_Of the Woman of_ Endor _that pretended to raise up_ Samuel, _and of
some other places in the Scriptures, not handled yet, and of some
other objections_.
Concerning the Woman of _Endor_, that our English and many other
Translators have falsly rendered a Witch, or a Woman that had a familiar
Spirit, we have spoken sufficiently, where we treated of the
signification of the word _Ob_. And there have shewed plainly, that she
is only called the Mistriss of the bottle, or of the Oracle, and that
what she there did, or pretended to do, was only by Ventriloquy, or
casting her self into a feigned Trance lay groveling upon the earth with
her face downwards, and so changing her voice did mutter and murmur, and
peep and chirp like a bird coming forth of the shell, or that she spake
in some hollow Cave or Vault, through some Pipe, or in a Bottle, and so
amused and deceived poor timerous and despairing _Saul_, or had a
confederate apparelled like Samuel to play his part, and that it was
neither _Samuels_ Body, Soul, nor no Ghost or Devil, but only the
cunning and Imposture of the Woman alone, or assisted with a
confederate. And though this might be amply satisfactory to all sound
and serious judgments, especially if hereunto be added what Mr. _Scot_,
Mr. _Ady_, Mr. _Wagstaff_, and the learned Authors of the Dialogue of
Spirits and Devils have written upon this subject: yet because we have
promised before to speak something of the History and matter of fact,
and that Mr. _Glanvil_ a Minister of our English Church hath of late
espoused the quarrel, we shall confute his arguments and clear the case
as fully as in reason can be required, and that in these particulars
following.
[Sidenote: 1 Sam. 3. 19. _Id._ _c._ 7. _v._ 13.]
[Sidenote: Confid. about Witchcraft, p. 8.]
1. The certain and infallible prophecies of _Samuel_ so punctually
coming to pass according as he foretold them, for it is said: _And
Samuel grew, and the Lord was with him, and did let none of his words
fall to the ground_; were manifestly known to all _Israel_, as in the
case of the destruction of _Eli_, and his house, and by the overthrow of
the _Philistines_ at _Eben-ezer_, and in the anointing of _Saul_ to be
King, and in the case of sending Thunder and Lightning in Harvest time,
and such like. And as these were publickly known unto all _Israel_, and
they had seen, and tryed what infallible certainty followed upon them,
so it was as generally known, that _Samuel_ had told _Saul_ that God had
rejected him from being King over _Israel_, and that he had anointed
_David_ to be King in his stead; and therefore any rational Man, that
knew these things, and also saw that _David_ prospered in all things
that he did, and that it was quite otherwise with _Saul_, might
certainly know that the Kingdome would be transferred from him unto
_David_, and so there needed neither spirit nor Devil be fetched up to
predict this, being sufficiently known unto all, of which also the Woman
at _Endor_ could not be ignorant as a thing of concern to her,
especially in the point of her practise which was meer couzenage and
Imposture. And therefore Mr. _Glanvils_ argument concludes nothing,
where he saith: “And this _Samuel_ truly foretold his approaching fate,
_viz._ That _Israel_ should be delivered with him into the hands of the
_Philistines_, and that on the morrow he, and his Sons should be in the
state of the dead, which doubtless is meant by the expression that
[_they should be with him_:] which contingent particulars, how could the
couzener, and her confederate foretel, if there were nothing in it
extraordinary and preternatural?” To answer which we say, that there was
no contingent particular that was foretold, but Mr. _Glanvil_ might have
foretold it, if he had been there, and known but that which was
publickly divulged in _Israel_, without incurring the danger of being
reputed a Witch or a Diviner.
[Sidenote: Isa. 63. 16.]
1. Because _Samuels_ prophecies were certainly known to come to pass,
and he had openly declared, that the Kingdom should be rent from _Saul_,
and given to _David_. 2. She or her confederate might have guessed as
much, because of the extream fear and consternation that _Saul_ was in,
for heartless and fearful Generals seldom or never win Battels. 3.
