Citizen in _Zurick_, is in the Judgment of that great Divine _Lud
Lavater_, of weighty Consideration: And he declares, that he does
therefore mention it, that so Judges might be cautelous in their
Proceedings in Cases of this nature, inasmuch as the Devil does often in
that way intangle innocent Persons, and bring them into great Troubles.
His Words are, [40]_Hanc Historiam ideo recito, ut Judices, in
hujusmodi, Casibus cauti sint: Diabolus enim hac via saepe innocentibus
insidiatur._ He confirms what he saith by reciting a Passage out of
_Alertus Granzius_, who writes that the Devil was seen in the shape of a
Nobleman to come out of the Empress's Chamber: But to clear her
Innocency, she (according to the superstitious _Ordeals_ then in
fashion) walked blindfold over a great many of glowing hot Irons without
touching any of them. _Voetius_ in his [41]Disputation of _Spectres_
proposeth that Question, whether the Devil may not untruly personate a
Godly Man, and answers in the Affirmative: And withal adds, that it is a
sufficient Argument (_ad hominem_) to answer the Papists with their own
Histories, which give Instances of Satan's appearing in the Figure of
Saints, nay of Christ himself. And in his Discourse concerning the
_Operations of Daemons_[42] he has the like _Problem_, whether the Devil
may not possibly put on the shape of a true Believer, a real Saint, not
only of such as are dead, but still living, and answers, _Quidni?_ Why
not? It is true Popish _Casuists_[43] do generally incline to the
Negative in this Question: Nevertheless, the Instance of _Germanus_, who
saw a Company of honest People represented by the Devil, as if they had
been feasting together, when they were really asleep in their Beds, does
a little puzzle them, so as that they are necessitated to take up with
this Conclusion, [44]_That by an extraordinary Permission of God,
innocent Persons may be represented by Satan in the Nocturnal
Conventicles of Witches:_ And if so, much more as afflicting bewitched
Persons. _Delrio_ giveth an account of an innocent Monk, whose
Reputation was indangered by a _Daemon's_ appearing in his shape. He
writes more like a Divine than Jesuits use to do, when he saith that,
[45]_It is not absolutely to be denied, but that the Devils may exhibite
the Forms of innocent Persons, if God permit it, who when he does permit
it, usually by some Providence discovers the Fraud of the Devils, that
so the Innocent may be vindicated, or if not, it is to bring them to
repentance for some Sin, or to try their Patience._ It is rare to see
such Words dropping from the Pen of a Jesuit: As for Protestant Writers,
I cannot call to mind one of any Note, that does deny the Possibility
of the Affirmative, in the Question before us. Dr. _Henkelius_ has
lately [46]published a learned and elaborate Discourse concerning the
right Method of curing such as are obsessed with _Cacodaemons_, in which
he asserts, that _Satan may possibly assume the Form of innocent and
pious Persons, that so he might thereby destroy their Reputations, and
expose them to undue Punishments._ As for our _English_ Divines, there
are not many greater _Casuists_ than Mr. _Perkins_; nor do I know any
one that has written on the Case of Witchcraft with more Judgment and
Clearness of Understanding: He has these Words,[47] "If a Man being
dangerously sick and like to die upon suspicion, will take it on his
death, that such an one has bewitched him, it is an allegation which may
move the Judge to examine the Party, but it is of no moment for
Conviction." The like is asserted by [48]Mr. _Cooper_, Mr. _Bernard_,
(once a famous Minister at _Batcomb_ in _Somerset_) his Book called _A
Guide to Grand Jury-men in Cases of Witchcraft_, is a solid and wise
Treatise. What his Judgment was in the Case now under debate, we may
see, _pag._ 209, 210. where his Words are these; "An Apparation of the
Party suspected, whom the Afflicted in their Fits seem to see, is a
great suspicion; yet this is but a presumption, tho' a strong one,
because these Apparitions are wrought by the Devil, who can represent to
the Phansie such as the Parties use to fear, in which his representation
he may well lye as in his other Witness: For if the Devil can represent
to the Witch a seeming _Samuel_, saying, I see Gods ascending out of the
Earth, to beguile _Saul_, may we not think he can represent a common
ordinary Person, Man or Woman unregenerate, tho' no Witch to the Phansie
of vain Persons, to deceive them and others that will give Credit to the
Devil." Thus Mr. _Bernard_.
As for the Judgment of the Elders in _New-England_, so far as I can
learn, they do generally concur with Mr. _Perkins_, and Mr. _Bernard_.
