to be considered. First,
whether the devil is always present when the sick man is afflicted. Second,
what sort of things are capable of being exorcised or remedied. Third, the
method of exorcising.
For the first point, it would seem, following that pronouncement of
S. John Damascene that where the devil operates there he is, that the devil
is always present in the sick man when he afflicts him. Also in the history
of S. Bartholomew it seems that a man is only delivered from the devil when
he is cured of his sickness.
But this can be answered as follows. When it is said that the devil
is present in a sick man, this can be understood in two ways: either that he
is personally present, or that he is present in the effect which he has
caused. In the first sense he is present when he first causes the sickness;
in the second sense he is said to be present not personally but in the
effect. In this way, when the Doctors ask whether the devil substantially
inhabits a man who commits mortal sin, they say that he is not personally
present, but only in effect; just as a master is said to dwell in his
servants in respect of his mastership. But the case is quite otherwise with
men who are possessed by a devil.
For the second point, as to what sort of things can be exorcised,
the opinion of S. Thomas, Book IV, dist. 6, should be noted, where he says
that on account of man's sin the devil receives power over a man and over
everything which a man uses, to hurt him with them; and since there can be
no compromise of Christ with Belial, therefore whenever anything is to be
sanctified for Divine worship, it is first exorcised that it may be
consecrated to God freed from the power of the devil, by which it might be
turned to the hurt of men. This is shown in the blessing of water, the
consecration of a church, and in all matters of this sort. Therefore, since
the first act of reconciliation by which a man is consecrated to God is in
baptism, it is necessary that man should be exorcised before he is baptized;
indeed in this it is more imperative than in any other circumstance. For in
man himself lies the cause by reason of which the devil receives his power
in other matters which are brought about by man, namely, sin, either
original or actual. This then is the significance of the words that are used
in exorcism, as when it is said, “Depart, O Satan, from him”; and likewise
of the things that are then done.
To return, then, to the actual point. When it is asked whether the
disease is to be exorcised and the devil abjured, and which of these should
be done first; it is answered that not the disease, but the sick and
bewitched man himself is exorcised: just as in the case of a child, it is
not the infection of the fomes which is exorcised, but the child itself.
Also, just as the child is first exorcised, and then the devil is abjured to
depart; so also is the bewitched person first exorcised, and afterwards the
devil and his works are bidden to depart. Again, just as salt and water are
exorcised, so are all things which can be used by the sick man, so that it
is expedient to exorcise and bless chiefly his food and drink. In the case
of baptism the following ceremony of exorcism is observed: the exsufflation
towards the West and the renunciation of the devil; secondly, the raising of
the hands with a solemn confession of the faith of the Christian religion;
thirdly, prayer, benediction, and the laying on of hands; fourthly, the
stripping and anointing with Holy Oil; and after baptism, the communion and
the putting on of the chrisom, he is to remain bound naked to a Holy Candle
of the length of Christ's body or of the Cross. And then may be said the
following:
I exorcise thee, Peter, or thee, Barbara, being weak but reborn in
Holy Baptism, by the living God, by the true God, by God Who redeemed thee
with His Precious Blood, that thou mayest be exorcised, that all the
illusions and wickedness of the devil's deceits may depart and flee from
thee together with every unclean spirit, adjured by Him Who will come to
judge both the quick and the dead, and who will purge the earth with fire.
Amen.
Let us pray.
O God of mercy and pity, Who according to Thy tender lovingkindness
chastenest those whom Thou dost cherish, and dost gently compel those whom
Thou receivest to turn their hearts, we invoke Thee, O Lord, that Thou wilt
vouchsafe to bestow Thy grace upon Thy servant who suffereth from a weakness
in the limbs of his body, that whatever is corrupt by earthly frailty,
whatever is made violate by the deceit of the devil, may find redemption in
the unity of the body of the Church. Have mercy, O Lord, on his groaning,
have mercy upon his tears; and as he putteth his trust only in Thy mercy,
receive him in the sacrament of Thy reconciliation, through Jesus Christ Our
Lord. Amen.
Therefore, accursed devil, hear thy doom, and give honour to the
true and living God, give honour to the Lord Jesus Christ, that thou depart
with thy works from this servant whom our Lord Jesus Christ hath redeemed
with His Precious Blood.
Then let him exorcise him a second and yet a third time, with the
prayers as above.
Let us pray.
God, Who dost ever mercifully govern all things that Thou hast made,
incline Thine ear to our prayers, and look in mercy upon Thy servant
labouring under the sickness of the body; visit him, and grant him Thy
salvation and the healing virtue of Thy heavenly grace, through Christ our
Lord. Amen.
Therefore, accursed devil, etc.
The prayer for the third exorcism.
O God, the only protection of human frailty, show forth the mighty
power of Thy strong aid upon our sick brother (or sister), that being holpen
by Thy mercy he (she) may be worthy to enter Thy Holy Church in safety,
through Christ our Lord. Amen.
And let the exorcist continually sprinkle him with Holy Water. And
note that this method is recommended, not because it must be rigidly
observed, or that other exorcisms are not of greater efficacy, but that
there should be some regular system of exorcism and adjuration. For in the
old histories and books of the Church there are sometimes found more devout
and powerful exorcisms; but since before all things the reverence of God is
necessary, let each proceed in this matter as he finds it best.
In conclusion, and for the sake of clearness, we may recommend this
form of exorcism for a person who is bewitched. Let him first make a good
confession (according to the often-quoted Canon: If by sortilege, etc.).
Then let a diligent search be made in all corners and in the beds and
mattresses and under the threshold of the door, in case some instrument of
witchcraft may be found. The bodies of animals bewitched to death are at
once to be burned. And it is expedient that all bed-clothes and garments
should be renewed, and even that he should change his house and dwelling.
But in case nothing is found, then he who is to be exorcised should if
possible go into the church in the morning, especially on the Holier Days,
such as the Feast of Our Lady, or on some Vigil; and the better if the
priest also has confessed and is in a state of grace, for then the stronger
will he be. And let him who is to be exorcised hold in his hand a Holy
Candle as well as he can, either sitting or kneeling; and let those who are
present offer up devout prayers for his deliverance. And let him begin the
Litany at “Our help is in the Name of the Lord,” and let one be appointed to
make the responses: let him sprinkle him with Holy Water, and place a stole
round his neck, and recite the Psalm “Haste thee, O God, to deliver me”; and
let him continue the Litany for the Sick, saying at the Invocation of the
Saints, “Pray for him and be favourable; deliver him, O Lord,” continuing
thus to the end. But where the prayers are to be said, then in the place of
the prayers let him begin the exorcism, and continue in the way we have
declared, or in any other better way, as seems good to him. And this sort of
exorcism may be continued at least three times a week, that so through many
intercessions the grace of health may be obtained.
Finally, he must receive the Sacrament of the Eucharist; although
some think that this should be done before the exorcism. And at his
confession the confessor must inquire whether he is under any bond of
excommunication, and if he is, whether he has rashly omitted to obtain
absolution from his Judge; for then, although he may at his discretion
absolve him, yet when he has regained his health, he must seek absolution
also from the Judge who excommunicated him.
It should further be noted that, when the exorcist is not ordained
to the Order of Exorcist, then he may proceed with prayers; and if he can
read the Scriptures, let him read the beginnings of the four Gospels of the
Evangelists, and the Gospel beginning, “There was an Angel sent”; and the
Passion of our Lord; all of which have great power to expel the works of the
devil. Also let the Gospel of S. John, “In the beginning was the Word,” be
written and hung round the sick man's neck, and so let the grace of healing
be looked for from God.
But if anyone asks what is the difference between the aspersion of
Holy Water and exorcism, since both are ordained against the plagues of the
devil, the answer is supplied by S. Thomas, who says: The devil attacks us
from without and from within. Therefore Holy Water is ordained against his
attacks from without; but exorcism against those from within. For this
reason those for whom exorcism is necessary are called Energoumenoi, from
En, meaning In, and Ergon, meaning Work, since they labour within
themselves. But in exorcising a bewitched person both methods are to be
used, because he is tormented both within and without.
Our second main consideration is what is to be done when no healing
grace results from exorcisms. Now this may happen for six reasons; and there
is a seventh about which we suspend any definite judgement. For when a
person is not healed, it is due either to want of faith in the bystanders or
in those who present the sick man, or to the sins of them who suffer from
the bewitchment, or to a neglect of the due and fitting remedies, or to some
flaw in the faith of the exorcist, or to the lack of a greater trust in the
powers of another exorcist, or to the need of purgation and for the
increased merit of the bewitched person.
Concerning the first four of these the Gospel teaches us in the
incident of the only son of his father, who was a lunatic, and of the
disciples of Christ being there present (S. Matthew xvii. And S. Mark ix.).
For in the first place He said that the multitude were without faith;
whereupon the father prayed Him, saying: Lord, I believe: help Thou mine
unbelief. And JESUS said to the multitude: O faithless and perverse
generation, how long shall I be with you?
Secondly, with regard to him who endured the devil, JESUS rebuked
him, that is, the son; for, as Saint Jerome says, he had been tormented by
the devil because of his sins.
Thirdly, this illustrates the neglect of the rightful remedies,
because good and perfect men were not at first present. For S. John
Chrysostom says: The pillars of faith, namely, Peter and James and John,
were not present, for they were at the Transfiguration of Christ: neither
were there prayer and fasting, without which Christ said that this sort of
devil goeth not out. Therefore Origen, writing on this passage, says: If at
any time a man be not cured after prayer, let us not wonder or ask questions
or speak, as if the unclean spirit were listening to us; but let us cast out
our evil spirits by prayer and fasting. And the gloss says: This sort of
devil, that is, the variability of carnal desires induced by that spirit, is
not conquered except by strengthening the soul with prayer, and subduing the
flesh with fasting.
Fourthly, the flaw in the faith of the exorcist is exemplified in
the disciples of Christ who were present. For when they afterwards asked Him
privately the cause of their failure, He answered: Because of your unbelief:
for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye
shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence, etc. And S. Hilary says: The
Apostles believed indeed, but they were not yet perfect in faith: for while
the Lord was away in the mountain with the other three, and they remained
with the multitude, their faith became lukewarm.
The fifth reason is illustrated in the Lives of the Fathers, where
we read that certain possessed persons could not be delivered by S. Antony,
but were delivered by his disciple, Paul.
The sixth reason has already been made clear; for not always when a
man is freed from sin is he also freed from punishment, but sometimes the
penalty remains as a punishment and atonement for the previous sin.
There is yet another remedy by which many have been said to be
delivered, namely, the re-baptizing of those who are bewitched; but this is
a matter on which, as we have said, we can make no definite pronouncement.
Nevertheless it is most true that when a person has not been duly exorcised
before baptism, the devil, with God's permission, has always more power
against such a person. And it is clearly shown without any doubt in what has
just been written, that much negligence is committed by improperly
instructed priests (in which case it pertains to the fourth of the above-
noted impediments, namely, a flaw in the exorcist), or else by old women who
do not observe the proper method of baptism at the necessary time.
However, God forbid that I should maintain that the Sacraments
cannot be administered by wicked men, or that when baptism is performed by a
wicked man it is not valid, provided that he observes the proper forms and
words. Similarly in the exorcism let him proceed with due care, not timidly
and not rashly. And let no one meddle with such sacred offices by any
accidental or habitual omission of any necessary forms or words; for there
are four matters to be observed in the right performance of exorcism,
namely, the matter, the form, the intention and the order, as we have set
them out above; and when one of these is lacking it cannot be complete.
And it is not valid to object that in the primitive Church persons
were baptized without exorcism, and that even now a person is truly baptized
without any exorcism; for in that case S. Gregory would have instituted
exorcism in vain, and the Church would be in error in its ceremonies.
Therefore I have not dared altogether to condemn the re-baptism under
certain conditions of bewitched persons, that they may recover that which
was at first omitted.
It is said, also, of those who walk in their sleep during the night
over high buildings without any harm, that it is the work of evil spirits
who thus lead them; and many affirm that when such people are re-baptized
they are much benefited. And it is wonderful that, when they are called by
their own names, they suddenly fall back to earth, as if that name had not
been given to them in proper form at their baptism.
Let the reader pay attention to those six impediments mentioned
above, although they refer to Energoumenoi, or men possessed, rather than to
men bewitched; for though equal virtue is required in both cases, yet it may
be said that it is more difficult to cure a bewitched person than one
possessed. Therefore those impediments apply even more pertinently to the
case of those who are bewitched; as is proved by the following reasoning.
It was shown in Chapter X of the First Question of the Second Part
that some men are at times possessed for no sin of their own, but for the
venial sin of another man, and for various other causes. But in witchcraft,
when adults are bewitched, it generally happens to them that the devil
grievously possesses them from within for the destruction of their souls.
Therefore the labour required in the case of the bewitched is twofold,
whereas it is only single in the case of the possessed. Of this most
grievous possession John Cassian speaks in his Collation of the Abbot
Serenus: They are truly to be judged unhappy and miserable who, although
they pollute themselves with every crime and wickedness, yet show no outward
sign of being filled with the devil, nor does there seem to be any
temptation commensurate with their deeds, nor any punishment sufficient to
restrain them. For they do not deserve even the healing medicine of
purgatory, who in their hardness of heart and impenitence are beyond the
reach of any earthly correction, and lay up to themselves anger and
vengeance in that day of wrath and revelation of the Just Judgement, when
their worm shall not die.
And a little earlier, comparing the possession of the body with the
binding of the soul in sin, he says: Far more grievous and violent is the
torment of those who show no sign of being bodily possessed by devils, but
are most terribly possessed in their souls, being fast bound by their sins
and vices. For according to the Apostle, a man becomes the slave of him by
whom he is conquered. And in this respect their case is the most desperate,
since they are the servants of devils, and can neither resist nor tolerate
that domination. It is clear then that, not they who are possessed by the
devil from without, but they who are bewitched in their bodies and possessed
from within to the perdition of their souls, are, by reason of many
impediments, the more difficult to heal.
Our third main consideration is that of curative charms, and it is
to be noted that these are of two sorts. They are either quite lawful and
free from suspicion, or they are to be suspected and are not altogether
lawful. We have dealt with the first sort in Chapter V, towards the end,
where we disposed of a doubt as to the legality of using herbs and stones to
drive away a bewitchment.
Now we must treat the second sort which are under suspicion of not
being altogether lawful; and we must draw attention to what was said in the
Introduction to the Second Question of the Second Part of this work as to
the four remedies, of which three are judged to be unlawful, and the fourth
not altogether so, but vain, being that of which the Canonists say that it
is lawful to oppose vanity to vanity. But we Inquisitors are of the same
opinion as the Holy Doctors, that when, owing to the six or seven
impediments which we have detailed, the remedies of sacred words and lawful
exorcism are not sufficient, then those who are so bewitched are to be
exhorted to bear with patient spirit the devils of this present life for the
purgation of their crimes, and not to seek further in any way for
superstitious and vain remedies. Therefore, if anyone is not content with
the aforesaid lawful exorcisms, and wishes to have recourse to remedies
which are, at least, vain, of which we have spoken before, let him know that
he does not do this with our consent or permission. But the reason why we
have so carefully explained and detailed such remedies is that we might
bring into some sort of agreement the opinions of such Doctors as Duns
Scotus and Henry of Segusio on the one hand, and those of the other
Theologians on the other hand. Yet we are in agreement with S. Augustine in
his Sermon against Fortune-tellers and Diviners, which is called the Sermon
on Auguries, where he says: Brethren, you know that I have often entreated
you that you should not follow the customs of Pagans and sorcerers, but this
has had little effect on some of you. Yet, if I do not speak out to you, I
shall be answerable for you in the Day of Judgement, and both you and I must
suffer eternal damnation. Therefore I absolve myself before God, that again
and again I admonish and adjure you, that none of you seek out diviners or
fortune-tellers, and that you consult with them for no cause or infirmity;
for whosoever commits this sin, the sacrament of baptism is immediately lost
in him, and he at once becomes a sacrilegious and a Pagan, and unless he
repents will perish in eternity.
