REPLY TO THE OBJECTIONS.
In answer to these, I allow that there is indeed very often a great
deal of illusion, prepossession, and imagination in all that is termed
magic and sorcery; and sometimes the devil by false appearances
combines with them to deceive the simple; but oftener, without the
evil spirit being any otherwise a party to it, wicked, corrupt, and
interested men, artful and deceptive, abuse the simplicity both of men
and women, so far as to persuade them that they possess supernatural
secrets for interpreting dreams and foretelling things to come, for
curing maladies, and discovering secrets unknown to any one. I can
easily agree to all that. All kinds of histories are full of facts
which demonstrate what I have just said. The devil has a thousand
things imputed to him in which he has no share; they give him the
honor of predictions, revelations, secrets, and discoveries, which are
by no means the effect of his power, or penetration; as in the same
manner he is accused of having caused all sorts of evils, tempests,
and maladies, which are purely the effect of natural but unknown
causes.
It is very true that there are really many persons who are persuaded
of the power of the devil, of his influence over an infinite number of
things, and of the effects which they attribute to him; that they have
consulted him to learn future events, or to discover hidden things;
that they have addressed themselves to him for success in their
projects, for money, or favor, or to enjoy their criminal pleasures.
All this is very real. Magic, then, is not a simple chimera, since so
many persons are infatuated with the power of charms and convicted of
holding commerce with the devil, to procure a number of effects which
pass for supernatural. Now it is the folly, the vain credulity, the
prepossession of such people that the law of God interdicts, that
Moses condemns to death, and that the Christian Church punishes by its
censures, and which the secular judges repress with the greatest
rigor. If in all these things there was nothing but a diseased
imagination, weakness of the brain, or popular prejudices, would they
be treated with so much severity? Do we put to death hypochondriacs,
maniacs, or those who imagine themselves ill? No; they are treated
with compassion, and every effort is made to cure them. But in the
other case it is impiety, or superstition, or vice in those who
consult, or believe they consult, the devil, and place their
confidence in him, against which the laws are put in force and ordain
chastisement.
Even if we could deny and contest the reality of augurs, diviners, and
magicians, and look on all these kind of persons as seducers, who
abuse the simplicity of those who betake themselves to them, could we
deny the reality of the magicians of Pharaoh, that of Simon, of
Bar-Jesus, of the Pythoness of the Acts of the Apostles? Did not the
first-mentioned perform many wonders before Pharaoh? Did not Simon the
magician rise into the air by means of the devil? Did not St. Paul
impose silence on the Pythoness of the city of Philippi in
Macedonia?[139] Will it be said that there was any collusion between
St. Paul and the Pythoness? Nothing of the kind can be maintained by
any reasonable argument.
A small volume was published at Paris, in 1732, by a new author, who
conceals himself under the two initials M. D.; it is entitled,
_Treatise on Magic, Witchcraft, Possessions, Obsessions and Charms; in
which their truth and reality are demonstrated_. He shows that he
believes there are magicians; he shows by Scripture, both in the Old
and New Testament, and by the authority of the ancient fathers, some
passages from whose works are cited in that of Father Debrio, entitled
_Disquisitiones Magicae_. He proves it by the rituals of all the
dioceses, and by the examinations which are found in the printed
"Hours," wherein they suppose the existence of sorcerers and
magicians.
The civil laws of the emperors, whether pagan or Christian, those of
the kings of France, both ancient and modern, jurisconsult,
physicians, historians both sacred and profane, concur in maintaining
this truth. In all kinds of writers we may remark an infinity of
stories of magic, spells and sorcery. The Parliaments of France, and
the tribunals of justice in other nations, have recognized magicians,
the pernicious effects of their art, and condemned them personally to
the most rigorous punishments.
He relates at full length[140] the remonstrances made to King Louis
XIV., in 1670, by the Parliament at Rouen, to prove to that monarch
that it was not only the Parliament of Rouen, but also all the other
Parliaments of the kingdom, which followed the same rules of
jurisprudence in what concerns magic and sorcery; that they
acknowledged the existence of such things and condemn them. This
author cites several facts, and several sentences given on this matter
in the Parliaments of Paris, Aix, Toulouse, Rennes, Dijon, &c. &c.;
and it was upon these remonstrances that the same king, in 1682, made
his declaration concerning the punishment of various crimes, and in
particular of sorcery, diviners or soothsayers, magicians, and similar
crimes.