This I know, that at a Meeting of Ministers at _Cambridge_, _August 1.
1692._ where were present seven elders besides the President of the
_Colledge_, the Question then discoursed on, was, _Whether the Devil may
not sometimes have a Permission to represent an innocent Person as
tormenting such as are under Diabolical Molestations?_ The Answer which
they all concurred in, was in these words, _viz._ _That the Devil may
sometimes have a Permission to represent an innocent Person as
tormenting such as are under Diabolical Molestations; but that such
things are rare and extraordinary, especially when such Matters come
before Civil Judicatures:_ And that some of the most eminent Ministers
in the Land, who were not at that Meeting are of the same Judgment, I am
assured: And I am also sure, that in Cases of this nature the _Priest's
Lips should keep Knowledge, and they should seek the Law at his Mouth_,
_Mal. 2.7._
Arg. 6. _Our own Experience has confirmed the Truth of what we affirm._
I have in another Book given an account concerning _Elizabeth Knap_ of
_Groton_, who complained that a Woman as eminent for Piety as any in
that Town, did appear to her, and afflict her: But afterwards she was
satisfied that that Person never did her any harm, but that the Devil
abused them both. About two Years ago, a bewitched Person in
_Chelmsford_ in her Fits, complained that a worthy good Man, a near
Relation of hers did afflict her: So did she likewise complain of
another Person in that town of known integrity and Piety.
I have my self known several of whom I ought to think that they are now
in Heaven, considering that they were of good Conversation, and reputed
Pious by those that had the greatest Intimacy with them, of whom
nevertheless, some complained that their Shapes appeared to them, and
threatned them: Nor is this answered by saying, we do not know but those
Persons might be Witches: We are bound by the Rule of Charity to think
otherwise: And they that censure any, meerly because such a sad
Affliction as their being falsly represented by Satan has befallen them,
do not do as they would be done by. I bless the Lord, it was never the
portion allotted to me, nor to any Relation of mine to be thus abused:
But no Man knoweth what may happen to him, since _there be just Men unto
whom it happeneth according to the Work of the Wicked_, _Eccles. 8.14._
But what needs more to be said, since there is one amongst our selves
whom no Man that knows him, can think him to be a Wizzard, whom yet some
bewitched Persons complained of, that they are in his Shape tormented:
And the Devils have of late accused some eminent Persons.
It is an awful thing which the Lord has done to convince some amongst us
of their Error: This then I declare and testifie, that to take away the
Life of any one, meerly because a _Spectre_ or Devil, in a bewitched or
possessed Person does accuse them, will bring the Guilt of innocent
Blood on the Land, where such a thing shall be done: Mercy forbid that
it should, (and I trust that as it has not it never will be so) in
_New-England_. What does such an Evidence amount unto more than this:
Either such an one did afflict such an one, or the Devil in his
likeness, or his Eyes were bewitched.
The things which have been mentioned make way for, and bring us unto the
second Case, which is to come under our Consideration, _viz._
_If one bewitched is struck down at the Look or cast of the Eye of
another, and after that recovered again by a Touch from the same Person,
Is not this an infallible Proof, that the Person suspected and
complained of is in League with the Devil?_
_Answer;_ It must be owned that by such things as these Witchcrafts and
Witches have been discovered more than once or twice: And that an ill
Fame, or other Circumstances attending the suspected Party, this may be
a Ground for Examination; but this alone does not afford sufficient
Matter for Conviction: As _Spectres_ or _Devils_ appearing in the Shapes
of Men that have been murdered, declaring that they were murdered by
such Persons and in such a place, may give just occasion to the
Magistrate for Enquiry into the Matter: One great Witch-Advocate[49]
confesseth, that by this means Murders have been brought to light; yet
that alone, if other Circumstances did not concur, would not by the Law
of God take away the Life of any Man. If my Reader pleaseth, he shall
hear what old Mr. _Bernard_ of _Batcomb_ saith to a Case not unlike to
this, and the former: His Words are these,[50] 'The naming of the
suspected in their Fits, and also where they have been, and what they
have done here or there, as Mr. _Throgmorton's_ Children could do, and
that often and ever found true; this is a great Presumption: yet is this
but a Presumption, because this is only the Devils Testimony, who can
lie, and that more often than speak Truth. Christ would not allow his
Witness of him in a point most true; nor St. _Paul_ in the due Praises
of him and _Sylas_; his Witness then may not be received as sufficient
in case of ones Life: He may accuse an Innocent, as I shewed before in
Mr. _Edmund's_ giving over his Practice to find Stollen Goods; and Satan
we read would accuse _Job_ to God himself to be an Hypocrite, and to be
ready to be a Blasphemer, and he is called the Accuser of the Brethren.