And afterwards he adds: Let no one observe days for going out and
coming back; for God hath made all things well, and He Who ordained one day
ordained also another. But as often as you have to do anything or to go out,
cross yourselves in the name of Christ, and saying faithfully the Creed or
the Lord's Prayer you may go about your business secure in the help of God.
But certain superstitious sons of our times, not content with the
above securities and accumulating error upon error, and going beyond the
meaning or intention of Scotus and the Canonists, try to justify themselves
with the following arguments. That natural objects have certain hidden
virtues the cause of which cannot be explained by men; as a lodestone
attracts iron, and many other such things which are enumerated by S.
Augustine in the City of God, xxi. Therefore, they say, to seek the recovery
of one's health by the virtue of such things, when exorcisms and natural
medicines have failed, will not be unlawful, although it may seem to be
vain. This would be the case if a man tried to procure his own or another's
health by means of images, not necromantic but astrological, or by rings and
such devices. They argue also that, just as natural matter is subject to the
influence of the stars, so also are artificial objects such as images, which
receive some hidden virtue from the stars by which they can cause certain
effects: therefore it is not unlawful to make use of such things.
Besides, the devils can in very many ways change bodies, as S.
Augustine says, de Trinitate, 3, and as is evident in the case of those who
are bewitched: therefore it is lawful to use the virtues of such bodies for
the removing of witchcraft.
But actually all the Holy Doctors are of an entirely contrary
opinion to this, as has been shown here and there in the course of this
work.
Therefore we can answer their first argument in this way: that if
natural objects are used in a simple way to produce certain effects for
which they are thought to have some natural virtue, this is not unlawful.
But if there are joined to this certain characters and unknown signs and
vain observations, which manifestly cannot have any natural efficacy, then
it is superstitious and unlawful. Wherefore S. Thomas, II, q. 96, art. 2,
speaking of this matter, says that when any object is used for the purpose
of causing some bodily effect, such as curing the sick, notice must be taken
whether such objects appear to have any natural quality which could cause
such an effect; and if so, then it is not unlawful, since it is lawful to
apply natural causes to their effects. But if it does not appear that they
can naturally cause such effects, it follows that they are not applied as
causes of those effects, but as signs or symbols; and so they pertain to
some pact symbolically formed with devils. Also S. Augustine says, in the
City of God, xxi: The devils ensnare us by means of creatures formed not by
themselves, but by God, and with various delights consonant with their own
versatility; not as animals with food, but as spirits with signs, by various
kinds of stones and herbs and trees, animals and charms and ceremonies.
Secondly, S. Thomas, says: The natural virtues of natural objects
follow their material forms which they obtain from the influence of the
stars, and from the same influence they derive certain active virtues. But
the forms of artificial objects proceed from the conception of the
craftsman; and since, as Aristotle says in his Physics, I, they are nothing
but an artificial composition, they can have no natural virtue to cause any
effect. It follows then that the virtue received from the influence of the
stars can only reside in natural and not in artificial objects. Therefore,
as S. Augustine says in the City of God, x, Porphyry was in error when he
thought that from herbs and stones and animals, and from certain sounds and
voices and figures, and from certain configurations in the revolutions of
the stars and their motions, men fabricated on earth certain Powers
corresponding to the various effects of the stars; as if the effects of
magicians proceeded from the virtue of the stars. But, as S. Augustine adds,
all such matters belong to the devils, the deceivers of souls which are
subject to them. So also are those images which are called astronomical the
work of devils, the sign of which is that they have inscribed upon them
certain characters which can have no natural power to effect anything; for a
figure or sign is no cause of natural action. But there is this difference
between the images of astronomers and those of necromancers; that in the
case of the latter there is an open invocation, and therefore an open and
expressed pact with devils; whereas the signs and characters on astronomical
images imply only a tacit pact.
Thirdly, there is no power given to men over devils, whereby a man
may lawfully use them for his own purposes; but there is war declared
between man and the devils, therefore by no means may he use the help of
devils, by either a tacit or an expressed pact with them. So says S. Thomas.
To return to the point: he says, "By no means"; therefore not even
by the means of any vain things in which the devil may in any way be
involved. But if they are merely vain, and man in his frailty has recourse
to them for the recovery of his health, let him repent for the past and take
care for the future, and let him pray that his sins may be forgiven and that
he be no more led into temptation; as S. Augustine says at the end of his
Rule.
Chapter VII Remedies prescribed against Hailstorms, and for animals that
are Bewitched.
With regard to the remedies for betwitched animals, and charms
against tempests, we must first note some unlawful remedies which are
practised by certain people. For these are done by means of superstitious
words or actions; as when men cure the worms in the fingers or limbs by
means of certain words or charms, the method of deciding the legality of
which has been explained in the preceding chapter. There are others who do
not sprinkle Holy Water over bewitched cattle, but pour it into their
mouths.
Beside the proofs we have already given that the remedy of words is
unlawful, William of Paris, whom we have often quoted, gives the following
reason. If there were any virtue in words as words, then it would be due to
one of three things: either their material, which is air; or their form,
which is sound; or their meaning; or else to all three together. Now it
cannot be due to air, which has no power to kill unless it be poisonous;
neither can it be due to sound, the power of which is broken by a more solid
object; neither can it be due to the meaning, for in that case the words
Devil or Death or Hell would always be harmful, and the words Health and
Goodness always be beneficial. Also it cannot be due to all these three
together; for when the parts of a whole are invalid, the whole itself is
also invalid.
And it cannot validly be objected that God gave virtue to words just
as He did to herbs and stones. For whatever virtue there is in certain
sacramental words and benedictions and lawful incantations belongs to them,
not as words, but by Divine institution and ordinance according to God's
promise. It is, as it were, a promise from God that whoever does such and
such a thing will receive such and such a grace. And so the words of the
sacraments are effective because of their meaning; although some hold that
they have an intrinsic virtue; but these two opinions are not mutually
inconsistent. But the case of other words and incantations is clear from
what has already been said; for the mere composing or uttering or writing of
words, as such, can have no effect; but the invocation of the Divine Name,
and public prayer, which is a sacred protestation committing the effect to
the Divine Will, are beneficial.
We have treated above of remedies performed by actions which seem to
be unlawful. The following is a common practice in parts of Swabia. On the
first of May before sunrise the women of the village go out and gather from
the woods leaves and branches from willow trees, and weave them into a
wreath which they hang over the stable door, affirming that all the cattle
will then remain unhurt and safe from witchcraft for a whole year. And in
the opinion of those who hold that vanity may be opposed by vanity, this
remedy would not be unlawful; and neither would be the driving away of
diseases by unknown cantrips and incantations. But without meaning and
offence, we say that a woman or anyone else may go out on the first or any
other day of the month, without considering the rising or the setting of the
sun, and collect herbs or leaves and branches, saying the Lord's Prayer or
the Creed, and hang them over the stable door in good faith, trusting to the
will of God for their protective efficacy; yet even so the practice is not
above reproach, as was shown in the preceding chapter in the words of S.
Jerome; for even if he is not invoked, the devil has some part in the
efficacy of herbs and stones.
It is the same with those who make the sign of the Cross with leaves
and consecrated flowers on Palm Sunday, and set it up among their vines or
crops; asserting that, although the crops all round should be destroyed by
hail, yet they will remain unharmed in their own fields. Such matters should
be decided upon according to the distinction of which we have already
treated.
Similarly there are women who, for the preservation of milk and that
cows should not be deprived of their milk by witchcraft, give freely to the
poor in God's name the whole of a Sunday's yield of milk; and say that, by
this sort of alms, the cows yield even more milk and are preserved from
witchcraft. This need not be regarded as superstitious, provided that it is
done out of pity for the poor, and that they implore the Divine mercy for
the protection of their cattle, leaving the effect to the good pleasure of
Divine providence.
Again, Nider in the First chapter of his Præceptorium says that it
is lawful to bless cattle, in the same way as sick men, by means of written
charms and sacred words, even if they have the appearance of incantations,
as long as the seven conditions we have mentioned are observed. For he says
that devout persons and virgins have been known to sign a cow with the sign
of the Cross, together with the Lord's Prayer and the Angelic Salutation,
upon which the devil's work has been driven off, if it is due to witchcraft.
And in his Formicarius he tells that witches confess that their
witchcraft is obstructed by the reverent observation of the ceremonies of
the Church; as by the aspersion of Holy Water, or the consumption of
consecrated salt, by the lawful use of candles on the Day of Purification
and of blessed palms, and such things. For this reason the Church uses these
in her exorcisms, that they may lessen the power of the devil.
Also, because when witches wish to deprive a cow of milk they are in
the habit of begging a little of the milk or butter which comes from that
cow, so that they may afterwards by their art bewitch the cow; therefore
women should take care, when they are asked by persons suspected of this
crime, not to give away the least thing to them.
Again, there are women who, when they have been turning a church for
a long while to no purpose, and if they suspect that this is due to some
witch, procure if possible a little butter from the house of that witch.
Then they make that butter into three pieces and throw them into the churn,
invoking the Holy Trinity, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost; and so
all witchcraft is put to flight. Here again it is a case of opposing vanity
to vanity, for the simple reason that the butter must be borrowed from the
suspected witch. But if it were done without this; if with the invocation of
the Holy Trinity and the Lord's Prayer the woman were to commit the effect
of the Divine Will, she would remain beyond reproach. Nevertheless it is not
a commendable practice to throw in the three pieces of butter; for it would
be better to banish the witchcraft by means of sprinkling Holy Water or
putting in some exorcised salt, always with the prayers we have mentioned.
Again, since often the whole of a person's cattle are destroyed by
witchcraft, those who have suffered in this way ought to take care to remove
the soil under the threshold of the stable or stall, and where the cattle go
to water, and replace it with fresh soil sprinkled with Holy Water. For
witches have often confessed that they have placed some instrument of
witchcraft at the instance of devils, they have only had to make a hole in
which the devil has placed the instrument of witchcraft; and that this was a
visible object, such as a stone or a piece of wood or a mouse or some
serpent. For it is agreed that the devil can perform such things by himself
without the need of any partner; but usually, for the perdition of her soul,
he compels a witch to co-operate with him.
In addition to the setting up of the sign of the Cross which we have
mentioned, the following procedure is practised against hailstorms and
tempests. Three of the hailstones are thrown into the fire with an
invocation of the Most Holy Trinity, and the Lord's Prayer and the Angelic
Salutation are repeated twice or three times, together with the Gospel of S.
John, In the beginning was the Word. And the sign of the Cross is made in
every direction towards each quarter of the world. Finally, The Word was
made Flesh is repeated three times, and three times, “By the words of this
Gospel may this tempest be dispersed.” And suddenly, if the tempest is due
to witchcraft, it will cease. This is most true and need not be regarded
with any suspicion. For if the hailstones were thrown into the fire without
the invocation of the Divine Name, then it would be considered
superstitious.
But it may be asked whether the tempest could not be stilled without
the use of those hailstones. We answer that it is the other sacred words
that are chiefly effective; but by throwing in the hailstones a man means to
torment the devil, and tries to destroy his works by the invocation of the
Holy Trinity. And he throws them into the fire rather than into water,
because the more quickly they are dissolved the sooner is the devil's work
destroyed. But he must commit to the Divine Will the effect which is hoped
for.
Relevant to this is the reply given by a witch to a Judge who asked
her if there were any means of stilling a tempest raised by witchcraft. She
answered: Yes, by this means. I adjure you, hailstorms and winds, by the
five wounds of Christ, and by the three nails which pierced His hands and
feet, and by the four Holy Evangelists, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, that
you be dissolved and fall as rain.
Many also confess, some freely and some under stress of torture,
that there are five things by which they are much hindered, sometimes
entirely, sometimes in part, sometimes so that they cannot harm his friends.
And these are, that a man should have a pure faith and keep the commandments
of God; that he should protect himself with the sign of the Cross and with
prayer; that he should reverence the rites and ceremonies of the Church;
that he should be diligent in the performance of public justice; and that he
should meditate aloud or in his heart on the Passion of Christ. And of these
things Nider also speaks. And for this reason it is a general practice of
the Church to ring bells as a protection against storms, both that the
devils may flee from them as being consecrated to God and refrain from their
wickedness, and also that the people may be roused up to invoke God against
tempests with the Sacrament of the Altar and sacred words, following the
very ancient custom of the Church in France and Germany.
But since this method of carrying out the Sacrament to still a storm
seems to many a little superstitious, because they do not understand the
rules by which it is possible to distinguish between that which is
superstitious and that which is not; therefore it must be considered that
five rules are given by which anyone may know whether an action is
superstitious, that is, outside the observances of the Christian religion,
or whether it is in accordance with the due and proper worship and honour of
God, proceeding from the true virtue of religion both in the thoughts of the
heart and in the actions of the body. For these are explained in the gloss
on Colossians ii, where S. Paul says: Which things have a show of wisdom in
superstition; and the gloss says: Superstition is religion observed without
due discipline; as was said before.
The first of these is, that in all our works the glory of God ought
to be our chief aim; as it is said: Whether ye eat or drink, or whatsoever
else ye do, do all in the glory of God. Therefore in every work relating to
the Christian religion let care be taken that it is to the glory of God, and
that in it man should give the glory chiefly to God, so that by that very
work the mind of man may be put in subjection to God. And although,
according to this rule, the ceremonies and legal procedures of the Old
Testament are not now observed, since they are to be understood
figuratively, whereas the truth is made known in the New Testament, yet the
carrying out of the Sacrament or of Relics to still a storm does not seem to
militate against this rule.
The second rule is that care should be taken that the work is a
discipline to restrain concupiscence, or a bodily abstinence, but in the way
that is owed to virtue, that is, according to the rites of the Church and
moral doctrine. For S. Paul says, Romans xii: Let your service be
reasonable. And because of this rule, they are foolish who make a vow not to
comb their hair on the Sabbath, or who fast on Sunday, saying, The better
the day the better the deed, and such like. But again it does not seem that
it is superstitious to carry out the Sacrament, etc.
The third rule is to be sure that what is done is in accordance with
the statutes of the Catholic Church, or with the witness of Holy Scripture,
or according at least to the rites of some particular Church, or in
accordance with universal use, which S. Augustine says may be taken as a
law. Accordingly when the Bishops of the English were in doubt because the
Mass was celebrated in different manners in different Churches, S. Gregory
wrote to them that they might use whatever methods they found most pleasing
to God, whether they followed the rites of the Roman or of the Gallican or
of any other Church. For the fact that different Churches have different
methods in Divine worship does not militate against the truth, and therefore
such customs are to be preserved, and it is unlawful to neglect them. And
so, as we said in the beginning, it is a very ancient custom in the Churches
of France and some parts of Germany, after the consecration of the Eucharist
to carry It out into the open; and this cannot be unlawful, provided that It
is not carried exposed to the air, but enclosed and contained in a Pyx.
The fourth rule is to take care that what is done bears some natural
relation to the effect which is expected; for if it does not, it is judged
to be superstitious. On this account unknown characters and suspected names,
and the images or charts of necromancers and astronomer, are altogether to
be condemned as suspect. But we cannot say that on this account it is
superstitious to carry out Holy Relics or the Eucharist as a protection
against the plagues of the devil; for it is rather a most religious and
salutary practice, since in that Sacrament lies all our help against the
Adversary.
The fifth rule is to be careful that what is done should give no
occasion for scandal or stumbling; for in that case, although it be not
superstitious, yet because of the scandal it should be forgone or postponed,
or done secretly without scandal. Therefore if this carrying of the
Sacrament can be done without scandal, or even secretly, then it should not
be neglected. For by this rule many secular priests neglect the use of
benedictions by means of devout words either uttered over the sick or bound
round their necks. I say that nothing should be done, at least publicly, if
it can give any occasion of stumbling to other simple folk.
