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, nto by
the potency of any magic art, but by some hidden dispensation unknown to
the Pythoness or to Saul, that the spirit of that just man should appear
before the sight of the king, to deliver the Divine sentence against him.
Or else it was not really the spirit of Samuel aroused from its rest, but
some phantasm and imaginary illusion of devils caused by the machinations
of the devil; and the Scripture calls that phantasm by the name of Samuel,
just as the images of things are called by the names of the things they
represent. This he says in his answer to the question whether divination
by the invocation of devils is lawful. In the same Summa the reader
will find the answer to the question whether there are degrees of prophecy
among the Blessed; and he may refer to S. Augustine, XXVI, 5. But this has
little to do with the deeds of witches, which retain in themselves no
vestige of piety, as is apparent from a consideration of their works; for
they do not cease to shed innocent blood, to bring hidden things to light
under the guidance of devils, and by destroying the soul with the body
spare neither the living nor the dead.
Oneiromancy may be practised in two ways. The first is when a person uses
dreams so that he may dip into the occult with the help of the revelation
of devils invoked by him, with whom he has entered into an open pact. The
second is when a man uses dreams for knowing the future, in so far as
there is such virtue in dreams proceeding from Divine revelation, from a
natural and instinsic or extrinsic cause; and such divination would not be
unlawful. So says S. Thomas.
And that preachers may have at least the nucleus of an understanding of
this matter, we must first speak about the Angels. An Angel is of limited
power, and can more effectively reveal the future when the mind is adapted
to such revelations than when it is not. Now the mind is chiefly so
adapted after the relaxation of exterior and interior movement, as when
nights are silent and the fumes of motion are quieted; and these
conditions are fulfilled round about the dawn, when digestion is
completed. And I say this of us who are sinners, to whom the Angels in
their Divine piety, and in the execution of their offices, reveal certain
things, so that when we study at the time of the dawn we are given an
understanding of certain occult matters in the Scriptures. For a good
Angel presides over our understanding, just as God does over our will, and
the stars over our bodies. But to certain more perfect men the Angel can
at any hour reveal things, whether they are awake or asleep. However,
according to Aristotle, de Somno et Uigilia, such men are more apt
to receive revelations at one time than at another; and this is the casein
all matters of magic.
Secondly, it is to be noted that is happens through Nature's care for and
regulation of the body, that certain future events have their natural
cause in a man's dreams. And then those dreams or visions are not cause,
as was said in the case of Angels, but only signs of that which is coming
to a man in the future, such as health or sickness or danger. And this is
the opinion of Aristotle. For in the dreams of the spirit Nature images
the disposition of the heart, by which sickness or some other thing
naturally comes to a man in the future. For is a man dreams of fires, it
is a sign of a choleric disposition; if of flying or some such thing, it
is a sign of a sanguine disposition; if he dreams of water or some other
liquid, it is a sign of a phlegmatic, and if he dreams of terrene matters,
it is a sign of a melancholy disposition. And therefore doctors are very
often helped by dreams in their diagnosis (as Aristotle says in the same
book).
But these are slight matters in comparison with the unholy dreams of
witches. For when they do not wish, as has been mentioned above, to be
bodily transferred to a place, but desire to see what their fellow-witches
are doing, it is their practice to lie down on their left side in the name
of their own and of all devils; and these things are revealed to their
vision in images. And if they seek to know some secret, either for
themselves of for others, they learn it in dreams from the devil, by
reason of an open, not a tacit, pact entered into with him. And this pact,
again, is not a symbolical one, accomplished by the sacrifice of some
animal, or some act of sacrilege, or by embracing the worship of some
strange cult; but it is an actual offering of themselves, body and soul,
to the devil, by a sacrilegiously uttered and inwardly purposed abnegation
of the Faith. And not content with this, they even kill, or offer to
devils, their own and others' children.
Another species of divination is practised by Pythons, so called from
Pythian Apollo, who is said to have been the originator of this kind of
divination, according to S. Isidore. This is not effected by dreams or by
converse with the dead, but by means of living men, as in the case of
those who are lashed into a frenzy by the devil, either willingly or
unwillingly, only for the purpose of foretelling the future, and not for
the perpetration of any other monstrosities. Of this sort was the girl
mentioned in Acts xvi, who cried after the Apostles that they were
the servants of the true God; and S. Paul, being angered by this,
commanded the spirit to come out of her. But it is clear that there is no
comparison between such things and the deeds of witches, who, according to
S. Isidore, are so called for the magnitude of their sins and the enormity
of their crimes.