Albeit, I cannot deny but this has very often proved true, yet seeing
the Devil is such an one as you heard, Christian Men should not take his
Witness, to give in Verdict upon Oath, and so swear that the Devil has
therein spoken the Truth; be it far from good men to confirm any Word of
the Devil by Oath, if it be not an evident Truth without the Devil's
Testimony, who in speaking the Truth, has a lying Intent, and speaks
some Truths of things done, which may be found to be so, that he may
wrap with them some pernicious Lye, which cannot be tried to be true,
but must rest upon his own testimony to ensnare the Blood of the
Innocent.' Thus Mr. _Bernard_ resolved the Case above sixty Years ago;
and truly in my Opinion like a Wise and Orthodox Divine, what he says,
reacheth both this and the former Case. Dr. _Cotta_ (a Learned
Physician) in his Book, about _The Tryal of Witchcraft, shewing the true
and right Method of the Discovery, with a Confutation of Erroneous ways_
(which Book he dedicates to the Right Honourable Sir _Edward Cook_, Lord
Chief Justice of _England_,)[51] He discourses concerning _Exploration
of Witches by the touch of the Witch curing the touched bewitched_, and
sheweth the Fallibility and Vanity of that way of Tryal, tho' he had
often seen Persons bewitched in that way immediately delivered from the
present Fit or Agony which was upon them: But he taketh it to be a
Diabolical Miracle. He argueth thus,[52] 'No Man can doubt but that the
Vertue wherewith this touch was indued, is supernatural: If it be so,
How can man to whom nothing is simply possible that is not natural be
justly reputed an Agent therein? If he cannot be esteemed in himself any
possible or true Agent, then it remaineth that he can only be interested
therein as an Accessary in Consent, or as a Servant unto a Superior
Power: If that Superior Power be the Devil, the least reasonable doubt,
whether the Devil alone, or with the Consent or Contract of the
suspected Person has produced that wonderful effect; with what Religion
or Reason can any Man incline rather to credit the Devil's mouth in the
Bewitched, than to pity the Accused, and believe them against the
subtility of a deceitful Devil: If the Devil by Divine Permission may
cause supernatural Concomitances and Consequences to attend the natural
Actions of Men without their allowance, as is manifest in possessed
Persons, how is it reasonable and just that the Impositions of the Devil
should be imputed unto any Man: And (saith he) God forbid that the
Devil's Signs and Wonders, nay his Truths should become any legal
Allegations or Evidences in Law. We may therefore conclude it unjust,
that the forenamed miraculous Effect by the Devil wrought and imputed by
the Bewitched, should be esteemed an infallible mark against any Man, as
therefore convinced for that the Devil and the Bewitched have so
decyphered him!' Thus that Learned Man. But to the Case in hand, I have
several things to offer.
1. _It is possible that the Persons in Question may be possessed with
Cacodaemons:_ That bewitched Persons are many times really possessed with
evil Spirits, is most certain. And as Mr. _Perkins_ observes, no Man can
prove but that Witchcraft might be the Cause of many of those
Possessions, which we read of in the Gospel: And that Devils have been
immitted into the Bodies of miserable Creatures by Magicians and
Witches, Histories and Experience do abundantly testifie. _Hierom_[53]
relates concerning a certain Virgin, that a young Man, whose Amours she
despised, prevailed with a Magician to send an evil Spirit into her, by
means whereof she was strangely besotted. 'Tis reported[54] of _Simon
Magus_, that after he had used an Hellish Sacrifice, to be revenged of
some that had called him a great Witch, he caused infernal Spirits to
enter into them. Many confessing Witches have acknowledged, that they
were the Cause of such and such Persons being possessed of evil Angels,
as [55]_Thyraeus_ and others have observed: Now no Credit ought to be
given to what _Daemons_ in such as are by them obsessed shall say. Our
Saviour by his own unerring Example has taught us not to receive the
Devil's Testimony in any thing. The Papists are justly condemned for
bringing Diabolical Testimony to confirm the Principles of their
Religion. _Peter Cotton_ the Jesuite[56] enquired of the Devil in a
possessed Person, what was the clearest Scripture to prove Purgatory. At
the time when _Luther_ died, all the possessed People in the
_Netherlands_ were quiet: The Devils in them, said the Reason was,
because _Luther_[57] had been a great Friend of theirs, and they owed
him that respect as to go as far as _Germany_ to attend his Funeral.