Let this be enough on the subject of the remedies against
hailstorms, either by words or lawful actions.
Chapter VIII Certain Remedies prescribed against those Dark and Horrid
Harms with which Devils may Afflict Men.
Yet again we reserve our judgement in discussing the remedies
against certain injuries to the fruits of the earth, which are caused by
canker-worms, or by huge flights of locusts and other insects which cover
vast areas of land, and seem to hide the surface of the ground, eating up
everything to the very roots in the vineyards and devouring fields of ripe
crops. In the same light too we consider the remedies against the stealing
of children by the work of devils.
But with regard to the former kind of injury we may quote S. Thomas,
the Second of the Second, Question 90, where he asks whether it is lawful to
adjure an irrational creature. He answers that it is; but only in the way of
compulsion, by which it is sent back to the devil, who uses irrational
creatures to harm us. And such is the method of adjuration in the exorcisms
of the Church by which the power of the devil is kept away from irrational
creatures. But if the adjuration is addressed to the irrational creature
itself, which understands nothing, then it would be nugatory and vain. From
this it can be understood that they can be driven off by lawful exorcisms
and adjurations, the help of the Divine mercy being granted; but first the
people should be bidden to fast and to go in procession and practice other
devotions. For this sort of evil is sent on account of adulteries and the
multiplication of crimes; wherefore men must be urged to confess their sins.
In some provinces even solemn excommunications are pronounced; but
then they obtain power of adjuration over devils.
Another terrible thing which God permits to happen to men is when
their own children are taken away from women, and strange children are put
in their place by devils. And these children, which are commonly called
changelings, or in the German tongue Wechselkinder, are of three kinds. For
some are always ailing and crying, and yet the milk of four women is not
enough to satisfy them. Some are generated by the operation of Incubus
devils, of whom, however, they are not the sons, but of that man from whom
the devil has received the semen as a Succubus, or whose semen he has
collected from some nocturnal pollution in sleep. For these children are
sometimes, by Divine permission, substituted for the real children.
And there is a third kind, when the devils at times appear in the
form of young children and attach themselves to the nurses. But all three
kinds have this in common, that though they are very heavy, they are always
ailing and do not grow, and cannot receive enough milk to satisfy them, and
are often reported to have vanished away.
And it can be said that the Divine pity permits such things for two
reasons. First, when the parents dote upon their children too much, and this
a punishment for their own good. Secondly, it is to be presumed that the
women to whom such things happen are very superstitious, and are in many
other ways seduced by devils. But God is truly jealous in the right sense of
the word, which means a strong love for a man's own wife, which not only
does not allow another man to approach her, but like a jealous husband will
not suffer the hint or suspicion of adultery. In the same way is God jealous
of the soul which He bought with His Precious Blood and espoused in the
Faith; and cannot suffer it to be touched by, to converse with, or in any
way to approach or have dealings with the devil, the enemy and adversary of
salvation. And if a jealous husband cannot suffer even a hint of adultery,
how much more will he be disturbed when adultery is actually committed!
Therefore it is no wonder if their own children are taken away and
adulterous children substituted.
And indeed that it may be more strongly impressed how God is jealous
of the soul, and will not suffer anything which might cause a suspicion, it
is shown in the Old Law where, that He might drive His people farther from
idolatry, He not only forbade idolatry, but also many other things which
might give occasion to idolatry, and seemed to have no use in themselves,
although in some marvellous way they retain some use in a mystical sense.
For He not only says in Exodus xxii: Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live
on this earth; but He adds this: She shall not dwell in thy land, lest
perchance she cause thee to sin. Similarly common bawds and bulkers are put
to death, and not allowed to company with men.
Note the jealousy of God, Who says as follows in Deuteronomy xxii:
If thou find a bird's nest, and the dam sitting upon the eggs or upon the
young ones, thou shalt not take the dam with the young, but thou shalt let
the dam fly away; because the Gentiles used these to procure sterility. The
jealous God would not suffer in His people this sign of adultery. In like
manner in our days when old women find a penny, they think it a sign of
great fortune; and conversely, when they dream of money it is an unlucky
sign. Also God taught that all vessels should be covered, and that when a
vessel had no cover it should be considered unclean.
There was an erroneous belief that when devils came in the night (or
the Good People as old women call them, though they are witches, or devils
in their forms) they must eat up everything, that afterwards they may bring
greater abundance of stores. Some people give colour to the story, and call
them Screech Owls; but this is against the opinion of the Doctors, who say
that there are no rational creatures except men and Angels; therefore they
can only be devils.
Again, in Leviticus xix: Ye shall not round the corners of your
heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard; because they did
this idolatrously in veneration of idols.
Again in Deuteronomy xxii: God says that men shall not put on the
garments of women, or conversely; because they did this in honour of the
goddess Venus, and others in honour of Mars or Priapus.
And for the same reason He commanded the altars of idols to be
destroyed; and Hezechias destroyed the Brazen Serpent when the people wanted
to sacrifice to it, saying: It is brass. For the same reason He forbade the
observance of visions and auguries, and commanded that the man or woman in
whom there was a familiar spirit should be put to death. Such are now called
soothsayers. All these things, because they give rise to suspicion of
spiritual adultery, therefore, as has been said, from the jealousy which God
has for the souls He has espoused, as a husband espouses a wife, they were
all forbidden by Him.
And so we preachers also ought to bear in mind that no sacrifice is
more acceptable to God than a jealousy of souls, as S. Jerome says in his
commentaries upon Ezekiel.
Therefore in the Third Part of this work we shall treat the
extermination of witches, which is the ultimate remedy. For this is the last
recourse of the Church, to which she is bound by Divine commandment. For it
has been said: Ye shall not suffer witches to live upon the earth. And with
this will be included the remedies against archer-wizards; since this kind
can only be exterminated by secular law.
A remedy. When certain persons for the sake of temporal gain have
devoted themselves entirely to the devil, it has often been found that,
though they may be freed from the devil's power by true confession, yet they
have been long and grievously tormented, especially in the night. And God
allows this for their punishment. But a sign that they have been delivered
is that, after confession, all the money in their purses or coffers
vanishes. Many examples of this could be adduced, but for the sake of
brevity they are passed over and omitted.
THE THIRD PART
RELATING TO THE JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS IN BOTH THE ECCLESIASTICAL AND CIVIL
COURTS AGAINST WITCHES AND INDEED ALL HERETICS
CONTAINING XXXV QUESTIONS IN WHICH IS MOST CLEARLY SET OUT THE FORMAL RULES
FOR INITIATING A PROCESS OF JUSTICE, HOW IT SHOULD BE CONDUCTED, AND THE
METHOD OF PRONOUNCING SENTENCE.
Question I The Method of Initiating a Process
Question II Of the Number of Witnesses
Question III Of the Solemn Adjuration and Re-examination of Witnesses
Question IV Of the Quality and Condition of Witnesses
Question V Whether Mortal Enemies may be Admitted as Witnesses
Question VI How the Trial is to be Proceeded with and Continued. And how
the Witnesses are to be Examined in the Presence of Four Other Persons, and
how the Accused is to be Questioned in Two Ways
Question VII In Which Various Doubts are Set Forth with Regard to the
Foregoing Questions and Negative Answers. Whether the Accused is to be
Imprisoned, and when she is to be considered Manifestly Taken in the Foul
Heresy of Witchcraft. This is the Second Action
Question VIII Which Follows from the Preceding Question, Whether the Witch
is to be Imprisoned, and of the Method of Taking her. This is the Third
Action of the Judge
Question IX What is to be done after the Arrest, and whether the Names of
the Witnesses should be made Known to the Accused. This is the Fourth Action
Question X What Kind of Defence may be Allowed, and of the Appointment of
an Advocate. This is the Fifth Action
Question XI What Course the Advocate should Adopt when the Names of the
Witnesses are not Revealed to him. Ths Sixth Action
(the rest is missing)
General and Introductory Who are the Fit and Proper Judges in the Trial of
Witches?
The question is whether witches, together with their patrons and
protectors and defenders, are so entirely subject to the jurisdiction of the
Diocesan Ecclesiastical Court and the Civil Court so that the Inquisitors of
the crime of heresy can be altogether relieved from the duty of sitting in
judgement upon them. And it is argued that this is so. For the Canon (c.
accusatus, § sane, lib. VI) says: Certainly those whose high privilege it is
to judge concerning matters of the faith ought not to be distracted by other
business; and Inquisitors deputed by the Apostolic See to inquire into the
pest of heresy should manifestly not have to concern themselves with
diviners and soothsayers, unless these are also heretics, nor should it be
their business to punish such, but they may leave them to be punished by
their own judges.
Nor does there seem any difficulty in the fact that the heresy of
witches is not mentioned in that Canon. For these are subject to the same
punishment as the others in the court of conscience, as the Canon goes on to
say (dist. I, pro dilectione). If the sin of diviners and witches is secret,
a penance of forty days shall be imposed upon them: if it is notorious, they
shall be refused the Eucharist. And those whose punishment is identical
should receive it from the same Court. Then, again, the guilt of both being
the same, since just as soothsayers obtain their results by curious means,
so do witches look for and obtain from the devil the injuries which they do
to creatures, unlawfully seeking from His creatures that which should be
sought from God alone; therefore both are guilty of the sin of idolatry.
This is the sense of Ezechiel xxi, 23; that the King of Babylon
stood at the cross-roads, shuffling his arrows and interrogating idols.
Again it may be said that, when the Canon says “Unless these are
also heretics,” it allows that some diviners and soothsayers are heretics,
and should therefore be subject to trial by the Inquisitors; but in that
case artificial diviners would also be so subject, and no written authority
for that can be found.
Again, if witches are to be tried by the Inquisitors, it must be for
the crime of heresy; but it is clear that the deeds of witches can be
committed without any heresy. For when they stamp into the mud of the Body
of Christ, although this is a most horrible crime, yet it may be done
without any error in the understanding, and therefore without heresy. For it
is entirely possible for a person to believe that It is the Lord's body, and
yet throw It into the mud to satisfy the devil, and this by reason of some
pact with him, that he may obtain some desired end, such as the finding of a
treasure or anything of that sort. Therefore the deeds of witches need
involved no error in faith, however great the sin may be; in which case they
are not liable to the Court of the Inquisition, but are left to their own
judges.
Again, Solomon showed reverence to the gods of his wives out of
complaisance, and was not on that account guilty of apostasy from the Faith;
for in his heart he was faithful and kept the true Faith. So also when
witches give homage to devils by reason of the pact they have entered into,
but keep the Faith in their hearts, they are not on that account to be
reckoned as heretics.
But it may be said that all witches have to deny the Faith, and
therefore must be judged heretics. On the contrary, even if they were to
deny the Faith in their hearts and minds, still they could not be reckoned
as heretics, but as apostates. But a heretic is different from an apostate,
and it is heretics who are subject to the Court of the Inquisition;
therefore witches are not so subject.
Again it is said, in c. 26, quest. 5: Let the Bishops and their
representatives strive by every means to rid their parishes entirely of the
pernicious art of soothsaying and magic derived from Zoroaster; and if they
find any man or woman addicted to this crime, let him be shamefully cast out
of their parishes in disgrace. So when it says at the end of c. 348, Let
them leave them to their own Judges; and since it speaks in the plural, both
of the Ecclesiastic and the Civil Court; therefore, according to this Canon
they are subject to no more than the Diocesan Court.
But if, just as these arguments seem to show it to be reasonable in
the case of Inquisitors, the Diocesans also wish to be relieved of this
responsibility, and to leave the punishment of witches to the secular
Courts, such a claim could be made good by the following arguments. For the
Canon says, c. ut inquisitionis: We strictly forbid the temporal lords and
rulers and their officers in any way to try to judge this crime, since it is
purely an ecclesiastical matter: and it speaks of the crime of heresy. It
follows therefore that, when the crime is not purely ecclesiastical, as is
the case with witches because of the temporal injuries which they commit, it
must be punished by the Civil and not by the Ecclesiastical Court.
Besides, in the last Canon Law concerning Jews it says: His goods
are to be confiscated, and he is to be condemned to death, because with
perverse doctrine he opposed the Faith of Christ. But if it is said that
this law refers to Jews who have been converted, and have afterwards
returned to the worship of the Jews, this is not a valid objection. Rather
is the argument strengthened by it; because the civil Judge has to punish
such Jews as apostates from the Faith; and therefore witches who abjure the
Faith ought to be treated in the same way; for abjuration of the Faith,
either wholly or in part, is the essential principle of witches.
And although it says that apostasy and heresy are to be judged in
the same way, yet it is not the part of the ecclesiastical but of the civil
Judge to concern himself with witches. For no one must cause a commotion
among the people by reason of a trial for heresy; but the Governor himself
must make provision for such cases.
The Authentics of Justinian, speaking of ruling princes, says: You
shall not permit anyone to stir up your Province by reason of a judicial
inquiry into matters concerning religions or heresies, or in any way allow
an injunction to be put upon the Province over which you govern; but you
shall yourself provide, making use of such monies and other means of
investigation as are competent, and not allow anything to be done in matters
of religion except in accordance with our precepts. It is clear from this
that no one must meddle with a rebellion against the Faith except the
Governor himself.
Besides, if the trial and punishment of such witches were not
entirely a matter for the civil Judge, what would be the purpose of the laws
which provide as follows? All those who are commonly called witches are to
be condemned to death. And again: Those who harm innocent lives by magic
arts are to be thrown to the beasts. Again, it is laid down that thy are to
be subjected to questions and tortures; and that none of the faithful are to
associate with them, under pain of exile and the confiscation of all their
goods. And many other penalties are added, which anyone may read in those
laws.
But in contradiction of all these arguments, the truth of the matter
is that such witches may be tried and punished conjointly by the Civil and
the Ecclesiastical Courts. For a canonical crime must be tried by the
Governor and the Metropolitan of the Province; not by the Metropolitan
alone, but together with the Governor. This is clear in the Authentics,
where ruling princes are enjoined as follows: If it is a canonical matter
which is to be tried, you shall inquire into it together with the
Metropolitan of the Province. And to remove all doubt on this subject, the
gloss says: If it is a simple matter of the observance of the faith, the
Governor alone may try it; but if the matter is more complicated, then it
must be tried by a Bishop and the Governor; and the matter must be kept
within decent limits by someone who has found favour with God, who shall
protect the orthodox faith, and impose suitable indemnities of money, and
keep our subjects inviolate, that is, shall not corrupt the faith in them.
And again, although a secular prince may impose the capital
sentence, yet this does not exclude the judgement of the Church, whose part
it is to try and judge the case. Indeed this is perfectly clear from the
Canon Law in the chapters de summa trin. and fid. cath., and again in the
Law concerning heresy, c. ad abolendam and c. urgentis and c.
excommunicamus, 1 and 2. For the same penalties are provided by both the
Civil and the Canon Laws, as is shown by the Canon Laws concerning the
Manichaean and Arian heresies. Therefore the punishment of witches belongs
to both Courts together, and not to one separately.
Again, the laws decree that clerics shall be corrected by their own
Judges, and not by the temporal or secular Courts, because their crimes are
considered to be purely ecclesiastical. But the crime of witches is partly
civil and partly ecclesiastical, because they commit temporal harm and
violate the faith; therefore it belongs to the Judges of both Courts to try,
sentence, and punish them.
This opinion is substantiated by the Authentics, where it is said:
If it is an ecclesiastical crime needing ecclesiastical punishment and fine,
it shall be tried by a Bishop who stands in favour with God, and not even
the most illustrious Judges of the Province shall have a hand in it. And we
do not wish the civil Judges to have any knowledge of such proceedings; for
such matters must be examined ecclesiastically and the souls of the
offenders must be corrected by ecclesiastical penalties, according to the
sacred and divine rules which our laws worthily follow. So it is said.
Therefore it follows that on the other hand a crime which is of a mixed
nature must be tried and punished by both courts.
