60. I reply: In all bodies, however compact, there are pores, as is

apparent in metals where, more than in other bodies, it would seem

there should be none; through a perfect microscope the pores of metals

are discerned, with their different shapes. Now, those animals might,

through the pores, creep into, and thus penetrate any other bodies,

although such pores were impervious to other liquors or material

spirits, of wine, ammoniacal salt, or the like, because their bodies

would be much more subtle than those liquors. However, notwithstanding

many Angels may abide together on the same material spot, and even

confine themselves in a lesser and lesser space, though not infinitely,

as is shown by Scott, yet it were rash to ascribe the same power to

those animals; for, their bodies are determined in substance and

impervious to each other; and if two glorious bodies cannot abide

together on the same spot, though a glorious and a non glorious one

may do so, according to some Doctors, much less would it be possible

for the bodies of those animals, which are indeed subtile, yet do not

attain to the subtility of the glorious body. As regards their power

of extension or compression, we may instance the case of air, which,

rarefied and condensed, occupies more or less room, and may even, by

artificial means, be compressed into a narrower space than would be

naturally due to its volume; as is seen with those large balls which,

for amusement, one inflates by means of a blow-pipe or tube: air, being

forced into them and compressed, is held in larger quantity than is

warranted by the capacity of the ball. Similarly the bodies of the

animals we are speaking of might, by their natural virtue, extend to

a larger space, not exceeding however their own substance; they might

also contract, but not beyond the determined space due to that same

substance. And, considering that of their number, as with men, some

would be tall and some short, it were proper that the tall should be

able to extend more than the short, and the short to contract more than

the tall.

61. Septima interrogatio est, an hujusmodi animalia in peccato

originali nascerentur, et a Christo Domino fuissent redempta; an ipsis

conferretur gratia, et per quæ sacramenta; sub qua lege viverent, et an

beatitudinis et damnationis essent capacia?

61. Seventh question: Would those animals be born in original sin,

and have been redeemed by the Lord Christ? Would the grace have been

conferred upon them and through what sacraments? Under what law would

they live, and would they be capable of beatitude and damnation?

62. Respondeo, quod articulus Fidei est, quod Christus Dominus pro

universa creatura rationali gratiam et gloriam meruit. Pariter

articulus Fidei est, quod Creaturæ rationali gloria non confertur nisi

præcedat in ea gratia, quæ est dispositio ad gloriam. Similis articulus

est quod gloria non confertur nisi per merita. Hæc vero fundantur in

observantia perfecta mandatorum Dei adimpleta per gratiam. Ex his

satis fit positis interrogationibus. Incertum est an tales Creaturæ

originaliter peccavissent, necne. Certum tamen est, quod si ipsarum

Prothoparens peccasset, sicut peccavit Adam, ipsius descendentes in

peccato originali nascerentur, quemadmodum nascuntur homines. Et

quia Deus nunquam reliquit Creaturam rationalem sine remedio, dum

ipsa est in via; si hujusmodi creaturæ in peccato originali, aut

actuali inficerentur, Deus providisset illis de remedio, sed quale

sit, an fecisset, noverit Deus, noverint ipsæ. Hoc certum est, si

inter ipsas essent eadem, aut alia sacramenta, ac sunt in Ecclesia

humana militanti, ipsa habuissent, et institutionem, et efficaciam a

meritis Jesu Christi, qui omnium creaturarum rationalium Redemptor

et Satisfactor universalis est. Convenientissimum pariter, immo

necessarium esset quod sub aliqua lege a Deo sibi data viverent, ut per

ipsius observantiam possent sibi beatitudinem mereri; quænam autem lex

fuisset, an naturalis tantum, aut scripta, Mosaica, aut Evangelica,

aut alia ab his omnibus differens, prout Deo placuisset, hoc nobis

incognitum. Quoquomodo autem fuisset, nulla resultaret repugnantia

possibilitatem talium creaturarum excludens.