Another time when there was a talk of some Ministers of the Reformed
Religion, the Devils in the Obsessed laughed and said, they were not at
all afraid of them, for the _Calvinists_ and they were very good
Friends. The Jesuits insult with these Testimonies as if they were
Divine Oracles: But the Father of Lyes is never to be believed: He will
utter twenty great truths to make way for one lye: He will accuse twenty
Witches, if he can but thereby bring one innocent Person into trouble:
He mixeth Truths with Lyes, that so those truths giving credit unto
lyes, Men may believe both, and so be deceived: And whereas some say,
that the Persons in question are only bewitched and not possessed, let
it be considered that possessed Persons are called _Energumens_ from
#ERGOMAI# _Agitor_: They whose Bodies are preternaturally
agitated, so as to be in danger of being thrown into the Fire, or into
the Water, though they may be bewitched, are undoubtedly possessed with
_Daemons_, _Mark 9.22, 25._ Learned Men[58] give it as a most certain
sign of Possession, when the afflicted Party can see and hear that which
no one else can discern any thing of, and when they can discover
[59]secret things, _Acts 6.16._ past, or future, [60]as a possessed
Person in _Germany_ foretold the War which broke out in the Year, 1546.
And when the Limbs of miserable Creatures, are bent and disjointed so as
could not possible be without a Luxation of Joints, were it not done by
a preternatural Hand, and yet no hurt raised thereby that argueth
Possession. Also, when Persons are by the Devil cast into Fits, in the
which they speak of things, that afterwards they have no remembrance
of,[61] or, if they are by cruel Devils tortured, so as to cause
horrendous Clamours in the distressed Sufferers, that's another sign of
Obsession by evil Spirits: If all these things concur in the Persons
concerning where the Question is, we may conclude them to be
_Daemoniacks_: And if so, no _Juror_ can with a safe Conscience look on
the Testimony of such, as sufficient to take away the Life of any Man.
2. _Falling down by the cast of an Eye proceeds not from a natural, but
an arbitrary Cause;_[62] not from any Poyson in the Eye of the Witch,
but from the Agency of some _Daemon_: The opinion of Fascination by the
Eye is an old Fable, and (saith Mr. _Perkins_) as fond as old.
_Pliny_[63] speaks of a People that killed folks by looking on them; and
he adds, that they had two Apples in each Eye: and _Tully_ writes of
women who had two Apples in one Eye that always did mischief with their
meer looks; so _Ovid_, _Pupula duplex fulminat._ And _Plutarch_[64]
writes that some persons have such a Poyson in their Eyes, as that their
Friends and Familiars are Fascinated thereby; nay he speaks of one that
Bewitched himself sick by looking on his own Face in a Glass: Others
write of Fascination by a meer Prolation of Words; and for ought I know,
there may be as much Witchery in the Tongue as there is in the Eye.
_Sennertus_[65] has discovered the Superstition of these Fancies; Sight
does not proceed from an Emission of Rays from the Eye, but by a
reception of the visible Species; and if it be (as Philosophers
conclude) an innocent Action and not an Emission of optick Spirits, so
that sight as such, does receive something from the Object, and not act
upon it, the Notion of Fascination by the Eye is unphilosophical: It is
true, that sore Eyes will affect those that look upon them, _Dum
spectant Oculi Laesos, Leduntur & ipsi_, for which a natural Reason is
easily to be assigned; but if the Witches Eyes are thus infected with a
natural Contagion, Whence is it, that only Bewitched Persons are hurt
thereby? If the vulgar Error concerning the _Basilisks_ killing with
the Look of his Poysonful Eye were a Truth, whatever person that
Serpent cast his Eye upon would be poysoned. So if Witches had a
physical Venom in their Eyes, others as well as Fascinated Persons would
be sensible thereof; there is as much Truth in this fancy of Physical
Venom in the Eye of a Witch, as there is in what _Pliny_[66] and others
relate concerning the _Thibians_, _viz._ that they have two Apples in
one Eye, and the Effigies of an Horse in the other Eye; and that they
are a people that cannot be drowned.