We make our answer to all the above as follows. Our main object here
is to show how, with God's pleasure, we Inquisitors of Upper Germany may be
relieved of the duty of trying witches, and leave them to be punished by
their own provincial Judges; and this because of the arduousness of the
work: provided always that such a course shall in no way endanger the
preservation of the faith and the salvation of souls. And therefore we
engaged upon this work, that we might leave to the Judges themselves the
methods of trying, judging and sentencing in such cases.
Therefore in order to show that the Bishops can in many cases
proceed against witches without the Inquisitors; although they cannot so
proceed without the temporal and civil Judges in cases involving capital
punishment; it is expedient that we set down the opinions of certain other
Inquisitors in parts of Spain, and (saving always the reverence due to
them), since we all belong to one and the same Order of Preachers, to refute
them, so that each detail may be more clearly understood.
Their opinion is, then, that all witches, diviners, necromancers,
and in short all who practise any kind of divination, if they have once
embraced and professed the Holy Faith, are liable to the Inquisitorial
Court, as in the three cases noted in the beginning of the chapter, Multorum
querela, in the decretals of Pope Clement concerning heresy; in which it
says that neither must the Inquisitor proceed without the Bishop, nor the
Bishop without the Inquisitor: although there are five other cases in which
one may proceed without the other, as anyone who reads the chapter may see.
But in one case it is definitively stated that one must not proceed without
the other, and that is when the above diviners are to be considered as
heretics.
In the same category they place blasphemers, and those who in any
way invoke devils, and those who are excommunicated and have contumaciously
remained under the ban of excommunication for a whole year, either because
of some matter concerning faith or, in certain circumstances, not on account
of the faith; and they further include several other such offences. And by
reason of this the authority of the Ordinary is weakened, since so many more
burdens are placed upon us Inquisitors which we cannot safely bear in the
sight of the terrible Judge who will demand from us a strict account of the
duties imposed upon us.
And because their opinion cannot be refuted unless the fundamental
thesis upon which it is founded is proved unsound, it is to be noted that it
is based upon the commentators on the Canon, especially on the chapter
accusatus, and § sane, and on the words “savour of heresy.” Also they rely
upon the sayings of the Theologians, S. Thomas, Blessed Albert, and S.
Bonaventura, in the Second Book of Sentences, dist. 7.
It is best to consider some of these in detail. For when the Canon
says, as was shown in the first argument, that the Inquisitors or heresy
should not concern themselves with soothsayers and diviners unless they
manifestly savour of heresy, they say that soothsayers and diviners are of
two sorts, either artificial or heretical. And the first sort are called
diviners pure and simple, since they work merely by art; and such are
referred to in the chapter de sortilegiis, where it says that the presbyter
Udalricus went to a secret place with a certain infamous person, that is, a
diviner, says the gloss, not with the intention of invoking the devil, which
would have been heresy, but that, by inspecting the astrolabe, he might find
out some hidden thing. And this, they say, is pure divination or sortilege.
But the second sort are called heretical diviners, whose art
involves some worship of or subjection to devils, and who essay by
divination to predict the future of something of that nature, which
manifestly savours of heresy; and such are, like other heretics, liable to
the Inquisitorial Court.
And that this is the meaning of the Canon they prove from
commentaries of the Canonists on the word “savour.” For Giovanni d’Andrea,
writing on this Canon accusatus, and the word “saviour,” says: They savour
of heresy in this way, that they utter nefarious prayers and offer
sacrifices at the altars of idols, and they consult with devils and receive
answers from them; or they meet together to practise heretical sortes, that
they may have an answer, re-baptize a child, and practise other such
matters.
Many others also they quote in support of their opinion, including
John Modestus; S. Raymund, and William de Laudun, O.P. And they refer to the
decision of the Church at the Council of Aquitaine, c. 26, q. 5, Episcopi,
where such superstitious women are called infidels, saying, Would that these
had perished alone in their perfidy. And perfidy in a Christian is called
heresy; therefore they are subject to the Court of the Inquisitors of
heresy.
They quote also the Theologians, especially S. Thomas, the Second
Book of Sentences, dist. 7, where he considers whether it is a sin to use
the help of devils. For speaking of that passage in Esaias viii: Should not
a people seek unto their God? he says among other things: In everything the
fulfilment of which is looked for from the power of the devil, because of a
pact entered into with him, there is apostasy from the faith, either in
word, if there is some invocation, or in deed, even if there be no sacrifice
offered.
To the same effect they quote Albertus, and Peter of Tarentaise, and
Giovanni Bonaventura, who has lately been canonized, not under the name of
Giovanni, although that was his true name. Also they quote Alexander of
Hales and Guido the Carmelite. All these say that those who invoke devils
are apostates, and consequently heretics, and therefore subject to the Court
of the Inquisitors of heretics.
But the said Inquisitors of Spain have not, by the above or any
other arguments, made out a sufficient case to prove that such soothsayers
etc. may not be tried by the Ordinary or the Bishops without the
Inquisitors; and that the Inquisitors may not be relieved from the duty of
trying such diviners and necromancers, and even witches: not that the
Inquisitors are not rather to be praised than blamed when they do try such
cases, when the Bishops fail to do so. And this is the reason that they have
not proved their case. The Inquisitors need only concern themselves with
matters of heresy, and the heresy must be manifest; as is shown by the
frequently quoted Canon accusatus, § sane.
This being the case, it follows that however serious and grave may
be the sin which a person commits, if it does not necessarily imply heresy,
then he must not be judged as a heretic, although he is to be punished.
Consequently an Inquisitor need not interfere in the case of a man who is to
be punished as a malefactor, but not as a heretic, but may leave him to be
tried by the Judges of his own Province.
It follows again that all the crimes of invoking devils and
sacrificing to them, of which the Commentators and Canonists and Theologians
speak, are no concern of the Inquisitors, but can be left to the secular or
episcopal Courts, unless they also imply heresy. This being so, and it being
the case that the crimes we are considering are very often committed without
any heresy, those who are guilty of such crimes are not to be judged or
condemned as heretics, as is proved by the following authorities and
arguments.
For a person rightly to be adjudged a heretic he must fulfil five
conditions. First, there must be an error in his reasoning. Secondly, that
error must be in matters concerning the faith, either being contrary to the
teaching of the Church as to the true faith, or against sound morality and
therefore not leading to the attainment of eternal life. Thirdly, the error
must lie in one who has professed the Catholic faith, for otherwise he would
be a Jew or a Pagan, not a heretic. Fourthly, the error must be of such a
nature that he who holds it must confess some of the truth of Christ as
touching either His Godhead or His Manhood; for is a man wholly denies the
faith, he is an apostate. Fifthly, he must pertinaciously and obstinately
hold to and follow that error. And that this is the sense of heretics is
proved as follows (not by way of refuting, but of substantiating the gloss
of the Canonists).
For it is well known to all through common practice that the first
essential of a heretic is an error in the understanding; but two conditions
are necessary before a man can be called a heretic; the first material, that
is, an error in reasoning, and the second formal, that is, an obstinate
mind. S. Augustine shows this when he says: A heretic is one who either
initiates or follows new and false opinions. It can also be proved by the
following reasoning: heresy is a form of infidelity, and infidelity exists
subjectively in the intellect, in such a way that a man believes something
which is quite contrary to the true faith.
This being so, whatever crime a man commits, if he acts without an
error in his understanding he is not a heretic. For example, if a man
commits fornication or adultery, although he is disobeying the command Thou
shalt not commit adultery, yet he is not a heretic unless he holds the
opinion that it is lawful to commit adultery. The point can be argued in
this way: When the nature of a thing is such that two constituent parts are
necessary to its existence, if one of those two parts is wanting the thing
itself cannot exist; for if it could, then it would not be true that that
part is necessary to its existence. For in the constitution of a house it is
necessary that there should be a foundation, walls, and a roof; and if one
of these is missing, there is no house. Similarly, since an error in the
understanding is a necessary condition of heresy, no action which is done
entirely without any such error can make a man a heretic.
Therefore we Inquisitors of Germany are in agreement with Blessed
Antoninus where he treats of this matter in the second part of his Summa;
saying that to baptize things, to worship devils, to sacrifice to them, to
tread underfoot the Body of Christ, and all such terrible crimes, do not
make a man a heretic unless there is an error in his understanding.
Therefore a man is not a heretic who, for example, baptizes an image, not
holding any erroneous belief about the Sacrament of Baptism or its effect,
nor thinking that the baptism of the image can have any effect of its own
virtue; but does this in order that he may more easily obtain some desire
from the devil whom he seeks to please by this means, acting with either an
implied or an expressed pact that the devil will fulfil the desires either
of himself or of someone else. In this way men who, with either a tacit or
an expressed pact, invoke devils with characters and figures in accordance
with magic practice to perform their desires are not necessarily heretics.
But they must not ask from the devil anything which is beyond the power or
the knowledge of the devil, having a wrong understanding of his power and
knowledge. Such would be the case with any who believed that the devil could
coerce a man's free will; or that, by reason of their pact with him, the
devil could do anything which they desired, however much it were forbidden
by God; or that the devil can know the whole of the future; or that he can
effect anything which only God can do. For there is no doubt that men with
such beliefs have an error in their understanding, holding a wrong opinion
of the power of the devil; and therefore, granting the other conditions
necessary for heresy, they would be heretics, and would be subject at once
to the Ordinary and to the Inquisitorial Court.
But if they act for the reasons we have said, not out of any wrong
belief concerning baptism or the other matters we have mentioned, as they
very commonly do; for since witches and necromancers know that the devil is
the enemy of the faith and the adversary of salvation, it must follow that
they are compelled to believe in their hearts that there is great might in
the faith and that there is no false doctrine of which the father of lies is
not known to be the origin; then, although they sin most grievously, yet
they are not heretics. And the reason is that they have no wrong belief
concerning the sacrament, although they use it wrongly and sacrilegiously.
Therefore they are rather sorcerers than heretics, and are to be classed
with those whom the above Canon accusatus declares are not properly subject
to the Inquisitorial Court, since they do not manifestly savour of heresy;
their heresy being hidden, if indeed it exists at all.
It is the same with those who worship and sacrifice to the devil.
For if they do this in the belief that there is any divinity in devils, or
that they ought to be worshipped and that, by reason of such worship, that
can obtain from the devil what they desire in spite of the prohibition or
permission of God, then they are heretics. But if they act in such a way not
out of any such belief concerning the devil, but so that they may the more
easily obtain their desires because of some pact formed with the devil, then
they are not necessarily heretics, although they sin most grievously.
For greater clearness, some objections are to be disposed of and
refuted. For it appears to be against our argument that, according to the
laws, a simonist is not a heretic (1, q. 1: “Whoever by means of money, but
not having an error of the understanding”). For a simonist is not in the
narrow and exact sense of the word a heretic; but broadly speaking and by
comparison he is so, according to S. Thomas, when he buys or sells holy
things in the belief that the gift of grace can be had for money. But if, as
is often the case, he does not act in this belief, he is not a heretic. Yet
he truly would be if he did believe that the gift of grace could be had for
money.
Again we are apparently in opposition to what is said of heretics in
the Canon; namely, that he who reveres a heretic is himself a heretic, but
he who worships the devil sins more heavily than he who reveres a heretic,
therefore, etc.
Also, a man must be obviously a heretic in order that he may be
judged as such. For the Church is competent to judge only of those things
which are obvious, God alone having knowledge and being the Judge of that
which is hidden (dist. 33, erubescant). But the inner understanding can only
be made apparent by intrinsic actions, either seen or proved; therefore a
man who commits such actions as we are considering is to be judged a
heretic.
Also, it seems impossible that anyone should commit such an action
as the treading underfoot of the Body of Christ unless he held a wrong
opinion concerning the Body of Christ; for it is impossible for evil to
exist in the will unless there is error in the understanding. For according
to Aristotle every wicked man is either ignorant or in error. Therefore,
since they who do such things have evil in their wills, they must have an
error in their understandings.
To these three objections we answer as follows; and the first and
third may be considered together. There are two kinds of judgement, that of
God and that of men. God judges the inner man; whereas man can only judge of
the inner thoughts as they are reflected by outer actions, as is admitted in
the third of these arguments. Now he who is a heretic in the judgement of
God is truly and actually a heretic; for God judges no one as a heretic
unless he has some wrong belief concerning the faith in his understanding.
But when a man is a heretic in the judgement of men, he need not necessarily
be actually a heretic; but because his deeds give an appearance of a wrong
understanding of the faith he is, by legal presumption, considered to be a
heretic.
And if it be asked whether the Church should stigmatize at once as
heretics those who worship devils or baptize imagines, note these answers.
First, it belongs rather to the Canonists than to the Theologians to
discriminate in this matter. The Canonists will say that they are by legal
presumption to be considered as heretics, and to be punished as such. A
Theologian will say that it is in the first instance a matter for the
Apostolic See to judge whether a heresy actually exists or is only to be
presumed in law. And this may be because whenever an effect can proceed from
a twofold cause, no precise judgement can be formed of he actual nature of
the cause merely on the basis of the effect.
Therefore, since such effects as the worship of the devil or asking
his help in the working of witchcraft, by baptizing an image, or offering to
him a living child, or killing an infant, and other matters of this sort,
can proceed from two separate causes, namely, a belief that it is right to
worship the devil and sacrifice to him, and that images can receive
sacraments; or because a man has formed some pact with the devil, so that he
may obtain the more easily from the devil that which he desires in those
matters which are not beyond the capacity of the devil, as we have explained
above; it follows that no one ought hastily to form a definite judgement
merely on the basis of the effect as to what is its cause, that is, whether
a man does such things out of a wrong opinion concerning the faith. So when
there is no doubt about the effect, still it is necessary to inquire farther
into the cause; and if it be found that a man has acted out of a perverse
and erroneous opinion concerning the faith, then he is to be judged a
heretic and will be subject to trial by the Inquisitors together with the
Ordinary. But if he has not acted for these reasons, he is to be considered
a sorcerer, and a very vile sinner.
Another answer which touches the matter nearly is that, whatever may
be said and alleged, it is agreed that all diviners and witches are judged
as heretics by legal presumption and not by actual fact are subject to the
Court of the Ordinary, not of the Inquisitors. And the aforesaid Inquisitors
of other countries cannot defend their opinions by quoting the Canon and its
commentators, because they who sacrifice to and worship devils are judged to
be heretics be legal presumption, and not because the facts obviously show
that they are such. For the text says that they must savour of heresy
manifestly, that is, intrinsically and by their very nature. And it is
enough for us Inquisitors to concern ourselves with those who are manifestly
from the instrinsic nature of the case heretics, leaving others to their own
judges.
It has been said that the cause must be inquired into, to know
whether or not a man acts out of an error of faith; and this is easy. For
the spirit of faith is known by the act of faith; as the spirit of chastity
is shown by a chaste life; similarly the Church must judge a man a heretic
if his actions show that he disputes any article of the faith. In this way
even a witch, who has wholly or in part denied the faith, or used vilely the
Body of Christ, and offered homage to the devil, may have done this merely
to propitiate the devil; and even if she has totally denied the faith in her
heart, she is to be judged as an apostate, for the fourth condition, which
is necessary before anyone can rightly be said to be a heretic, will be
wanting.
But if against this conclusion be set the Bull and commission given
to us by our Holy Father Innocent VIII, that witches should be tried by the
Inquisitors, we answer in this way. That this is not to say that the
Diocesans also cannot proceed to a definite sentence against witches, in
accordance with those ancient laws, as has been said. For that Bull was
rather given to us because of the great care with which we have wrought to
the utmost of our ability with the help of God.