62. I reply: It is an article of belief that Christ has merited grace

and glory for all rational creatures without exception. It is also an

article of belief that glory is not conferred on a rational creature

until such creature has been previously endowed with grace, which

is the disposition to glory. According to a like article, glory is

conferred but by merits. Now, those merits are grounded on the perfect

observance of the commands of God, which is accomplished through grace.

The above questions are thus solved. Whether those creatures did or did

not sin originally is uncertain. It is clear, however, that if their

first Parent had sinned as Adam sinned, his descent would be born in

original sin, as men are born. And, as God never leaves a rational

creature without a remedy, so long as it treads the way, if those

creatures were infected with original or with actual sin, God would

have provided them with a remedy; but whether it is the case, and of

what kind is the remedy, is a secret between God and them. Surely, if

they had sacraments identical with or different from those in use in

the human Church militant, for the institution and efficacy thereof

they would be indebted to the merits of Jesus-Christ, the Redeemer and

universal Atoner of all rational creatures. It would likewise be highly

proper, nay necessary, that they should live under some law given them

by God, and through the observance of which they might merit beatitude;

but what would be that law, whether merely natural or written, Mosaic

or Evangelical, or different from all these and specially instituted

by God, that we are ignorant of. Whatever it might be though, there

would follow no objection exclusive of the possible existence of such

creatures.

63. Unicum porro argumentum, et quidem satis debile post longam

meditationem mihi subit contra talium creaturarum possibilitatem:

et est quod si tales creaturæ in Mundo existerent, de ipsis notitia

aliqua tradita fuisset a Philosophis, Sacra Scriptura, Traditione

Ecclesiastica, aut Sanctis Patribus; quod cum non fuerit, tales

creaturas minime possibiles esse concludendum est.

63. The only argument, and that a rather lame one, which long

meditations has suggested to me against the possibility of such

creatures, is that, if they really existed in the World, we should

find them mentioned somewhere by Philosophers, Holy Scripture,

Ecclesiastical Tradition, or the Holy Fathers; such not being the case,

their utter impossibility should be inferred.

64. Sed hoc argumentum, quod revera magis pulsat existentiam, quam

possibilitatem illarum, facili negotio solvitur ex iis quæ præmissimus

supra nº 41. et 42. Argumentum enim ab auctoritate negativa non tenet.

Præterquam quod falsum est, quod de illis notitiam non tradiderint

tum Philosophi, tum Scriptura, tum Patres. Plato siquidem, ut refert

Apuleius =de Deo Socratis= et Plutarchus =de Isid.= apud Baronem,

=Scot. Defens.=, tom. 9. =Apparat.= p. 1. fol. 2., voluit Dæmones

esse animalia genere, animo passiva, mente rationalia, corpore aerea,

tempore æterna: creaturasque istas nomine =Dæmonum= intitulavit; quod

tamen nomen non male sonat ex se: importat enim =plenum sapientia=;

unde cum Diabolum (Angelum nempe malum) volunt auctores exprimere,

non simpliciter Dæmonem sed =Cacodæmonem= vocant: sicut =Eudæmonem=,

quando bonum Angelum volunt intelligi. Similiter in Scriptura Sacra et

Patribus, de dictis creaturis habetur mentio, et de hoc infra dicemus.

64. But that argument which, in fact, calls in question their existence

rather than their possibility, is easily disposed of by our premises,

Nrs 41 and 42; for no argument can stand in virtue of a negative

authority. Besides, it is not correct to assert that neither the

Philosophers, nor the Scriptures, nor the Fathers have handed down

any notion of them. Plato, as is reported by Apuleius (_The Demon of

Socrates_) and Plutarch (_Isis and Osiris_), declared that Demons were

beings of the animal kind, passive souls, rational intelligences,

aerial bodies, everlasting; and he gave them the name of _Demons_,

which of itself is nowise offensive, since it means _replete with

wisdom_; so that, when authors allude to the Devil (or Evil Angel),

they do not merely call him Demon, but _Cacodemon_, and say likewise

_Eudemon_, when speaking of a good Angel. Those creatures are also

mentioned in Scripture and by the Fathers, as shall be said hereafter.