3. _As for that which concerns the Bewitched Persons being recovered out
of their Agonies by the Touch of the suspected Party, it is various and
fallible._
For sometimes the afflicted Person is made sick, (instead of being made
whole) by the Touch of the Accused; sometimes the Power of Imagination
is such, as that the Touch of a Person innocent and not accused shall
have the same effect. It is related in the Account of the Tryals of
Witches at _Bury_ in _Suffolk_ 1664, during the time[67] of the Tryal,
there were some Experiments made with the Persons afflicted, by bringing
the accused to touch them, and it was observed that by the least Touch
of one of the supposed Witches, they that were in their Fits, to all
mens Apprehension wholly deprived of all Sense and Understandings, would
suddenly shriek out and open their Hands.
Mr. Serjeant _Keeling_ did not think that sufficient to Convict the
Prisoners, for admitting that the Children were in truth Bewitched, yet
(saith he) it cannot be applyed to the Prisoners upon the Imagination
only of the Parties afflicted; for if that might be allowed, no Person
whatsoever can be in safety, for perhaps they might fancy another Person
who might altogether be innocent in such matters: To avoid this Scruple
it was privately desired by the Judge, that some Gentlemen there in
Court would attend one of the distempered Persons in the farther part of
the Hall, whilst she was in her Fits, and then to send for one of the
Witches to try what would happen, which they did accordingly. One of
them was conveyed from the Bar, and brought to the Afflicted Maid. They
put an Apron before her Eyes, and then another person (not the Witch)
touched her, which produced the same effect, as the Touch of the Witch
did in the Court. Whereupon the Gentlemen returned much unsatisfied.
_Bodin_[68] relates, that a Witch who was Tryed at _Nants_, was
commanded by the Judges to touch a Bewitched person, a thing often
practised by the Judges of _Germany_ in the _Imperial Chamber_. The
Witch was extreamly unwilling, but being Compelled by the Judges, she
cryed out, _I am undone;_ and as soon as ever she touched the Afflicted
person, the Witch fell down dead, and the other recovered. That horrid
Witch of _Salisbury_, _Ann Bodenham_[69] who had been Servant to the
Notorious Conjurer Dr. _Lamb_, could not bear the sight of one that was
Bewitched by her. As soon as ever she saw the Afflicted Person, she ran
about shrieking, and crying, and roaring after an hideous manner, that
the Devil would tear her in pieces, if that person came near her. And
whilst the Witch was in such Torment, the Bewitched was at ease. By
these things we see, that the Laws and Customs of the Kingdom of
darkness, are not always and in all places the same.
And it is good for men to concern themselves with them as little as may
be.
I think there is weight in Dr. _Cotta's_[70] Argument, _viz._
_That the Gift of healing the Sick and Possessed, was a special Grace
and Favour of God, for the Confirmation of the Truth of the Gospel, but
that such a Gift should be annexed to the Touch of Wicked Witches, as an
infallible sign of their guilt, is not easie to be believed._ It is a
thing well known, that if a person possessed by an Evil Spirit, is (as
oft it so happens) never so outragious whilst a good man is Praying with
and for the Afflicted, let him lay his hand on them, and the Evil Spirit
is quiet. I hope this is no evidence of any Covenant, or voluntary
Communion between the Good Man that is Praying and the Evil Spirit; no
more does the Case before us evince any such thing.