Therefore we cannot concede to those other Inquisitors their first
argument, since the contrary conclusion is rather the true one; for
simonists are thought to be heretics only be legal presumption, and the
Ordinaries themselves without the Inquisitors can try them. Indeed, the
Inquisitors have no need to concern themselves with various simonists, or
similarly with any others who are judged to be heretics only by legal
presumption. For they cannot proceed against schismatic Bishops and other
high Dignitaries, as is shown by the chapter of the Inquisition Concerning
Heretics, Book VI, where is says: The Inquisitors of the sin of heresy
deputed by the Apostolic See or by any other authority have no power to try
such offenders on this sort of charge, or to proceed against them under
pretext of their office, unless it is expressly stated in the letters of
commission from the Apostolic See that they are empowered to do so.
But if the Inquisitors know or discover that Bishops or other high
Dignitaries have been charged with heresy, or have been denounced or
suspected of that crime, it is their duty to report the fact to the
Apostolic See.
Similarly the answer to their second argument is clear from what has
been said. For he who cherishes and comforts a heretic is himself a heretic
if he does this in the belief that he is worthy to be cherished or honoured
on account of his doctrine or opinion. But if he honours him for some
temporal reason, without any error of faith in his understanding, he is not
rightly speaking a heretic, though he is so by a legal fiction or
presumption or comparison, because he acts as if he held a wrong belief
concerning the faith like him whom he cherishes: so in this case he is not
subject to the Inquisitorial Court.
The third argument is similarly answered. For though a man should be
judged by the Church as a heretic on account of his outward actions, visible
and proved, yet it does not always follow that he is actually a heretic, but
is only so reputed by legal presumption. Therefore in this case he is not
liable to be tried by the Inquisitorial Court, because he does not
manifestly savour of heresy.
For their fourth argument, it is a false assumption to say that it
is not possible for anyone to tread underfoot the Body of Christ unless he
has some perverse and wrong belief concerning the Body of Christ. For a man
may do this with a full knowledge of his sin, and with a firm belief that
the Body of Christ is truly there. But he does it to please the devil, and
that he may more easily obtain his desire from him. And though in every sin
there is an error, it need not necessarily be an error of the understanding,
which is heresy or a wrong belief concerning the faith; for it may be an
erroneous use of some power which turns it to vicious purposes; and then it
will only be the first of those five conditions which are necessary
constituents of heresy, in accordance with which a heretic is rightly liable
to the Inquisitorial Court.
And it is not a valid objection to say that an Inquisitor may,
nevertheless, proceed against those who are denounced as heretics, or are
under a light or a strong or a grave suspicion of heresy, although they do
not appear to savour manifestly of heresy. For we answer that an Inquisitor
may proceed against such in so far as they are denounced or suspected for
heresy rightly so called; and this is the sort of heresy of which we are
speaking (as we have often said), in which there is an error in the
understanding, and the other four conditions are superadded. And the second
of these conditions is that such error should consist in matters concerning
the faith, or should be contrary to the true decisions of the Church in
matters of faith and good behaviour and that which is necessary for the
attainment of eternal life. For if the error be in some matter which does
not concern the faith, as, for example, a belief that the sun is not greater
than the earth, or something of that sort, then it is not a dangerous error.
But an error against Holy Scripture, against the articles of the faith, or
against the decision of the Church, as has been said above, is heresy (art.
24, q. 1, haec est fides).
Again, the determination of doubts respecting the faith belongs
chiefly to the Church, and especially to the Supreme Pontiff, Christ's
Vicar, the successor of S. Peter, as is expressly stated (art. 24, q. 1,
quotiens). And against the determination of the Church, as S. Thomas says,
art. 2, q. 2, no Doctor or Saint maintains his own opinion; not S. Jerome
nor S. Augustine nor any other. For just as he who obstinately argues
against the faith is a heretic, so also is he who stubbornly maintains his
opinion against the determination of the Church in matters concerning the
faith and that which is necessary for salvation. For the Church herself has
never been proved to be in error over matter of faith (as it is said in art.
24, q. 1, a recta, and in other chapters). And it is expressly said, that he
who maintains anything against the determination of the Church, not in an
open and honest manner, but in matters which concern faith and salvation, is
a heretic. For he need not be a heretic because he disagrees over other
matters, such as the separability of law from use in matters which are
affected by use: this matter has been settled by Pope John XXII in his
Extrauagantes, where he says that they who contradict this opinion are
stubborn and rebellious against the Church, but not heretics.
The third condition required is that he who holds the error should
be one who has professed the Catholic faith. For is a man has never
professed the Christian faith, he is not a heretic but simply an infidel,
like the Jews or the Gentiles who are outside the faith. Therefore S.
Augustine says in the City of God: The devil, seeing the human race to be
delivered from the worship of idols and devils, stirred up heretics who,
under the guise of Christians, should oppose Christian doctrine. So for a
man to be a heretic it is necessary that he should have received the
Christian faith in baptism.
Fourthly, it is necessary that the man who so errs should retain
some of the true belief concerning Christ, pertaining either to His divinity
or to His humanity. For if he retains no part of the faith, he is more
rightly to be considered an apostate than a heretic. In this way Julian was
an apostate. For the two are quite different, though sometimes they are
confused. For in this manner there are found to be men who, driven by
poverty and various afflictions, surrender themselves body and soul to the
devil, and deny the faith, on condition that the devil will help them in
their need to the attainment of riches and honours.
For we Inquisitors have known some, of whom a few afterwards
repented, who have behaved in this way merely for the sake of temporal gain,
and not through any error in the understanding; wherefore they are not
rightly heretics, nor even apostates in their hearts, as was Julian, though
they must be reckoned as apostates.
They who are apostates in their heart and refuse to return to the
faith are, like impenitent heretics, to be delivered to the secular Court.
But if they are desirous of reconciliation, they are received back into the
Church, like penitent heretics. See the chapter ad abolendam, § praesenti,
de haeretic., lib. 6. Of the same opinion is S. Raymund in his work de
Apostolica, cap. reuertentes, where he says that they who return from the
perfidy of apostasy, though they were heretics, are to be received back like
penitent heretics. And here the two are confused, as we have said. And he
adds: Those who deny the faith through fear of death (that is, who deny the
faith for the sake of temporal gain from the devil, but do not believe their
error) are heretics in the sight of the law, but are not, properly speaking,
heretics. And he adds: Although they have no erroneous belief, yet since the
Church must judge by outward signs they are to be considered as heretics
(not this fiction of law); and if they return, they are to be received as
penitent heretics. For the fear of death, or the desire for temporal gain,
is not sufficient to cause a constant man to deny the faith of Christ.
Wherefore he concludes that it is more holy to die than to deny the faith or
to be fed by idolatrous means, as S. Augustine says.
The judgement of witches who deny the faith would be the same; that
when they wish to return they should be received as penitents, but otherwise
they should be left to the secular Court. But they are by all means to be
received back into the bosom of the Church when they repent; and are left to
the secular Court if they will not return; and this is because of the
temporal injuries which they cause, as will be shown in the methods of
passing sentence. And all this may be done by the Ordinary, so that the
Inquisitor can leave his duties to him, at least in a case of apostasy; for
it is otherwise in other cases of sorcerers.
The fifth condition necessary for a man to be rightly thought a
heretic is that he should obstinately and stubbornly persist in his error.
Hence, according to S. Jerome, the etymological meaning of heresy is Choice.
And again S. Augustine says: Not he who initiates or follows false
doctrines, but he who obstinately defends them, is to be considered a
heretic. Therefore if anyone does not evilly persist in believing some false
doctrine, but errs through ignorance and is prepared to be corrected and to
be shown that his opinion is false and contrary to Holy Scripture and the
determination of the Church, he is not a heretic. For he was ready to be
corrected when his error was pointed out to him. And it is agreed that every
day the Doctors have various opinions concerning Divine matters, and
sometimes they are contradictory, so that one of them must be false; and yet
none of them are reputed to be false until the Church has come to a decision
concerning them. See art. 24, q. 3, qui in ecclesia.
From all this is is concluded that the sayings of the Canonists on
the words “savour manifestly of heresy” in the chapter accusatus do not
sufficiently prove that witches and others who in any way invoke devils are
subject to trial by the Inquisitorial Court; for it is only by a legal
fiction that they judge such to be heretics. Neither is it proved by the
words of the Theologians; for they call such persons apostates either in
word or in deed, but not in their thoughts and their hearts; and it is of
this last error that the words “savour of heresy” speak.
And though such persons should be judged to be heretics, it does not
follow form this that a Bishop cannot proceed against them without an
Inquisitor to a definite sentence, or punish them with imprisonment or
torture. More than this, even when this decision does not seem enough to
warrant the exemption of us Inquisitors from the duty of trying witches,
still we are unwilling to consider that we are legally compelled to perform
such duties ourselves, since we can depute the Diocesans to our office, at
least in respect of arriving at a judgement.
For this provision is made in the Canon Law (c. multorum in prin. de
haeret. in Clem.). There it says: As a result of a general complaint, and
that this sort of Inquisition may proceed more fortunately and the inquiry
into this crime be conducted more skilfully, diligently, and carefully, we
order that this kind of case may be tried by the Diocesan Bishops as well as
by the Inquisitors deputed by the Apostolic See, all carnal hatred or fear
or any temporal affection of this sort being put aside; and so either of the
above may move without the other, and arrest or seize a witch, placing her
in safe custody in fetters and iron chains, if it seems good to him; and in
this matter we leave the conduct of the affair to his own conscience; but
there must be no negligence in inquiring into such matters in a manner
agreeable to God and justice; but such witches must be thrust into prison
rather as a matter of punishment than custody, or be exposed to torture, or
be sentenced to some punishment. And a Bishop can proceed without an
Inquisitor, or an Inquisitor without a Bishop; or, if either of their
offices be vacant, their deputies may act independently of each other,
provided that is is impossible for them to meet together for joint action
within eight days of the time when the inquiry is due to commence; but if
there be no valid reason for their not meeting together, the action shall be
null and void in law.
The chapter proceeds to support our contention as follows: But if
the Bishop or the Inquisitor, or either of their deputies, are unable or
unwilling, for any of the reasons which we have mentioned, to meet together
personally, they can severally depute their duties to each other, or else
signify their advice and approval by letters.
From this it is clear that even in those cases where the Bishop is
not entirely independent of the Inquisitor, the Inquisitor can depute the
Bishop to act in his stead, especially in the matter of passing sentence:
therefore we ourselves have decided to act according to this decision,
leaving other Inquisitors to other districts to act as seems good to them.
Therefore in answer to the arguments, it is clear that witches and
sorcerers have not necessarily to be tried by the Inquisitors. But as for
the other arguments which seek to make it possible for the Bishops in their
turn to be relieved from the trial of witches, and leave this to the Civil
Court, it is clear that this is not so easy in their case as it is in that
of the Inquisitors. For the Canon Law (c. ad abolendam, c. uergentis, and c.
excommunicamus utrumque) says that in a case of heresy it is for the
ecclesiastical judge to try and to judge, but for the secular judge to carry
out the sentence and to punish; that is, when a capital punishment is in
question, though it is otherwise with other penitential punishments.
It seems also that in the heresy of witches, though not in the case
of other heresies, the Diocesans also can hand over to the Civil Courts the
duty of trying and judging, and this for two reasons: first because, as we
have mentioned in our arguments, the crime of witches is not purely
ecclesiastical, being rather civil on account of the temporal injuries which
they commit; and also because special laws are provided for dealing with
witches.
Finally, it seems that in this way it is easiest to proceed with the
extermination of witches, and that the greatest help is thus given to the
Ordinary in the sight of that terrible Judge who, as the Scriptures testify,
will exact the strictest account from and will most hardly judge those who
have been placed in authority. Accordingly we will proceed on this
understanding, namely, that the secular Judge can try and judge such cases,
himself proceeding to the capital punishment, but leaving the imposition of
any other penitential punishment to the Ordinary.
A Summary or Classification of the Matters Treated of in this Third Part
In order, then, that the Judges both ecclesiastical and civil may
have a ready knowledge of the methods of trying, judging and sentencing in
these cases, we shall proceed under three main heads. First, the method of
initiating a process concerning matters of the faith; second, the method of
proceeding with the trial; and third, the method of bringing it to a
conclusion and passing sentence on witches.
The first head deals with five difficulties. First, which of the
three methods of procedure provided by the law is the most suitable. Second,
the number of witnesses. Third, whether these can be compelled to take the
oath. Fourth, the condition of the witnesses. Fifth, whether mortal enemies
may be allowed to give evidence.
The second head contained eleven Questions. I. How witnesses are to
be examined, and that there should always be five persons present. Also how
witches are to be interrogated, generally and particularly. (This will be
numbered the Sixth Question of the whole Part; but we alter the numeration
here to facilitate reference by the reader). II. Various doubts are cleared
up as to negative answers, and when a witch is to be imprisoned, and when
she is to be considered as manifestly guilty of the heresy of witchcraft.
III. The method of arresting witches. IV. Of two duties which devolve upon
the Judge after the arrest, and whether the names of the deponents should be
made known to the accused. V. Of the conditions under which an Advocate
shall be allowed to plead for the defence. VI. What measures the Advocate
shall take when the names of the witnesses are not made known to him, and
when he wishes to protest to the Judge that the witnesses are mortal enemies
of the prisoner. VII. How the Judge ought to investigate the suspicion of
such mortal enmity. VIII. Of the points which the Judge must consider before
consigning the prisoner to torture. IX. Of the method of sentencing the
prisoner to examination by torture. X. Of the method of proceeding with the
torture, and how they are to be tortured; and of the provisions against
silence on the part of the witch. XI. Of the final interrogations and
precautions to be observed by the Judge.
The third head contains first of all three Questions dealing with
matters which the Judge must take into consideration, on which depends the
whole method of passing sentence. First, whether a prisoner can be convicted
by a trial of red-hot iron. Second, of the method in which all sentences
should be passed. Third, what degrees of suspicion can justify a trial, and
what sort of sentence ought to be passed in respect of each degree of
suspicion. Finally, we treat of twenty methods of delivering sentence,
thirteen of which are common to all kinds of heresy, and the remainder
particular to the heresy of witches. But since these will appear in their
own places, for the sake of brevity they are not detailed here.
Question I The Method of Initiating a Process
The first question, then, is what is the suitable method of
instituting a process on behalf of the faith against witches. In answer to
this it must be said that there are three methods allowed by Canon Law. The
first is when someone accuses a person before a judge of the crime of
heresy, or of protecting heretics, offering to prove it, and to submit
himself to the penalty of talion if he fails to prove it. The second method
is when someone denounces a person, but does not offer to prove it and is
not willing to embroil himself in the matter; but says that he lays
information out of zeal for the faith, or because of a sentence of
excommunication inflicted by the Ordinary or his Vicar; or because of the
temporal punishment exacted by the secular Judge upon those who fail to lay
information.
The third method involves an inquisition, that is, when there is no
accuser or informer, but a general report that there are witches in some
town or place; and then the Judge must proceed, not at the instance of any
party, but simply by the virtue of his office.
Here it is to be noted that a judge should not readily admit the
first method of procedure. For one thing, it is not actuated by motives of
faith, nor is it very applicable to the case of witches, since they commit
their deeds in secret. Then, again, it is full of danger to the accuser,
because of the penalty of talion which he will incur if he fails to prove
his case. Then, again, it is very litigious.
Let the process begin with a general citation affixed to the walls
of the Parish Church or the Town Hall, in the following manner.
WHEREAS we, the Vicar of such and such Ordinary (or the Judge of
such and such county), do endeavour with all our might and strive with our
whole heart to preserve the Christian people entrusted to us in unity and
the happiness of the Catholic faith and to keep them far removed from every
plague of abominable heresy: Therefore we the aforesaid Judge to whose
office it belongs, to the glory and honour of the worshipful name of JESUS
Christ and for the exaltation of the Holy Orthodox Faith, and for the
putting down of the abomination of heresy, especially in all witches in
general and in each one severally of whatever condition or estate: (Here, if
he is an ecclesiastical Judge, let him add a summons to all priests and
dignitaries of the Church in that town and for a distance of two miles about
it, who have knowledge of this notice. And he shall add) By the authority
which we exercise in this district, and in virtue of holy obedience and
under pain of excommunication, we direct, command, require, and admonish
that within the space of twelve days (Here the secular Judge shall command
in his own manner under pain of penalties suitable to his office), the first
four of which shall stand for the first warning, the second for the second,
and the third for the third warning; and we give this treble canonical
warning that if anyone know, see, or have heard that any person is reported
to be a heretic or a witch, or of any is suspected especially of such
practices as cause injury to men, cattle, or the fruits of the earth, to the
loss of the State. But if any do not obey these aforesaid commands and
admonitions by revealing such matters within the term fixed, let him know
(Here the ecclesiastical Judge shall add) that he is cut off by the sword of
excommunication (The secular Judge shall add the temporal punishments).
