The displaying of supposed witchcraft : $b Wherein is affirmed that there are many sorts of deceivers and impostors, and divers persons under a passive delusion of melancholy and fancy. But that there is a corporeal league made betwixt the devil and the witch, or that he sucks on the witches body, has carnal copulation, or that witches are turned into cats, dogs, raise tempests, or the like, is utterly denied and disproved. Wherein also is handled, the existence of angels and spirits, the truth Webster, John
Religion
The displaying of supposed witchcraft : $b Wherein is affirmed that there are many sorts of deceivers and impostors, and divers persons under a passive delusion of melancholy and fancy. But that there is a corporeal league made betwixt the devil and the witch, or that he sucks on the witches body, has carnal copulation, or that witches are turned into cats, dogs, raise tempests, or the like, is utterly denied and disproved. Wherein also is handled, the existence of angels and spirits, the truth
Webster, John
Witchcraft; Witchcraft -- Early works to 1800
1. If the Devil be considered as an incorporeal creature simply and
absolutely, then it will follow, that he cannot act upon any corporeal
matter, because an incorporeal substance can make no contact upon a
body, unless it were it self corporeal; for, _quicquid agit, agit per
contactum, vel mediatum, vel immediatum._ But both those are caused by
the touch of one body upon another, as when ones hand by touching a
straw doth immediately move it forth of its place, or else by blowing
doth remove it, which is by the mediation of the air; but that which is
meerly incorporeal can perform neither: Because that which is meerly
incorporeal hath no superficies, whereby to touch the body to be
removed; and therefore can make no motion of it at all; and where there
is no motion, there can be no alteration, and consequently no speech nor
articulation at all. And therefore the Devil (if incorporeal) could not,
move the Organs of the Serpent at all, and so could not speak in the
Serpent nor move his organs, if they had been fit for articulate
prolation, which they were not. Which was the thing required to be
proved.
[Sidenote: _Reas. 2._]
2. The Serpent by the ordinance of God in the Creation was specificated
to an inarticulate sound, not to an articulate: but the Devil neither
hath, nor ever had any power to change and overturn the course of Gods
ordination in nature, and therefore hath not power, nor never had to
make the Serpent speak articulately; for that were to overthrow the
inviolable order of God set in the Creation, which no man of sound
judgment did ever aver that the Devil could do.
[Sidenote: _Reas. 3._]
3. I take it to be one of the most firm maximes that ever the Schools
had, that, _immateriale non agit in materiale, nisi eminenter ut Deus_:
Therefore that the Devil being incorporeal and immaterial cannot act
upon that which is material, as was the body of the Serpent, unless he
had had a super-eminent and omnipotent power, which were blasphemous to
attribute unto him, therefore could he not articulately speak in the
Serpent unto _Evah_, because immaterial, and had no omnipotent power.
[Sidenote: _Reas. 4._]
4. And if he be conceived to be corporeal, then he could either of
himself speak articulately and audibly, or else not. And if he could do
so of himself, then to enter into the Serpent was needless and
superfluous. And if he could not, then the entring into the Serpent
would not have contributed that faculty unto him, and so neither way he
could have performed it; For a Frog creeping into the body of a Man,
will not cause the Frog to speak, though it may make some noise or
croaking.
[Sidenote: _Reas. 5._]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account