65. Stabilita huc usque talium creaturarum possibilitate, ad

earumdem existentiam probandam descendamus. Supposita tot historiarum

veritate de coitu hujusmodi Incuborum et Succuborum cum hominibus et

brutis, ita ut hoc negare impudentia videatur, ut ait D. Augustinus

quem dedimus supra nº 10., ita arguo: Ubi reperitur propria passio

sensus, ibidem necessario reperitur sensus ipse, cum juxta principia

philosophica propria passio fluat a natura, sive ubi reperiuntur

actiones, seu operationes sensus, ibidem reperitur sensus ipse, cum

operationes et actiones sint a forma. Atqui in hujusmodi Incubis aut

Succubis, sunt actiones, operationes, ac propriæ passiones, quæ sunt a

sensibus; ergo in iisdem reperitur sensus: sed sensus reperiri nequit

nisi adsint organa composita, nempe ex potentia animæ et determinata

parte corporis: ergo in iisdem reperiuntur corpus et anima; erunt

igitur animalia: sed etiam in ipsis et ab ipsis sunt actiones, et

operationes animæ rationalis: ergo eorum anima erit rationalis: et ita

de primo ad ultimum tales Incubi sunt animalia rationalia.

65. Now that we have proved that those creatures are possible, let us

go a step further, and show that they exist. Taking for granted the

truth of the recitals concerning the intercourse of Incubi and Succubi

with men and beasts, recitals so numerous that it would look like

impudence to deny the fact, as is said by St Austin, whose testimony

is given above (Nr 10), I argue: Where the peculiar passion of the

sense is found, there also, of necessity, is the sense itself; for,

according to the principles of philosophy, the peculiar passion flows

from nature, that is to say; that, where the acts and operations of

the sense are found, there also is the sense, the operations and acts

being but its external form. Now, those Incubi and Succubi present

acts, operations, peculiar passions, which spring from the senses; they

are therefore endowed with senses. But senses cannot exist without

concomitant composite organs, without a combination of soul and body.

Incubi and Succubi have therefore body and soul, and, consequentially,

are animals; but their acts and operations are also those of a rational

soul; their soul is therefore rational; and thus, from first to last,

they are rational animals.

66. Minor probatur quoad singulas ejus partes. Passio siquidem

appetitiva coitus est passio sensus; mœror, ac tristitia, ac iracundia

et furor ex coitu denegato passiones sensus sunt, ut patet in quibusvis

animalibus; generatio per coitum est operatio sensus, ut notum est.

Hæc porro omnia in Incubis sunt: ut enim probavimus supra a nº 25. et

seq., ipsi coitum muliebrem, et quandoque virilem appetunt, tristantur,

et furunt, ut amantes, amentes, si ipsis denegetur; coeunt perfecte et

quandoque generant. Concludendum ergo quod polleant sensu, et proinde

corpore; unde inferendum etiam perfecta animalia esse. Pariter clausis

ostiis ac fenestris intrant ubivis locorum: igitur ipsorum corpus

tenue est; item futura prænoscunt, annuntiant, componunt, ac dividunt;

quæ operationes sunt propriæ animæ rationalis: ergo anima rationali

pollent; et ita sunt vera animalia rationalia.

Respondent communiter Doctores, quod malus Dæmon est ille qui tales

impudicitias operatur, quod passiones, nempe amorem, tristitiamque

simulat ex coitu denegato, ut animas ad peccandum alliciat, et eas

perdat; et si coit, et generat, hoc est ex semine, et in corpore

alieno, ut dictum fuit supra nº 24.