4. _There are that Question the Lawfulness of the Experiment._ For if
this healing power in the Witch is not a Divine but a Diabolical Gift,
it may be dangerous to meddle too much with it. If the Witch may be
ordered to touch afflicted Persons in order to their healing or recovery
out of a sick Fit, why may not the Diseased Person be as well ordered to
touch the Witch for the same cause? And if to touch him, why not to
scratch him and fetch Blood out of him, which is but an harder kind of
touch? But as for this Mr. _Perkins_ doubts not to call it a _Practice
of Witchcraft_. It is not safe to meddle with any of the Devils
Sacraments or Institutions; _For my own part, I should be loath to say
to a Man, that I knew or thought was a Witch, do you look on such a
Person, and see if you can Witch them into a Fit, and there is such an
afflicted Person do you take them by the Hand, and see if you can Witch
them well again. If it is by vertue of some Contract with the Devil that
witches have Power to do such things, it is hard to conceive how they
can be bid to do them, without being too much concerned in that Hellish
Covenant._ I take it to be (as elsewhere[71] I have expressed) a solid
Principle, which the Learned _Sennertus_ insists on, _viz._ _That they
who force another to do that which he cannot possibly do, but by vertue
of a Compact with the Devil, have themselves implicitely Communion with
the Diabolical Covenant._ The Devil is pleased and honoured when any of
his Institutions are made use of; this way of discovering Witches, is no
better than that of putting the Urine of the afflicted Person into a
Bottle, that so the Witch may be tormented and discovered: The Vanity
and Superstition of which practice I have formerly shewed, and testified
against. _There was a Conjurer his name was +Edward Drake+[72] who
taught a Man to use that Experiment for the Relief of his afflicted
Daughter, who found benefit thereby;_ But we ought not to practice
Witchcraft to discover Witches, nor may we make use of a _White healing
Witch_ (as they call them) to find out a _Black and Bloody one_. And how
did men first come to know that Witches would be discovered in such
ways as these, which have been mentioned? If Satan himself were the
first Discoverer (as there is reason to believe) the experiment must
needs have deceit in it. See Dr. Willet on _Exod. 7._ _Quest. 9._ And
such Experiments better become Pagans or Papists than Professors in
_New-England_; whereas 'tis pleaded, that such things are practised by
the Judges of the Imperial Chamber, I reply, that those Judges (as
_Bodin_ relates, _Lib. 3. Daemon. Cap. 6._) have required suspected
Witches to pronounce over the afflicted persons, these words, _I bless
thee in the Name of the Father, &c._ upon which they have immediately
recovered; but is the dark day come upon us, that such Superstitions as
these shall be practised in _New-England_: The Lord Jesus forbid it. See
_Baldwin's_ Testimony against the Practice of the _Camera Imperialis_,
Cas. Consc. L. 3. c. 3. p. 634.
5. _If the Testimony of a bewitched or possessed Person, is of validity
as to what they see done to themselves, then it is so as to others, whom
they see afflicted no less than themselves:_ But what they affirm
concerning others, is not to be taken for Evidence. Whence had they this
Supernatural Sight? It must needs be either from Heaven or from Hell: If
from Heaven, (as _Elisha's_ Servant, and _Balaam's_ Ass could discern
Angels) let their Testimony be received: But if they had this Knowledge
from Hell, tho' there may possibly be truth in what they affirm, they
are not legal Witnesses: For the Law of God allows of no Revelation from
any other Spirit but himself, _Isa. 8.19._ It is a Sin against God to
make use of the Devil's help to know that which cannot be otherwise
known: And I testifie against it, as a great Transgression, which may
justly provoke the Holy One of _Israel_, to let loose Devils on the
whole Land, _Luke 4.35._ See Mr. _Bernard's_ Guide to Juries in Cases of
Witchcraft, p. 136, 137, 138. And _Brockmand_, _Theol. de Angelis_, p.
227. Altho' the Devil's Accusations may be so far regarded as to cause
an enquiry into the truth of things, _Job 1.11, 12. & 2.5, 6._ yet not
so as to be an Evidence or Ground of Conviction: The Persons, concerning
whom the Question is, see things through Diabolical Mediums; on which
account their Evidence is not meer humane Testimony; and if it be in any
part Diabolical, it is not to be owned as Authentick; for the Devil's
Testimony ought not to be received neither in whole nor in part.
6. I am told by credible Persons, who say it is certainly true, that a
bewitched Person has complained that she was cast into Fits by the Look
of a Dog; and that she was no more able to bear the sight of that Dog,
than of the Person whom she accused as bewitching her: And that
thereupon the Dog was shot to death: This Dog was no Devil; for then
they could not have killed him. I suppose no one will say that Dogs are
Witches: It remains then that the casting down with the Look is no
infallible sign of a Witch.
7. It has always been said, that it is a difficult thing to find out
Witches: But if the Representation of such a Person as afflicting, or
the Look or Touch be an infallible proof of the guilt of Witchcraft in
the Persons complained of, 'tis the easiest thing in the World to
discover them; for it is done to our hand, and there needs no enquiry
into the Matter.
8. _Let them say this is an infallible Proof, produce any Word out of
the Law of God which does in the least countenance that Assertion:_ The
Word of God instructs Jurors and Judges to proceed upon clear humane
Testimony, _Deut. 35.30._ But the Word no where giveth us the least
Intimation, that every one is a Witch, at whose look the bewitched
Person shall fall into Fits; nor yet that any other means should be used
for the discovery of Witches, than what may be used for the finding out
of Murderers, Adulterers, and other Criminals.