He also cites the treaty of M. de la Marre, commissary at the
_chatelet_ of Paris, who speaks largely of magic, and proves its
reality, origin, progress, and effects. Would it be possible that the
sacred authors, laws divine and human, the greatest men of antiquity,
jurisconsults, the most enlightened historians, bishops in their
councils, the Church in her decisions, her practices and prayers,
should have conspired to deceive us, and to condemn those who practice
magic, sorcery, spells, and crimes of the same nature, to death, and
the most rigorous punishments, if they were merely illusive, and the
effect only of a diseased and prejudiced imagination? Father le Brun,
of the Oratoire, who has written so well upon the subject of
superstitions, substantiates the fact that the Parliament of Paris
recognizes that there are sorcerers, and that it punishes them
severely when they are convicted. He proves it by a decree issued in
1601 against some inhabitants of Campagne accused of witchcraft. The
decree wills that they shall be sent to the Conciergerie by the
subaltern judges on pain of being deprived of their charge. It
supposes that they must be rigorously punished, but it desires that
the proceedings against them for their discovery and punishment may be
exact and regular.
M. Servin, advocate-general and councillor of state, fully proves from
the Old and New Testament, from tradition, laws and history, that
there are diviners, enchanters, and sorcerers, and refutes those who
would maintain the contrary. He shows that magicians and those who
make use of charms, ought to be punished and held in execration; but
he adds that no punishment must be inflicted till after certain and
evident proofs have been obtained; and this is what must be strictly
attended to by the Parliament of Paris, for fear of punishing madmen
for guilty persons, and taking illusions for realities.
The Parliament leaves it to the Church to inflict excommunication,
both on men and women who have recourse to charms, and who believe
they go in the night to nocturnal assemblies, there to pay homage to
the devil. The Capitularies of the kings[141] recommend the pastors to
instruct the faithful on the subject of what is termed the Sabbath; at
any rate they do not command that these persons should receive
corporeal punishment, but only that they should be undeceived and
prevented from misleading others in the same manner.
And there the Parliament stops, so long as the case goes no farther
than simply misleading; but when it goes so far as to injure others,
the kings have often commanded the judges to punish these persons with
fines and banishment. The Ordonnances of Charles VIII. in 1490, and of
Charles IX. in the States of Orleans in 1560, express themselves
formally on this point, and they were renewed by King Louis XIV. in
1682. The third article of these Ordonnances bears, that if it should
happen "_there were persons to be found wicked enough to add impiety
and sacrilege to superstition, those who shall be convicted of these
crimes shall be punished with death_."
When, therefore, it is evident that some person has inflicted injury
on his neighbor by malpractices, the Parliament punishes them
rigorously, even to the pain of death, conformably to the ancient
Capitularies of the kingdom,[142] and the royal Ordonnances. Bodin,
who wrote in 1680, has collected a great number of decrees, to which
may be added those which the reverend Father le Brun reports, given
since that time.
He afterwards relates a remarkable instance of a man named Hocque, who
was condemned to the galleys, the 2d of September, 1687, by sentence
of the High Court of Justice at Passy, for having made use of
malpractices towards animals, and having thus killed a great number in
Champagne. Hocque died suddenly, miserably, and in despair, after
having discovered, when drunken with wine, to a person named Beatrice,
the secret which he made use of to kill the cattle; he was not
ignorant that the demon would cause his death to revenge the discovery
which he had made of this spell.
Some of the accomplices of this wretched man were condemned to the
galleys by divers decrees; others were condemned to be hanged and
burnt, by order of the Baille of Passy, the 26th of October, 1691,
which sentence was confirmed by decree of the Parliament of Paris, the
18th of December, 1691. From all which we deduce that the Parliament
of Paris acknowledges that the spells by which people do injury to
their neighbors ought to be rigorously punished; that the devil has
very extensive power, which he too often exercises over men and
animals, and that he would exercise it oftener, and with greater
extension and fury, if he were not limited and hindered by the power
of God, and that of good angels, who set bounds to his malice. St Paul
warns us[143] to put on the armor of God, to be able to resist the
snares of the devil: for, adds he, "we have not to war against flesh
and blood: but against princes and powers, against the bad spirits who
govern this dark world, against the spirits of malice who reign in the
air."
Footnotes:
[139] Acts xvi. 10.
[140] Page 31, _et seq._
[141] Capitular. R. xiii de Sortilegiis et Sorciariis, 2 col. 36.
[142] Capitular. in 872, x. 2. col. 230.
[143] Eph. vi. 12.