66. Our minor is easy of demonstration in each of its parts. And

indeed, the appetitive passion of coition is a sensual passion; the

grief, sadness, wrath, rage, occasioned by the denial of coition, are

sensual passions, as is seen with all animals; generation through

coition is evidently a sensual operation. Now, all that happens with

Incubi, as has been shown above: they incite women, sometimes even men;

if denied, they sadden and storm, like lovers: _amantes, amentes_; they

perfectly practice coition, and sometimes beget. It must therefore be

inferred that they have senses, and consequently a body; consequently

also, that they are perfect animals. More than that: with closed doors

and windows they enter wherever they please: their body is therefore

slender; they foreknow and foretell the future, compose and divide, all

which operations are proper to a rational soul; they therefore possess

a rational soul and are, in sooth, rational animals.

Doctors generally retort that it is the Evil Spirit that perpetrates

those impure acts, simulates passions, love, grief at the denial of

coition, in order to entice souls to sin and to undo them; and that,

if he copulates and begets, it is with assumed sperm and body, as

aforesaid (Nr 24).

67. Sed contra Incubi nonnulli rem habent cum equis, equabus,

aliisque etiam brutis, quæ si coitum adversentur, male ab ipsis

tractantur, ut quotidiana constat experientia; sed in istis cessat

ratio adducta, nempe quod fingat appetitum coitus, ut animas perdat,

cum anima brutorum damnationis æternæ sit incapax. Præterea amoris et

iræ passiones in ipso contrarios effectus reales producunt. Si enim

aut mulier aut brutum amatum illis morem gerant, optime ab Incubis

tractantur; viceversa pessime habentur, si ex denegato coitu irascantur

et furant; et hoc firmatur quotidiana experientia; ergo in ipsis sunt

veræ passiones sensus. Insuper mali Dæmones, ac incorporei, qui rem

habent cum Sagis et Maleficis, ipsas cogunt ad eorum adorationem,

ad denegandam Fidem Orthodoxam, ad maleficia et scelera enormia

perpetranda tanquam pensum infamis coitus, ut supra nº 11. dictum

fuit: nihil horum prætendunt Incubi, ergo mali Dæmones non sunt.

Ulterius malus Dæmon, ut ex Peltano et Thyreo scribit Guaccius,

=Compend. Malef.= lib. 1. c. 19. fol. 128., ad prolationem nominis Jesu

aut Mariæ, ad formationem signi Crucis, ad approximationem sacrarum

Reliquiarum, sive rerum benedictarum, et ad exorcismos, adjurationes,

aut præcepta sacerdotum, aut fugit aut pavet, concutiturque, et

stridet, ut conspicitur quotidie in energumenis, et constat ex

tot historiis, quas recitat Guaccius, ex quibus habetur, quod in

nocturnis ludis Sagarum facto ab aliquo assistentium signo Crucis, aut

pronuntiato nomine Jesu, Diaboli et secum Sagæ omnes disparuerunt.

Sed Incubi ad supradicta nec fugiunt, nec pavent, quandoque cachinnis

exorcismos excipiunt, et quandoque ipsos Exorcistas cædunt, et sacras

vestes discerpunt. Quod si mali Dæmones, utpote a D. N. J. C. domiti,

ad ipsius nomen, Crucem, et res sacras pavent: boni autem Angeli

eisdem rebus gaudent, non tamen homines ad peccata et Dei offensam

sollicitant: Incubi vero sacra non timent, et ad peccata provocant,

convincitur ipsos nec malos Dæmones, nec bonos Angelos esse; sed patet,

quod nec homines sunt, cum tamen ratione utantur. Quid ergo erunt? Si

in termino sunt, et simplices spiritus sunt, erunt aut damnati aut

beati: non enim in bona Theologia dantur puri spiritus viatores. Si

damnati, nomen et Crucem Christi revererentur; si beati, homines ad

peccandum non provocarent; ergo aliud erunt a puris spiritus; et sic

erunt corporati, et viatores.