Which sentence of excommunication we impose as from this time by this
writing upon all and several who thus stubbornly set at naught these our
canonical warnings aforesaid, and our requirement of their obedience,
reserving to ourselves alone the absolution of such sentence (The secular
Judge shall conclude in this manner). Given, etc.
Note also that in the case of the second method the following
caution should be observed. For it has been said that the second method of
procedure and of instituting a process on behalf of the faith is by means of
an information, where the informer does not offer to prove his statement and
is not ready to be embroiled in the case, but only speaks because of a
sentence of excommunication, or out of zeal for the faith and for the good
of the State. Therefore the secular Judge must specify in his general
citation or warning aforesaid, that none should think that he will become
liable to a penalty even if he fails to proved his words; since he comes
forward not as an accuser but as an informer.
And then, since several will appear to lay information before the
Judge, he ought to take care to proceed in the following manner. First, let
him have a Notary and two honest persons, either clerics or laymen; or if a
Notary is not to be procured, then let there be two suitable men in the
place of the Notary. For this is dealt with in the c. ut officium, § uerum,
lib. 6, where it is said: But because it is expedient to proceed with great
caution in the trial of a grave crime, that no error may be committed in
imposing upon the guilty a deservedly severe punishment; we desire and
command that, in the examination of the witnesses necessary in such a
charge, you shall have two religious and discreet persons, either clerics or
laymen.
It goes on to say: In the presence of these persons the depositions
of the witnesses shall be faithfully written down by a public official if
one is obtainable, or, if not, by two suitable men. Note therefore that,
having these persons, the Judge shall order the informer to lay his
information in writing, or at least give it clearly by word of mouth. And
then the Notary or the Judge shall begin to process in the following manner.
In the Name of the Lord. Amen.
In the year of Our Lord —, on the — day of the — month, in the
presence of me the Notary and of the witnesses subscribed, N. of the town of
— in the Diocese of —, as above, appeared in the person at — before the
honourable Judge, and offered him a schedule to the following effect.
(Here shall follow the schedule in its entirety. But if he has not
deposed in writing buy by word of mouth, it shall continue thus.)
He appeared, etc. and laid information to the Judge that N. of the
town or parish of — in the Diocese of — had said and asserted that he knew
how to perform or had actually done certain injuries to the deponent or to
other persons.
After this, he shall immediately make the deponent take the oath in
the usual manner, either on the four Gospels of God, or on the Cross,
raising three fingers and depressing two in witness of the Holy Trinity and
of the damnation of his soul and body, that he will speak the truth in his
depositions. And when the oath has been sworn, he shall question him as to
how he knows that his depositions are true, and whether he saw or heard that
to which he swears. And if he says that he has seen anything, as, for
example, that the accused was present at such a time of tempest, or that he
had touched an animal, or had entered a stable, the Judge shall ask when he
saw him, and where, and how often, and in what manner, and who were present.
If he says that he did not see it, but heard of it, he shall ask him from
whom he heart it, where, when, and how often, and in whose presence, making
separate articles of each of the several points above mentioned. And the
Notary or scribe shall set down a record of them immediately after the
aforesaid denunciation; and it shall continue thus:
This denunciation, as we have said, having been made, the Inquisitor
himself did at once cause him to swear as above on the four Gospels, etc.
that he was speaking the truth in his depositions, and did ask him how and
why he knew or suspected that he what he said was true. He did make answer
either that he saw, or that he heard. The Inquisitor did then ask him where
he saw or heard this; and he answered on the — day of the — month in the
year — in the town or parish of —. He asked him how often he saw or heard
it, etc. And separate articles shall be made, and the whole set down in
process, as has been said. And particularly he shall be asked who shared or
could share in his knowledge of the case.
When all this has been done, he shall finally be asked whether he
lays his information out of ill-will, hatred, or rancour; or if he has
omitted anything through favour or love; of if he has been requested or
suborned to lay information.
Finally, he shall be enjoined, by virtue of his oath, to keep secret
whatever he has said there, or whatever the Judge has said to him; and the
whole process shall be set down in writing. And when all this is completed,
it shall be set down a little lower as follows. This was done at such a
place on the — day of the — month in the year —, in the presence of me the
Notary or scribe together with those associated with me in the duty of
writing, and of such and such witnesses summoned and interrogated.
The third method of beginning a process is the commonest and most
usual one, because it is secret, and no accuser or informer has to appear.
But when there is a general report of witchcraft in some town or parish,
because of this report the Judge may proceed without a general citation or
admonition as above, since the noise of that report comes often to his ears;
and then again he can begin a process in the presence of the persons, as we
have said before.
In the Name of the Lord. Amen.
In the year of Our Lord —, on the — day of the — month, to the ears
of such and such official or judge there came a persistent public report and
rumour that N. of the town or parish of — did or said such and such a thing
savouring of witchcraft, against the faith and the common good of the State.
And the whole shall be set down according to the common report. And
a little lower:
The case was heard on the — day of the — month in the year —, in the
presence of me the Notary of such and such authority, or of such and such a
scribe, and of such and such witnesses who were called and interrogated.
But before we proceed to the second Head, which deals with the
method of conducting this sort of process, we must first say something of
the witnesses who are to be examined, as to how many they should be, and
what should be their condition.
Question II Of the Number of Witnesses
Since we have said that in the second method the evidence of the
witnesses is to be written down, it is necessary to know how many witnesses
there should be, and of what condition. The question is whether a Judge may
lawfully convict any person of the heresy of witchcraft on the evidence of
two legitimate witnesses whose evidence is entirely concordant, or whether
more than two are necessary. And we say that the evidence of witnesses is
not entirely concordant when it is only partially so; that is, when two
witnesses differ in their accounts, but agree in the substance or effect: as
when one says “She bewitched my cow,” and the other says, “She bewitched my
child,” but they agree as to the fact of witchcraft.
But here we are concerned with the case of two witnesses being in
entire, not partial, agreement. And the answer is that, although two
witnesses seem to be enough to satisfy the rigour of law (for the rule is
that that which is sworn to by two or three is taken for the truth); yet in
a charge of this kind two witnesses do not seem sufficient to ensure an
equitable judgement, on account of the heinousness of the crime in question.
For the proof of an accusation ought to be clearer than daylight; and
especially ought this to be so in the case of the grave charge of heresy.
But it may be said that very little proof is required in a charge of
this nature, since it takes very little argument to expose a person's guilt;
for it is said in the Canon de Haereticis, lib. II, that a man makes himself
a heretic if in the least of his opinions he wanders from the teaching and
the path of the Catholic religion. We answer that this is true enough with
reference to the presumption that a person is a heretic, but not as regards
a condemnation. For in a charge of this sort the usual order of judicial
procedure is cut short, since the defendant does not see the witnesses take
the oath, nor are they made known to him, because this might expose them to
grave danger; therefore, according to the statute, the prisoner is not
permitted to know who are his accusers. But the Judge himself must by virtue
of his office, inquire into any personal enmity felt by the witnesses
towards the prisoner; and such witnesses cannot be allowed, as will be shown
later. And when the witnesses give confused evidence on account of something
lying on their conscience, the Judge is empowered to put them through a
second interrogatory. For the less opportunity the prisoner has to defend
himself, the more carefully and diligently should the Judge conduct his
inquiry.
Therefore, although there are two legitimate and concordant
witnesses against a person, even so I do not allow that this would be
sufficient warrant for a Judge to condemn a person on so great a charge; but
if the prisoner is the subject of an evil report, a period should be set for
his purgation; and if he is under strong suspicion on account of the
evidence of two witnesses, the Judge should make him abjure the heresy, or
question him, or defer his sentence. For it does not seem just to condemn a
man of good name on so great a charge on the evidence of only two witnesses,
though the case is otherwise with a person of bad reputation. This matter is
fully dealt with in the Canon Law of heretics, where it is set down that the
Bishop shall cause three or more men of good standing to give evidence on
oath to speak the truth as to whether they have any knowledge of the
existence of heretics in such a parish.
Again it may be asked whether the Judge can justly condemn a person
of such heresy only on the evidence of witnesses who in some respects differ
in their evidence, or merely on the strength of a general accusation. We
answer that he cannot do so on either of the above grounds. Especially since
the proofs of a charge ought, as we have said, to be clearer than daylight;
and in this particular charge no one is to be condemned on merely
presumptive evidence. Therefore in the case of a prisoner who is the subject
of a general accusation, a period of purgation shall be set for him; and in
the case of one who is under strong suspicion arising from the evidence of
witnesses, he shall be made to abjure his heresy. But when, in spite of
certain discrepancies, the witnesses agree in the main facts, then the
matter shall rest with the Judge's discretion; and indirectly the question
arises how often the witnesses can be examined.
Question III Of the Solemn Adjuration and Re-examination of Witnesses
But it may be asked whether the Judge can compel witnesses to sweat
an oath to tell the truth in a case concerning the Faith or witches, of if
he can examine them many times. We answer that he can do so, especially an
ecclesiastical Judge, and that in ecclesiastical cases witnesses can be
compelled to speak the truth, and this on oath, since otherwise their
evidence would not be valid. For the Canon Law says: The Archbishop or
Bishop may make a circuit of the parish in which it is rumoured that there
are heretics, and compel three or more men of good repute, or even, if it
seems good to him, the whole neighbourhood, to give evidence. And if any
through damnable obstinacy stubbornly refuse to take the oath, they shall on
that account be considered as heretics.
And that the witnesses can be examined several times is shown by the
Canon, where it says that, when the witnesses have given their evidence in a
confused manner, or appear to have withheld part of their knowledge for some
reason, the Judge must take care to examine them afresh; for he may legally
do so.
Question IV Of the Quality and Condition of Witnesses
Note that persons under a sentence of excommunication, associates
and accomplices in the crime, notorious evildoers and criminals, or servants
giving evidence against their masters, are admitted as witnesses in a case
concerning the Faith. And just as a heretic may give evidence against a
heretic, so may a witch against a witch; but this only in default of other
proofs, and such evidence can only be admitted for the prosecution and not
for the defence: this is true also of the evidence of the prisoner's wife,
sons and kindred; for the evidence of such has more weight in proving a
charge than in disproving it.
This is made clear in the c. in fidei de haer., where it says: As a
protection of the faith we allow that in a case of inquiry into the sin of
heresy, persons under excommunication and partners and accomplices in the
crime shall be admitted as witnesses, in default of other proofs against
heretics and their patrons, protectors and defenders; provided that it
appears probably both from the number of the witnesses and of those against
whom they give evidence, and from other cicumstances, that they are not
giving false testimony.
The case of evidence given by perjurers, when it is presumed that
they are speaking out of zeal for the faith, is deal with in the Canon c.
accusatus, § licet, where it says that the evidence of perjurers, after they
have repented, is admissable; and it goes on to say: If it manifestly
appears that they do not speak in a spirit of levity, or from motives of
enmity, or by reason of a bribe, but purely out of zeal for the orthodox
faith, wishing to correct what they have said, or to reveal something about
which they had kept silence, in defence of the faith, their testimony shell
be as valid as that of anyone else, provided that there is no other obection
to it.
And it is clear from the same chapter of the Canon that the
testimony of men or low repute and criminals, and of servants against their
masters, is admitted; for it says: So great is the plague of heresy that, in
an action involving this crime, even servants are admitted as witnesses
against their masters, and any criminal evildoer may give evidence against
any person soever.
Question V Whether Mortal Enemies may be Admitted as Witnesses
But if it is asked whether the Judge can admit the mortal enemies of
the prisoner to give evidence against him in such a case, we answer that he
cannot; for the same chapter of the Canon says: You must not understand that
in this kind of charge a mortal personal enemy may be admitted to give
evidence. Henry of Segusio also makes this quite clear. But it is mortal
enemies that are spoken of; and it is to be noted that a witness is not
necessarily to be disqualified because of every sort of enmity. And a mortal
enmity is constituted by the following circumstances: when there is a death
feud or vendetta between the parties, or when there has been an attempted
homicide, or some serious wound or injury which manifestly shows that there
is mortal hatred on the part of the witness against the prisoner, And in
such a case it is presumed that, just as the witness has tried to inflict
temporal death on the prisoner by wounding him, so he will also be willing
to effect his object by accusing him of heresy; and just as he wished to
take away his life, so he would be willing to take away his good name.
Therefore the evidence of such mortal enemies is justly disqualified.
But there are other serious degrees of enmity (for women are easily
provoked to hatred), which need not totally disqualify a witness, although
they render his evidence very doubtful, so that full credence cannot be
placed in his words unless they are substantiated by independent proofs, and
other witnesses supply an indubitable proof of them. For the Judge must ask
the prisoner whether he thinks that he has any enemy who would dare to
accuse him of that crime out of hatred, so that he might compass his death;
and if he says that he has, he shall ask who that person is; and then the
Judge shall take note whether the person named as being likely to give
evidence from motives of malice has actually done so. And if it is found
that this is the case, and the Judge has learned from trustworthy men the
cause of that enmity, and if the evidence in question is not substantiated
by other proofs and the words of other witnesses, then he may safely reject
such evidence. But if the prisoner says that he hopes he has no such enemy,
but admits that he has had quarrels with women; or if he says that he has an
enemy, but names someone who, perhaps, has not given evidence, in that case,
even if other witnesses say that such a person has given evidence from
motives of enmity, the Judge must not reject his evidence, but admit it
together with the other proofs.
There are many who are not sufficiently careful and circumspect, and
consider that the depositions of such quarrelsome women should be altogether
rejected, saying that no faith can be placed in them, since they are nearly
always actuated by motives of hatred. Such men are ignorant of the subtlety
and precautions of magistrates, and speak and judge like men who are colour-
blind. But these precautions are dealt with in Questions XI and XII.
Question VI How the Trial is to be Proceeded with and Continued. And how
the Witnesses are to be Examined in the Presence of Four Other Persons, and
how the Accused is to be Questioned in Two Ways
In considering the method of proceeding with a trial of a witch in
the cause of faith, it must first be noted that such cases must be conducted
in the simplest and most summary manner, without the arguments and
contentions of advocates.
This is explained in the Canon as follows: It often happens that we
institute a criminal process, and order it to be conducted in a simple
straightforward manner without the legal quibbles and contentions which are
introduced in other cases. Now much doubt had been experienced as to the
meaning of these words, and as to exactly in what manner such cases should
be conducted; but we, desiring as far as possible to remove all doubt on the
matter, sanction the following procedure once and for all as valid: The
Judge to whom we commit such a case need not require any writ, or demand
that the action should be contested; he may conduct the case on holidays for
the sake of the convenience of the public, he should shorten the conduct of
the case as much as he can by disallowing all dilatory exceptions, appeals
and obstructions, the impertinent contentions of pleaders and advocates, and
the quarrels of witnesses, and by restraining the superflous number of
witnesses; but not in such a way as to neglect the necessary proofs; and we
do not mean by this that he should omit the citation of and swearing of
witnesses to tell and not to hide the truth.