Wherefore, for the sake of brevity, there is no need to continue this
argument in respect of the minor forms of divination, since it has been
proved in respect of the major forms. For the preacher may, if he wishes,
apply these arguments to the other forms of divination: to Geomancy, which
is concerned with terrene matters, such as iron or polished stone;
Hydromancy, which deals with water and crystals; Aeromancy, which is
concerned with the air; Pyromancy, which is concerned with fire;
Soothsaying, which has to do with the entrails of animals sacrificed on
the devil's altars. For although all these are done by means of open
invocation of devils, they cannot be compared with the crimes of witches,
since they are not directly purposed for the harming of men or animals or
the fruits of the earth, but only for the foreknowledge of the future. The
other species of divination, which are performed with a tacit, but not an
open, invocation of devils, are Horoscopy, or Astrology, so called from
the consideration of the stars at birth; Haruspicy, which observes the
days and hours; Augury, which observes the behaviour and cries of birds;
Omens, which observe the words of men; and Cheiromancy, which observes the
lines of the hand, or of the paws of animals. Andone who wishes may refer
to the teaching of Nider, and he will find mush as to when such things are
lawful and when they are not. But the works of witches are never lawful.
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, have yet of their own will fallen from grace; just as Satan sinned
of his own will.
Secondly, it is granted that Satan's sin is unpardonable for various other
reasons. For S. Augustine saus that he sinned at the instigation of none,
therefore his sin is justly remediable by none. And S.
John Damascene says that
he sinned in his understanding against the character of God; and that his
sin was the greater by reason of the nobility of his understanding. For
the servant who knows the will of his master, etc. The same authority says
that, since Satan is incapable of repentance, therefore he is incapable of
pardon; and this is due to his very nature, which, being spiritual, could
only be changed once, when he changed it for ever; but this is not so with
men, in whom the flesh is always warring against the spirit. Or because he
sinned in the high places of heaven, whereas man sins in the earth.
But notwithstanding all this, his sin is in many respects small in
comparison with the crimes of witches. First, as S. Anselm showed in one
of his Sermons, he sinned in his pride while there was yet no
punishment for sin. But witches continue to sin after great punishments
have been often inflicted upon many other witches, and after the
punishments which the Church teaches them have been inflicted by reason of
the devil and his fall; and they make light of all these, and hasten to
commit, not the least deadly of sins, as do other sinners who sin through
infirmity or wickedness yet not from habitual malice, but rather the most
horrible crimes from the deep malice of their hearts.
Secondly, although the Bad Angel fell from innocence to guilt, and thence
to misery and punishment; yet he fell from innocence once only, in such a
way that he was never restored. But the sinner who is restored to
innocence by baptism, and again falls from it, falls very deep. And this
is especially true of witches, as is proved by their crimes.
Thirdly, he sinned against the Creator; but we, and especially witches,
sin against the Creator and the Redeemer.
Fourthly, he forsook God, who permitted him to sin but accorded him no
pity; whereas we, and witches above all, withdraw ourselves from God by
our sins, while, in spite of his permission of our sins, He continually
pities us and prevents us with His countless benefits.
Fifthly, when he sinned, God rejected him without showing him and grace;
whereas we wretches run into sin although God is continually calling us
back.
Sixthly, he keeps his heart hardened against a punisher; but we against a
merciful persuader. Both sin against God; but he against a commanding God,
and we against One who dies for us, Whom, as we have said, wicked witches
offend above all.
The Solutions of the
Arguments again Declare the Truth by Comparison.
To the arguments. The answer to the first is clear from what was said
in the beginning of this whole question. It was submitted that one sin
ought to be thought heavier than another; and that the sins of witches are
heavier than all others in respect of guilt, but not in respect of the
penalties that they entail. To this it must be said that the punishment of
Adam, just as his guilt, may be considered two ways; either as touching
him personally, or as touching the whole of nature, that is, the posterity
whcih came after him. As to the first, greater sins have been committed
after Adam; for he sinned only in doing that which was evil, not in
itself, but because it was forbidden. Therefore such sins deserve the
heavier punishment.
As to the second, it is true that the greatest punishment resulted from
the first sin; but this is only indirectly true, in that through Adam all
posterity was infected with original sin, and he was the first father of
all those for whom the Only Son of God was able to atone by the power
which was ordained. Moreover, Adam in his own person, with the mediation
of Divine grace, repented, and was afterwards saved through the Sacrifice
of Christ. But the sins of witches are incomparably greater, since they
are not content with their own sins and perdition, but ever draw countless
others after them.
And thirdly, it follows from what has been said that it was by accident
that Adam's sin involved the greater injury. For he found nature
uncorrupted, and it was inevitable, and not of his own will, that he left
it defiled; therefore it does not follow that his sin was intrinsically
greater than others. And again, posterity would have committed the same
sin if it had found nature in the same state. Similarly, he who has not
found grace does not commit so deadly a sin as he who has found it and
lost it. This is the solution of S. Thomas (II, 21, art. 2), in his
solution of the second argument. And if anyone wishes fully to understand
this solution, he must consider that even if Adam had kept his original
innocence, he would not have passed it down to all posterity; for, as S.
Anselm says, anyone coming after him could still have sinned. See also S.
Thomas, dist. 20, where he considers whether new-born children would have
been confirmed in grace; and in dist. 101, whether men who are now saved
would have been saved if Adam had not sinned.
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. |