67. But then, there are Incubi that have to do with horses, mares and

other beasts, and, as shown by every day experience, ill-treat them if

rebel to coition; yet, in those cases, it can no longer be adduced

that the Demon simulates the appetite for coition in order to bring

about the ruin of souls, since those of beasts are not capable of

everlasting damnation. Besides, love and wrath with them are productive

of quite opposite effects. For, if the loved woman or beast humours

them, those Incubi behave very well; on the contrary, they use them

most savagely when irritated and enraged by a denial of coition: this

is amply proved by daily experience: those Incubi therefore have

truly sexual passions. Besides, the Evil Spirits, the incorporeal

Demons which have to do with Sorceresses and Witches, constrain them

to Demon-Worship, to the abjuration of the Orthodox Faith, to the

commission of enchantments and foul crimes, as preliminary conditions

to the infamous intercourse, as has been above-stated (Nr 11); now,

Incubi pretend to nothing of the kind: they are therefore no Evil

Spirits. Lastly, as written by Guaccius, at the mere utterance of the

name of Jesus or Mary, at the sign of the Cross, the approach of Holy

Relics or consecrated objects, at exorcisms, adjurations or priestly

injunctions, the Evil Demon either shudders and takes to flight, or

is agitated and howls, as is daily seen with energumens and is shown

by numerous narratives of Guaccius concerning the nightly revels of

Witches, where, at a sign of the Cross or the name of Jesus said by

one of the assistants, Devils and Witches all vanish together. Incubi,

on the contrary, stand all those ordeals without taking to flight or

showing the least fear; sometimes even they laugh at exorcisms, strike

the Exorcists themselves, and rend the sacred vestments. Now, if the

evil Demons, subdued by our Lord Jesus-Christ, are stricken with fear

by his name, the Cross and the holy things; if, on the other hand, the

good Angels rejoice at those same things, without however inciting men

to sin nor to give offense to God, whilst the Incubi, without having

any dread of the holy things, provoke to sin, it is clear that they are

neither evil Demons nor good Angels; but it is clear also that they

are not men, though endowed with reason. What then should they be?

Supposing them to have reached the goal, and to be pure spirits, they

would be damned or blessed, for correct Theology does not admit of pure

spirits on the way to salvation. If damned, they would revere the name

and the Cross of Christ; if blessed, they would not incite men to sin;

they would therefore be different from pure spirits, and thus, have a

body and be on the way to salvation.

68. Præterea agens materiale non potest agere nisi in passum similiter

materiale; tritum siquidem est axioma philosophorum, quod agens et

patiens debent communicare in subjecto; nec id quod materiatum est,

potest agere in rem pure spiritualem. Dantur autem agentia naturalia,

quæ agunt contra hujusmodi Dæmones Incubos, sequitur igitur quod isti

materiati, seu corporei sunt. Minor probatur ex iis quæ scribunt

Dioscorides, l. 2. c. 168. et l. 1. c. 100., Plinius, lib. 15. c. 4.,

Aristoteles, =Probl. 34.=, et Apuleius, =l. De Virtute Herbarum=,

apud Guaccium, =Comp. Malef.=, l. 3. c. 13. fol. 316., et confirmatur

experientia, nempe de pluribus herbis, lapidibus ac animalibus, quæ

Dæmones depellunt, ut ruta, hypericon, verbena, scordium, palma

Christi, centaureum, adamas, corallium, gagates, jaspis, pellis capitis

lupi aut asini, menstruum muliebre, et centum alia; unde habetur 26, q.

7. cap. final.: =Dæmonium sustinenti liceat petras, vel herbas habere

sine incantatione=. Ex quo habetur, petras aut herbas posse sua vi

naturali Dæmonis vires compescere, aliter Canon hoc non permitteret,

sed ut superstitiosum vetaret. Et de hoc luculentum exemplum habemus in

Sacra Scriptura, ubi Angelus Raphael dixit Tobiæ, c. 6, v. 8.: =Cordis

ejus= (nempe piscis, quem a Tigri attraxerat) =particulam, si super

carbones ponas, fumus ejus extricat omne genus Dæmoniorum=. Et ejus

virtutem experientia comprobavit: nam incenso jecore piscis, fugatus

est Incubus, qui Saram deperiebat.