And since, as we have shown, the process is to be conducted in a
simple manner, and it is initiated either at the instance of an accuser, or
of an informer actuated by zeal, or by reason of a general outcry and
rumour; therefore the Judge should try to avoid the first method of
beginning the action, namely, at the instance of an accusing party. For the
deeds of witches in conjunction with devils are done in secret, and the
accuser cannot in this case, as in others, have definite evidence by which
he can make his statements good; therefore the Judge ought to advise the
accuser to set aside his formal accusation and to speak rather as an
informer, because of the grave danger that is incurred by an accuser. And so
he can proceed in the second manner, which is commonly used, and likewise in
the third manner, in which the process is begun not at the instance of any
party.
It is to be noted that we have already said that the Judge ought
particularly to ask the informer who shares or could share in his knowledge
of the case. Accordingly the Judge should call as witnesses those whom the
informer names, who seem to have most knowledge of the matter, and their
names shall be entered by the scribe. After this the Judge, having regard to
the fact that the aforesaid denunciation of heresy involves of its very
nature such a grave charge that it cannot and must not be lightly passed
over, since to do so would imply an offence to the Divine Majesty and an
injury to the Catholic Faith and to the State, shell proceed to inform
himself and examine the witnesses in the following manner.
Examination of Witnesses.
The witness N., of such a place, was called, sworn, and questioned
whether he knew N. (naming the accused), and answered that he did. Asked how
he knew him, he answered that he had seen and spoken with him on several
occasions, or that they had been comrades (so explaining his reason for
knowing him). Asked for how long he had known him, he answered, for ten or
for so many years. Asked concerning his reputation, especially in matter
concerning the faith, he answered that in his morals he was a good (or bad)
man, but with regard to his faith, there was a report in such a place that
he used certain practices contrary to the Faith, as a witch. Asked what was
the report, he made answer. Asked whether he had seen or heard him doing
such things, he again answered accordingly. Asked where he had heard him use
such words, he answered, in such a place. Asked in whose presence, he
answered, in the presence of such and such.
Further, he was asked whether any of the accused's kindred had
formerly been burned as witches, or had been suspected, and he answered.
Asked whether he associated with suspected witches, he answered. Asked
concerning the manner and reason of the accused's alleged words, he
answered, for such a reason and in such a manner. Asked whether he thought
that the prisoner had used those words carelessly, unmeaningly and
thoughtlessly, or rather with deliberate intention, he answered that he had
used them jokingly or in temper, or without meaning or believing what he
said, or else with deliberate intention.
Asked further how he could distinguish the accused's motive, he
answered that he knew it because he had spoken with a laugh.
This is a matter which must be inquired into very diligently; for
very often people use words quoting someone else, or merely in temper, or as
a test of the opinions of other people; although sometimes they are used
assertively with definite intention.
He was further asked whether he made this deposition out of hatred
or rancour, or whether he had suppressed anything out of favour or love, and
he answered, etc. Following this, he as enjoined to preserve secrecy. This
was done at such a place on such a day in the presence of such witnesses
called and questioned, and of me the Notary or scribe.
Here it must always be noted that in such an examination at least
five persons must be present, namely, the presiding Judge, the witness of
informer, the respondent or accused, who appears afterwards, and the third
is the Notary or scribe: where there is no Notary the scribe shall co-opt
another honest man, and these two, as has been said, shall perform the
duties of the Notary; and this is provided for by Apostolic authority, as
was shown above, that in this kind of action two honest men should perform
as it were the duty of witnesses of the depositions.
Also it must be noted that when a witness is called he must also be
sworn, that is, he must take the oath in the manner we have shown; otherwise
he would falsely be described as called and sworn.
In the same way the other witnesses are to be examined. And after
this the Judge shall decide whether the fact is fully proven; and if not
fully, whether there are great indications and strong suspicions of its
truth. Observe that we do not speak of a light suspicion, arising from
slight conjectures, but of a persistent report that the accused has worked
witchcraft upon children or animals, etc. Then, if the Judge fears the
escape of the accused, he shall cause him or her to be placed in custody;
but if he does not fear his escape, he shall have him called for
examination. But whether or not he places him in custody, he shall first
cause his house to be searched unexpectedly, and all chests to be opened and
all boxes in the corners, and all implements of witchcraft which are found
to be taken away. And having done this, the Judge shall compare together
everything of which he has been convicted or suspected by the evidence of
witnesses, and conduct an interrogatory on them, having with him a Notary,
etc., as above, and having caused the accused to swear by the four Gospels
of God to speak the truth concerning both himself and others. And they shall
all be written down in this following manner.
The General Examination of a Witch or Wizard: and it is the First Action.
The accused N. of such a place was sworn by personally touching the
four Gospels of God to speak the truth concerning both himself and others,
and was then asked whence he was and from where he originated. And he
answered, from such a place in such a Diocese. Asked who were his parents,
and whether they were alive or dead, he answered that they were alive in
such a place, or dead in such a place.
Asked whether they died a natural death, or were burned, he answered
in such a way. (Here note that this question is put because, as was shown in
the Second Part of this work, witches generally offer or devote their own
children to devils, and commonly their whole progeny is infected; and when
the informer has deposed to this effect, and the witch herself has denied
it, it lays her open to suspicion).
Asked where he was brought up, and where he chiefly lived, he
answered, in such or such a place. And if it appears that he has changed
abode because, perhaps, his mother or any of his kindred was not suspected,
and had lived in foreign districts, especially in such places as are most
frequented by witches, he shall be questioned accordingly.
Asked why he had moved from his birthplace and gone to live in such
or such a place, he answered, for such a reason. Asked whether in those said
places or elsewhere he had heard any talk of witches, as, for example, the
stirring up of tempests, the bewitching of cattle, the depriving of cows of
their milk, or any such matter of which he was accused; if he should answer
that he had, he must be asked what he had heard, and all that he says must
be written down. But if he denies it, and says that he has heard nothing,
then he must be asked whether he believes that there are such things as
witches, and that such things as were mentioned could be done, as that
tempests could be raised or men and animals bewitched.
Not that for the most part witches deny this at first; and therefore
this engenders a greater suspicion than if they were to answer that they
left it to a superior judgement to say whether there were such or not. So if
they deny it, they must be questioned as follows: Then are they innocently
condemned when they are burned? And he or she must answer.
The Particular Examination of the Same.
Let the Judge take care not to delay the following questions, but to
proceed at once with them. Let he be asked why the common people fear her,
and whether she knows that she is defamed and hated, and why she had
threatened such a person, saying, “You shall not cross me with impunity,”
and let her answers be noted.
Then let he be asked what harm that person had done her, that she
should have used such words to threaten him with injury. And note that this
question is necessary in order to arrive at the cause of their enmity, for
in the end the accused will allege that the informer has spoken out of
enmity; but when this is not mortal, but only a womanish quarrel, it is no
impediment. For this is a common custom of witches, to stir up enmity
against themselves by some word or action, as, for example, to ask someone
to lend them something or else they will damage his garden, or something of
that sort, in order to make an occasion for deeds of witchcraft; and they
manifest themselves either in word or in action, since they are compelled to
do so at the instance of the devils, so that in this way the sins of Judges
are aggravated while the witch remains unpunished.
For note that they do not do such things in the presence of others,
so that if the informer wishes to produce witnesses he cannot do so. Note
again that they are spurred on by the devils, as we have learned from many
witches who have afterwards been burned; so that often they have to work
witchcraft against their own wills.
Further, she was asked how the effect could follow from those
threats, as that a child or animal should so quickly be bewitched, and she
answered. Asked, “Why did you say that he would never know a day of health,
and it was so?” she answered. And if she denies everything, let her be asked
concerning other bewitchments, alleged by other witnesses, upon cattle or
children. Asked why she was seen in the fields or in the stable with the
cattle, and touching them, as is sometimes their custom, she answered.
Asked why she touched a child, and afterwards it fell sick, she
answered. Also she was asked what she did in the fields at the time of a
tempest, and so with many other matters. Again, why, having one or two cows,
she had more milk than her neighbours who had four or six. Again, let her be
asked why she persists in a state of adultery or concubinage; for although
this is beside the point, yet such questions engender more suspicion than
would the case with a chaste and honest woman who stood accused.
And not that she is to be continually questioned as to the
depositions which have been laid against her, to see whether she always
returns the same answers or not. And when this examination has been
completed, whether her answers have been negative, or affirmative, or
ambiguous, let them be written down: Executed in such a place, etc., as
above.
Question VII In Which Various Doubts are Set Forth with Regard to the
Foregoing Questions and Negative Answers. Whether the Accused is to be
Imprisoned, and when she is to be considered Manifestly Taken in the Foul
Heresy of Witchcraft. This is the Second Action
It is asked first what is to be done when, as often happens, the
accused denies everything. We answer that the Judge has three points to
consider, namely, her bad reputation, the evidence of the fact, and the
words of the witnesses; and he must see whether all these agree together.
And if, as very often is the case, they do not altogether agree together,
since witches are variously accused of different deeds committed in some
village or town; but the evidences of the fact are visible to the eye, as
that a child has been harmed by sorcery, or, more often, a beast has been
bewitched or deprived of its milk; and it a number of witnesses have come
forward whose evidence, even if it show certain discrepancies (as that one
should say she had bewitched his child, another his beast, and a third
should merely witness to her reputation, and so with the others), but
nevertheless agree in the substance of the fact, that is, as to the
witchcraft, and that she is suspected of being a witch; although those
witnesses are not enough to warrant a conviction without the fact of the
general report, or even with that fact, as was shown above at the end of
Question III, yet, taken in conjunction with the visible and tangible
evidence of the fact, the Judge may, in consideration of these three points
together, decide that the accused is to be reputed, not as strongly or
gravely under suspicion (which suspicions will be explained later), but as
manifestly taken in the heresy of witchcraft; provided, that is, that the
witnesses are of a suitable condition and have not given evidence out of
enmity, and that a sufficient number of them, say six or eight or ten, have
agreed together under oath. And then, according to the Canon Law, he must
subject her to punishment, whether she has confessed her crime or not. And
this is proved as follows.
For since it is said, that when all three of the above
considerations are in agreement, then she should be thought to be manifestly
taken in heresy, it must not be understood that it is necessary for all
three to be in agreement, but only that if this is the case the proof is all
the stronger. For either one instance by itself of the following two
circumstances, namely, the evidence of the fact and the production of
legitimate witnesses, is sufficient to cause a person to be reputed as
manifestly taken in heresy; and all the more when both these considerations
are in agreement.
For when the Jurists ask in how many ways a person may be considered
as manifestly taken in heresy, we answer that there are three ways, as S.
Bernard has explained. This matter was treated of above in the First
Question at the beginning of this work, namely, the evidence of the fact,
when a person has publicly preacher heresy. But here we consider the
evidence of the fact provided by public threats uttered by the accused, as
when she said, “You shall have no healthy days,” or some such thing, and the
threatened effect has followed. The other two ways are the legitimate proof
of the case by witnesses, and thirdly by her own confession. Therefore, if
each of these singly is sufficient to cause a person to be manifestly
suspected, how much more is this the case when the reputation of the
accused, the evidence of the fact, and the depositions of witnesses all
together point to the same conclusion. It is true that S. Bernard speaks of
an evident fact, and we here speak of the evidence of the fact; but this is
because the devil does not work openly, but secretly. Therefore the injuries
and the instruments of witchcraft which are found constitute the evidence of
the fact. And whereas in other heresies an evident fact is alone sufficient,
here we join three proofs together.
Secondly, it is thus proved that a person so taken is to be punished
according to the law, even though she denies the accusation. For a person
taken on the evidence of the fact, or on the depositions of witnesses,
either confesses the crime or does not. If he confesses and is impenitent,
he is to be handed over to the secular courts to suffer the extreme penalty,
according to the chapter ad abolendam, or he is to be imprisoned for life,
according to the chapter excommunicamus. But if he does not confess, and
stoutly maintains his denial, he is to be delivered as an impenitent to the
power of the Civil Court to be punished in a fitting manner, as Henry of
Segusio shows in his Summa, where he treats of the manner of proceeding
against heretics.
It is therefore concluded that it is most just if the Judge proceeds
in that manner with his questions and the depositions of witnesses, since,
as has been said, he can in a case concerning the Faith conduct matters
quite plainly and in a short and summary manner; and it is meet that he
should consign the accused to prison for a time, or for several years, in
case perhaps, being depressed after a year of the squalor of prison, she may
confess her crimes.
But, lest it should seem that he arrives at his sentence
precipitately, and to show that he proceeds with all equity, let us inquire
into what should next be done.
Question VIII Which Follows from the Preceding Question, Whether the Witch
is to be Imprisoned, and of the Method of Taking her. This is the Third
Action of the Judge
It is asked whether, after she has denied the accusation, the witch
ought to be kept in custody in prison, when the three aforesaid conditions,
namely, her reputation, the evidence of the fact, and the depositions of
witnesses, are in agreement; or whether she should be dismissed with the
security of sureties, so that she may again be called and questioned. As to
this question there are three opinions.
First, it is the opinion of some that she should be sent to prison,
and that by no means ought she to be dismissed under bond; and they hold
this opinion on the strength of the reasoning brought forward in the
preceding question, namely, that she is to be considered as manifestly
guilty when all those three considerations are in agreement.
Others, again, think that before she is imprisoned she may be
dismissed with the safeguard of sureties; so that if she makes her escape,
she can then be considered as convicted. But after she has been imprisoned
because of her negative answers, she is not to be released under any
safeguard or condition of bail, that is, when those three considerations
noted above are in agreement; because in that case she could not
subsequently be sentenced and punished by death; and this, they say, is the
general custom.
The third opinion is that no definite rule can be given, but that it
must be left to the Judge to act in accordance with the gravity of the
matter as shown by the testimony of the witnesses, the reputation of the
accused, and the evidence as to the fact, and the extent to which these
three agree with each other; and that he should follow the custom of the
country. And they who hold this opinion conclude by saying that if reputable
and responsible sureties are not to be procured, and the accused is
suspected of contemplating flight, she should then be cast into prison. And
this third opinion seems to be the most reasonable, as long as the correct
procedure if observed; and this consists in three things.
First, that her house should be searched as thoroughly as possible,
in all holes and corners and chests, top and bottom; and if she is a noted
witch, then without doubt, unless she has previously hidden them, there will
be found various instruments of witchcraft, as we have shown above.
Secondly, if she has a maid-servant or companions, that she or they
should be shut up by themselves; for though they are not accused, yet it is
presumed that none of the accused's secrets are hidden from them.
Thirdly, in taking her, if she be taken in her own house, let her
not be given time to go into her room; for they are wont to secure in this
way, and bring away with them, some object or power of witchcraft which
procures them the faculty of keeping silent under examination.
This gives rise to the question whether the method employed by some
to capture a witch is lawful, namely, that she should be lifted from the
ground by the officers, and carried out in a basket or on a plank of wood so
that she cannot again touch the ground. This can be answered by the opinion
of the Canonists and of certain Theologians, that this is lawful in three
respects. First, because, as is shown in the introductory question of this
Third Part, it is clear from the opinion of many authorities, and especially
of such Doctors as no one would dare to dispute, as Duns Scotus, Henry of
Segusio and Godfrey of Fontaines, that it is lawful to oppose vanity with
vanity. Also we know from experience and the confessions of witches that
when they are taken in this manner they more often lose the power of keeping
silence under examination: indeed many who have been about to be burned have
asked that they might be allowed at least to touch the ground with one foot;
and when this has been asked why they made such a request, they have
answered that if they had touched the ground they would have liberated
themselves, striking many other people dead with lightning.
The second reason is this. It was manifestly shown in the Second
Part of this work that a witch loses all her power when she falls into the
hands of public justice, that is, with regard to the past; but with regard
to the future, unless she receives from the devil fresh powers of keeping
silent, she will confess all her crimes. Therefore let us say with S. Paul:
Whatsoever we do in word or deed, let all be done in the name of the Lord
JESUS Christ. And if the witch be innocent, this form of capture will not
harm her.
Thirdly, according to the Doctors it is lawful to counteract
witchcraft by vain means; for they all agree as to this, though they are at
variance over the question as to when those vain means may also be unlawful.
