The Salem Witchcraft, the Planchette Mystery, and Modern Spiritualism: With Dr. Doddridge's DreamStowe, Harriet Beecher
History
The Salem Witchcraft, the Planchette Mystery, and Modern Spiritualism: With Dr. Doddridge's Dream
Stowe, Harriet Beecher
Spiritualism; Upham, Charles Wentworth, 1802-1875. Salem witchcraft; Witchcraft -- Massachusetts -- Salem
This theory has at least the merit of being clear, definite, and easy to
be understood, if it is not in all respects convincing. But here we have
an exemplification of the old paradox of an irresistible force coming
in contact with an immovable body. The Catholic priest tells us that
Planchette is _not_ a toy; that it moves by an intelligence and volition
that is not human; that its moving and directing power is of the devil.
The Rev. Dr. Patton, in his article in the _Advance_ (heretofore
referred to), tells us that "It is a philanthropic toy, which may be
used to bring to light hidden connections of mind and body, and to
refute the assumptions of spiritism;" and the Rev. A. D. Field, in his
article in the _Ladies' Repository_, backs up Dr. Patton by saying, that
it is "a mere toy," "is no humbug," is of "some use;"--and, concerning
the _devil_ theory of the general power which moves it and other
physical bodies, he says: there is "too often the spirit of gentleness
to make the theory acceptable." The "immovable body" here, is the
authority of the Catholic priest; the "irresistible force" is the
authority of our clerical brethren representing Protestantism; and after
this fair impingement of the latter upon the former, we shall, perhaps,
have to adopt a compromise solution of the problem, by saying that the
"immovable body" has been moved _a little_, and that the "irresistible
force" has been resisted _some_.
But this _devil_ theory, if what the Bible teaches us concerning that
personage is true, is encumbered with other difficulties; and the first
of these is, that the devil, however wicked, is not a _fool_. If he
should set a trap for human souls, he would not be so stupid as to tell
them there is a trap there. When approaching human beings, he assumes,
as the good book tells us, the garb of an angel of light; but it is not
likely that he would ever say he is the devil, as Planchette sometimes
does--at least until he felt quite sure of his prey. And again, when, in
a case slightly parallel with cases sometimes involved in the question
in hand, the captious Pharisees accused the Saviour of men of casting
out devils by Beelzebub the prince of devils, he reminded them that a
house or a kingdom divided against itself can not stand. Now Planchette,
I admit, is not always a saint--in fact, she sometimes talks and acts
very naughtily as well as foolishly; yet at other times, when a better
_spirit_ takes possession of her, she is gentle, loving, well disposed,
and does certainly give most excellent advice,--advice which could
not be heeded without detriment to the devil's kingdom, and which,
if universally followed, would work its overthrow entirely. It is
inconceivable that Satan would thus tear down with one hand what he
builds up with another. But just at this point I wish to say, I think
there is need of great caution in consulting Planchette on matters
of a weighty or serious nature, lest one should extort from her mere
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