68. Besides, a material agent cannot act but on an equally material

passive. It is indeed a trite philosophical axiom, that agent and

patient must have a common subject: pure matter cannot act on any

purely spiritual thing. Now, there are natural agents which act on

those Incubi Demons: these are therefore material or corporeal. Our

minor is proved by the testimony of Dioscorides, Pliny, Aristoteles and

Apuleius, quoted by Guaccius, _Comp. Malef._ b. 3, ch. 13, fol. 316;

it is confirmed by our knowledge of numerous herbs, stones and animal

substances which have the virtue of driving away Demons, such as rue,

St-John’s wort, verbena, germander, palma Christi, centaury, diamonds,

coral, jet, jasper, the skin of the head of a wolf or an ass, women’s

catamenia, and a hundred others: wherefore it is written: _For such as

are assaulted by the Demon it is lawful to have stones or herbs, but

without recourse to incantations_. It follows that, by their own native

virtue, stones or herbs can bridle the Demon: else the above mentioned

Canon would not permit their use, but would on the contrary forbid

it as superstitious. We have a striking instance thereof in Holy

Scripture, where the Angel Raphael says to Tobit, ch. 6, v. 8, speaking

of the fish which he had drawn from the Tigris: “_If thou puttest on

coals a particle of its liver, the smoke thereof will drive away all

kinds of Demons._” Experience demonstrated the truth of those

words; for, no sooner was the liver of the fish set on fire, than the

Incubus who was in love with Sarah was put to flight.

69. Respondent ad hæc communiter Theologi, quod talia agentia naturalia

inchoative tantum fugant Dæmonem, completive autem vis supernaturalis

Dei aut Angeli, ita ut virtus supernaturalis sit causa primaria,

directa, et principalis, naturalis autem secondaria, indirecta,

et minus principalis. Unde ad probationem, quæ supra adducta est

de Dæmone fugato a fumo jecoris piscis incensi a Tobia, respondet

Vallesius, =De Sac. Philosoph.=, c. 28., quod tali fumo indita fuit a

Deo vis supernaturalis fugandi Incubum, sicut igni materiali Inferni

data est virtus torquendi Dæmones et animas Damnatorum. Ad eamdem

autem probationem respondet Lyranus, et Cornelius ad c. 6. Tob. v.

8., Abulentis in 1. Reg. c. 16. q. 46., Pererius in =Daniel.=, pag.

272., apud Cornel. =loc. cit.=, fumum cordis piscis expulisse Dæmonem

inchoate vi naturali, sed complete vi angelica et cœlesti: naturali

autem impediendo actionem Dæmonis per dispositionem contrariam, quia

hic agit per naturales causas et humores, quorum qualitates expugnantur

a qualitatibus contrariis rerum naturalium, quæ dicuntur Dæmones

fugare; et in eadem sententia sunt omnes loquentes de arte exorcista.

69. To this Theologians usually retort that such natural agents merely

initiate the ejection of the Demon, and that the completive effect

is due to the supernatural force of God or of the Angel; so that the

supernatural force is the primary, direct and principal cause, the

natural force being but secondary, indirect and subordinate. Thus, in

order to explain how the liver of the fish burnt by Tobit drove away

the Demon, Vallesius asserts that the smoke thereof had been endowed by

God with the supernatural power of expelling the Incubus, in the same

manner as the material fire of Hell has the virtue of tormenting Demons

and the souls of the Damned. Others, such as Lyranus and Cornelius,

profess that the smoke of the heart of the fish initiated the ejection

of the Demon by native virtue, but completed it by angelical and

heavenly virtue: by native virtue, insomuch that it opposed a contrary

action to that of the Demon; for the Evil Spirit applies native causes

and humours, the native qualities of which are combated by the contrary

qualities of natural things known to be capable of driving away Demons;

that opinion is shared by all those who treat of the art of exorcisms.

Demoniality; or, Incubi and Succubi · 第 6 / 12 段