Therefore when Henry of Segusio says that it is lawful to oppose vanity with
vanity, this is explained as meaning that he speaks of vain means, not of
unlawful means. All the more, then, is it lawful to obstruct witchcraft; and
it is this obstruction which is referred to here, and not any unlawful
practice.
Let the Judge note also that there are two sorts of imprisonment;
one being a punishment inflicted upon criminals, but the other only a matter
of custody in the house of detention. And these two sorts are noted in the
chapter multorum querela; therefore she ought at least to be placed in
custody. But if it is only a slight matter of which she is accused, and she
is not of bad reputation, and there is no evidence of her work upon children
or animals, then she may be sent back to her house. But because she has
certainly associated with witches and knows their secrets, she must give
sureties; and if she cannot do so, she must be bound by oaths and penalties
not to go out of her house unless she is summoned. But her servants and
domestics, of whom we spoke above, must be kept in custody, yet not
punished.
Question IX What is to be done after the Arrest, and whether the Names of
the Witnesses should be made Known to the Accused. This is the Fourth Action
THERE are two matters to be attended to after the arrest, but it is
left to the Judge which shall be taken first; namely, the question of
allowing the accused to be defended, and whether she should be examined in
the place of torture, though not necessarily in order that she should be
tortured. The first is only allowed when a direct request is made; the
second only when her servants and companions, if she has any, have first
been examined in the house.
But let us proceed in the order as above. If the accused says that
she is innocent and falsely accused, and that she wishes to see and hear her
accusers, then it is a sign that she is asking to defend herself. But it is
an open question whether the Judge is bound to make the deponents known to
her and bring them to confront her face to face. For here let the Judge take
note that he is not bound either to publish the names of the deponents or to
bring them before the accused, unless they themselves should freely and
willingly offer to come before the accused and lay their depositions in her
presence And it is by reason of the danger incurred by the deponents that
the Judge is not bound to do this. For although different Popes have had
different opinions on this matter, none of them has ever said that in such a
case the Judge is bound to make known to the accused the names of the
informers or accusers (but here we are not dealing with the case of an
accuser). On the contrary, some have thought that in no case ought he to do
so, while others have thought that he should in certain circumstances.
But, finally, Bonifice VIII decreed as follows: If in a case of
heresy it appear to the Bishop or Inquisitor that grave danger would be
incurred by the witnesses of informers on account of the powers of the
persons against whom they lay their depositions, should their names be
published, he shall not publish them. But if there is no danger, their names
shall be published just as in other cases.
Here it is to be noted that this refers not only to a Bishop or
Inquisitor, but to any Judge conducting a case against witches with the
consent of the Inquisitor or Bishop; for, as was shown in the introductory
Question, they can depute their duties to a Judge. So that any such Judge,
even if he be secular, has the authority of the Pope, and not only of the
Emperor.
Also a careful Judge will take notice of the powers of the accused
persons; for these are of three kinds, namely, the power of birth and
family, the power of riches, and the power of malice. And the last of these
is more to be feared than the other two, since it threatens more danger to
the witnesses if their names are made known to the accused. The reason for
this is that it is more dangerous to make known the names of the witnesses
to an accused person who is poor, because such a person has many evil
accomplices, such as outlaws and homicides, associated with him, who venture
nothing but their own persons, which is not the case with anyone who is
nobly born or rich, and abounding in temporal possessions. And the kind of
danger which is to be feared is explained by Pope John XXII as the death of
cutting off of themselves or their children or kindred, or the wasting of
their substance, or some such matter.
Further, let the Judge take notice that, as he acts in this matter
with the authority of the Supreme Pontiff and the permission of the
Ordinary, both he himself and all who are associated with him at the
depositions, or afterwards at the pronouncing of the sentence, must keep the
names of the witnesses secret, under pain of excommunication. And it is in
the power of the Bishop thus to punish him or them if they do otherwise.
Therefore he should very implicitly warn them not to reveal the name from
the very beginning of the process.
Wherefore the above decrees of Pope Bonifice VIII goes on to say:
And that the danger to those accusers and witnesses may be the more
effectively met, and the inquiry conducted more cautiously, we permit, by
the authority of this statute, that the Bishop or Inquisitors (or, as we
have said, the Judge) shall forbid all those who are concerned in the
inquiry to reveal without their permission any secrets which they have
learned from the Bishop or Inquisitors, under pain of excommunication, which
they may incur by violating such secrets.
It is further to be noted that just as it is a punishable offence to
publish the names of witnesses indiscreetly, so also it is to conceal them
without good reason from, for instance, such people as have a right to know
them, such as the lawyers and assessors whose opinion is to be sought in
proceeding to the sentence; in the same way the names must not be concealed
when it is possible to publish them without risk of any danger to the
witnesses. On this subject the above decree speaks as follows, towards the
end: We command that in all cases the Bishop or Inquisitors shall take
especial care not to suppress the names of the witnesses as if there were
danger to them when there is perfect security, not conversely to decide to
publish them when there is some danger threatened, the decision in this
matter resting with their own conscience and discretion. And it has been
written in comment on these words: Whoever you are who are a Judge in such a
case, mark those words well, for they do not refer to a slight risk but to a
grave danger; therefore do not deprive a prisoner of his legal rights
without very good cause, for this cannot but be an offence to Almighty God.
The reader must note that all the process which we have already
described, and all that we have yet to describe, up to the methods of
passing sentence (except the death sentence), which it is in the province of
the ecclesiastical Judge to conduct, can also, with the consent of the
Diocesans, be conducted by a secular Judge. Therefore the reader need find
no difficulty in the fact that the above Decree speaks of an ecclesiastical
and not a secular Judge; for the latter can take his method of inflicting
the death sentence from that of the Ordinary in passing sentence of penance.
Question X What Kind of Defence may be Allowed, and of the Appointment of
an Advocate. This is the Fifth Action
IF, therefore, the accused asked to be defended, how can this be
admitted when the names of the witnesses are kept altogether secret? It is
to be said that three considerations are to be observed in admitting any
defence. First, that an Advocate shall be allotted to the accused. Second,
that the names of the witnesses shall not be made known to the Advocate,
even under an oath of secrecy, but that he shall be informed of everything
contained in the depositions. Third, the accused shall as far as possible be
given the benefit of every doubt, provided that this involves no scandal to
the faith nor is in any way detrimental to justice, as will be shown. And in
like manner the prisoner’s procurator shall have full access to the whole
process, only the names of the witnesses and deponents being suppressed; and
the Advocate can act also in the name of procurator.
As to the first of these points: it should be noted that an Advocate
is not to be appointed at the desire of the accused, as if he may choose
which Advocate he will have; but the Judge must take great care to appoint
neither a litigious nor an evil-minded man, nor yet one who is easily bribed
(as many are), but rather an honourable man to whom no sort of suspicion
attaches.
And the Judge ought to note four points, and if the Advocate be
found to conform to them, he shall be allowed to plead, but not otherwise.
For first of all the Advocate must examine the nature of the case, and then
if he finds it a just one he may undertake it, but if he finds it unjust he
must refuse it; and he must be very careful not to undertake an unjust or
desperate case. But if he has unwittingly accepted the brief, together with
a fee, from someone who wishes to do him an injury, but discovers during the
process that the case is hopeless, then he must signify to his client (that
is, the accused) that he abandons the case, and must return the fee which he
has received. This is the opinion of Godfrey of Fontaines, which is wholly
in conformity with the Canon de jud. i, rem non novam. But Henry of Segusio
holds an opposite view concerning the return of the fee in a case in which
the Advocate has worked very hard. Consequently if an Advocate has wittingly
undertaken to defend a prisoner whom he knows to be guilty, he shall be
liable for the costs and expenses (de admin. tut. i, non tamen est ignotum).
The second point to be observed is that in his pleading he should
conduct himself properly in three respects. First, his behaviour must be
modest and free from prolixity or pretentious oratory. Secondly, he must
abide by the truth, not bringing forward any fallacious arguments or
reasoning, or calling false witnesses, or introducing legal quirks and
quibbles if he be a skilled lawyer, or bringing counter-accusations;
especially in cases of this sort, which must be conducted as simply and
summarily as possible. Thirdly, his fee must be regulated by the usual
practice of the district.
But to return to our point; the Judge must make the above conditions
clear to the Advocate, and finally admonish him not to incur the charge of
defending heresy, which would make him liable to excommunication.
And it is not a valid argument for him to say to the Judge that he
is not defending the error, but the person. For he must not by any means so
conduct his defence as to prevent the case from being conducted in a plain
and summary manner, and he would be doing so if he introduced any
complications or appeals into it; all which things are disallowed together.
For it is granted that he does not defend the error; for in that case he
would be more damnably guilty than the witches themselves, and rather a
heresiarch than a heretical wizard. Nevertheless, if he unduly defends a
person already suspect of heresy, he makes himself as it were a patron of
that heresy, and lays himself under not only a light but a strong suspicion,
in accordance with the manner of his defence; and ought publicly to abjure
that heresy before the Bishop.
We have put this matter at some length, and it is not to be
neglected by the Judge, because much danger may arise from an improper
conducting of the defence by an Advocate or Procurator. Therefore, when
there is any objection to the Advocate, the Judge must dispense with him and
proceed in accordance with the facts and the proofs. But when the Advocate
for the accused is not open to any objection, but is a zealous man and lover
of justice, then the Judge may reveal to him the names of the witnesses,
under an oath of secrecy.
Question XI What Course the Advocate should Adopt when the Names of the
Witnesses are not Revealed to him. Ths Sixth Action
BUT it may be asked: What, then, should the Advocate acting a
Procurator for the accused do, when the names of the witnesses are withheld
from both himself and his client, although the accused earnestly desires
that they should be made known? We answer that he should obtain information
from the Judge on every point of the accusation, which must be given to him
at his request, only the names of the witnesses being suppressed; and with
this information he should approach the accused and, if the matter involves
a very grave charge, exhort him to exercise all the patience which he can.
And if the accused again and again insists that she should know the
names of the witnesses against her, he can answer her as follows: You can
guess from the charges which are made against you who are the witnesses. For
the child or beast of so and so has been bewitched; or to such a woman or
man, because they refused to lend you something for which you asked, you
said, "You shall know that it would have been better to have agreed to my
request," and they bear witness that in consequence of your words the person
was suddenly taken ill; and facts are stronger evidence than words. And you
know that you have a bad reputation, and have for a long time been suspected
of casting spells upon and injuring many men. And talking in this manner, he
may finally induce her to enter a plea that they had borne witness against
her from motives of hatred; or to say, "I confess that I did say so, but not
with any intent to do harm."
Therefore the Advocate must first lay before the Judge and his
assessors this plea of personal enmity, and the Judge must inquire into it.
And if it should be found to be a case of mortal enmity, as that there has
been some attempted or accomplished murder committed by the husbands or
kindred of the parties, or that someone of one party has been charged with a
crime by someone of the other party, so that he fell into the hands of
public justice, or that serious wounds have resulted from quarrels and
brawls between them; then the upright and careful Judge will consult with
his assessors whether the accused of the deponent was the aggravating party.
For if, for example, the husband or friends of the accused have unjustly
oppressed the friends of the deponent, then if there is no evidence of the
fact that children or animals or men have been bewitched, and if there are
no other witnesses, and the accused is not even commonly suspected of
witchcraft, in that case it is presumed that the depositions were laid
against her from motives of vengeance, and she is to be discharged as
innocent and freely dismissed, after having been duly cautioned against
seeking to avenge herself, in the manner which is usually used by Judges.
The following case may be put. Katharina’s child, or she herself, is
bewitched, or she has suffered much loss of her cattle; and she suspects the
accused because her husband or brothers had previously brought on an unjust
accusation against her own husband or brother. Here the cause of enmity is
twofold on the part of the deponent, having its root both in her own
bewitchment and in the unjust accusation brought against her husband or
brother. Then ought her deposition to be rejected or not? From one point of
view it seems that it should, because she is actuated by enmity; from
another point of view it should not, because there is the evidence of the
fact in her bewitchment.
We answer that if in this case there are no other deponents, and the
accused is not even under common suspicion, then her depositions cannot be
allowed, but must be rejected; but if the accused is rendered suspect, and
if the disease is not due to natural causes but to witchcraft (and we shall
show later how this can be distinguished), she is to be subjected to a
canonical purgation.
If it be asked further whether the other deponents must bear witness
to the evidence of the fact as experienced by themselves or others, or only
to the public reputation of the accused; we answer that, if they give
evidence of the fact, so much the better. But if they only give evidence as
to her general character, and the matter stands so, then, although the Judge
must reject that deponent on the grounds of personal enmity, yet he shall
take the evidence of the fact, and of her bad reputation given by the other
witnesses, as proof that the accused must be strongly suspect, and on these
grounds he can sentence her to a threefold punishment: namely, to a
canonical purgation because of her reputation; or to an abjuration, because
of the suspicion under which she rests, and there are various forms of
abjuration for various degrees of suspicion, as will be shown in the fourth
method of passing sentence; or, because of the evidence of the fact, and if
she confesses her crime and is penitent, she shall not be handed over to the
secular branch for capital punishment, but be sentenced by the
ecclesiastical Judge to imprisonment for life. But notwithstanding the fact
that she has been sentenced to imprisonment for life by the ecclesiastical
Judge, the secular Judge can, on account of the temporal injuries which she
has committed, deliver her to be burned. But all these matters will be made
clear later when we deal with the sixth method of passing sentence.
To sum up: Let the Judge first take care not to lend too easy belief
to the Advocate when he pleads mortal enmity on behalf of the accused; for
in these cases it is very seldom that anyone bears witness without enmity,
because witches are always hated by everybody. Secondly, let him take note
that there are four ways by which a witch can be convicted, namely, by
witnesses, by direct evidence of the fact, and by her own confession. And if
she is detained on account of a general report, she can be convicted by the
evidence of witnesses; if on account of definite suspicion, the direct or
indirect evidence of the facts can convict her, and by reason of these the
suspicion may be judged to be either light or strong or grave. All this is
when she does not confess; but when she does, the case can proceeds as has
been said.
Thirdly, let the Judge make use of all the foregoing circumstances
to meet the plea of the Advocate, whether the accused is charged only by
reason of a general report, or whether there are also certain evidences to
support the charge by which she incurs slight or strong suspicion; and then
he will be able to answer the Advocate’s allegation of personal enmity,
which is the first line of defence which he may assume.
But when the Advocate assumes the second line of defence, admitting
that the accused has used such words against the deponent as, "You shall
soon know what is going to happen to you," or "You will wish soon enough
that you had lent or sold me what I asked for," or some such words; and
submits that, although the deponent afterwards experienced some injury
either to this person or his property, yet it does not follow from this that
the accused was the cause of it as a witch, for illnesses may be due to
various different causes. Also he submits that it is a common habit of women
to quarrel together with such words, etc.
The Judge ought to answer such allegations in the following manner.
If the illness is due to natural causes, then the excuse is good. But the
evidence indicates the contrary; for it cannot be cured by any natural
remedy; or in the opinion of the physicians the illness is due to
witchcraft, or is what is in common speech called a Night-scathe. Again,
perhaps other enchantresses are of the opinion that it is due to witchcraft.
Or because it came suddenly, without any previous sickening, whereas natural
diseases generally develop gradually. Or perhaps because the plaintiff had
found certain instruments of witchcraft under his bed or in his clothes or
elsewhere, and when these were removed he was suddenly restored to health,
as often happens, as we showed in the Second Part of this work where we
treated of remedies. And by some such answer as this the Judge can easily
meet this allegation, and show that the illness was due rather to witchcraft
than to any natural causes, and that the accused must be suspected of
causing such witchcraft, by reason of her threatening words. In the same
way, if someone said, "I wish your barn would be burned down," and this
should afterwards happen, it would engender a grave suspicion that the
person who had used that threat had caused the barn to be set on fire, even
if another person, and not he himself, had actually set light to it.