Because that he confessed that God had forsaken him, and when he saw the
hoast of the _Philistines_, he was afraid and his heart greatly
trembled, and those that God doth forsake cannot prosper. 4. The word
_to morrow_ in the Hebrew doth not precisely denote the day following,
but the time to come, so that how true soever Mr. _Glanvil_ may think
it, there was but a piece of ambiguous Equivocation in it, for it cannot
be made out that it was fought the very next day, neither were all
_Sauls_ Sons slain with him, at that very time. 5. And if nothing must
be supplied but meerly what is _totidem verbis_ in the Text (as he
urgeth against Mr. _Scot_) then how will it be proved, that the Phrase
(_to morrow thou and thy Sons shall be with me_) is to be understood of
the state of the dead, seeing the words (if literally to be taken) do
imply a locality, not a state or condition? 6, But if it be supposed to
be the Devil, how comes he to know contingencies so certainly? It is a
thing that is easily affirmed, but was never yet sufficiently proved.
For if it be said he gathered it from the Prophecie of _Samuel_, so
might the Witch have done without any assistance of a Devil. 7. And if
he take it to be _Samuels_ Soul (as he seems to hold) how come departed
Souls to know, and foresee what contingent effects are to fall out here
below? Where reads he or finds any such Divinity except in Popish
Authors? But he may consult the Text: _Doubtless thou art our Father,
though Abraham be ignorant of us, and Israel acknowledge us not_.
[Sidenote: 1 Sam. 9. 2. & 10. 23.]
2. That this Woman was a meer dissembling and lying cheater, and used
nothing but Imposture, is manifest from these reasons. 1. Because that
she was but of the same Crew and Stamp that _Manasseh_, and _Ahab_ set
up, is most plain, but they were meer Impostors and deceivers pretending
to divine for other persons, and in other matters, but could not foresee
their own destruction, and therefore in probability she was of the same
practice. 2. Because she falsly faigned that she knew not _Saul_, of
whom she could not be ignorant, he being so publickly known, and seen,
and was taller by the head and shoulders than any man in _Israel_. 3. If
she had not known that it had been _Saul_, when he came to her at the
first, she would never have relyed upon his oath when he swore by
_Jehovah_, for there was none but the King that could protect her from
destruction. 4. She must needs be a most notorious dissembling cheater,
because she pretended to call up any, for she said: _whom shall I bring
up unto thee?_ which is most certainly false, she had no such universal
power, no nor all the Devils in Hell, if they had all assisted her. 5.
She did plainly dissemble, for the Text saith, _and when the woman saw
Samuel she cried out with a loud voice_; now if she saw _Samuel_ (whom
he could not but know) why did she answer to _Saul_, when he asked,
_what sawest thou?_ She answered, _I saw gods ascending out of the
earth_. Let Mr. _Glanvil_, and all men judge if this be not gross and
palpable lying, Gods is plural, but _Samuel_ was but one.
[Sidenote: 1 Sam. 16. 14.]
[Sidenote: 1 Sam. 15. 23, 27.]
[Sidenote: 1 Sam. 28. 6.]
3. As it is manifest that this Woman was an active deceiver, and one
that intended to cheat and couzen, so it is as plain that _Saul_ was in
a condition fit to be deluded, and imposed upon, even by those that had
been less cunning and skilful than she was in the craft of cheating,
which is apparent from these reasons. 1. The Spirit of the Lord was
departed from him, and consequently, Wisdom, Prudence and Discretion,
and so that which should have guided his Will, Affections and Actions in
the right way, had totally left him. And when these are gone, what is
man, but a fit instrument to undergo and suffer even the worst and
lowest of delusions and abuses? 2. The Spirit of the Lord had not only
left him, but an evil Spirit from the Lord was come upon him that vexed
and terrified him. And to what madness, folly and wickedness is not he
subject to, who is led by the Spirit of lies and darkness? 3. The Lord
had openly declared, that because he had rejected the word of the Lord,
therefore the Lord had rejected him from being King over _Israel_, and
that the Kingdom should be rent from him, and given to one more worthy
than him. Now what despondency of mind, what torture and vexation of
Spirit must needs be in him, that having been a King, is thus threatned
to have his Kingdom rent from him and given to another, is easy to be
imagined. 4. He must needs be under a most fearful consternation of mind
not only because of these things named, but especially having before in
his dangers and straights received counsel and advice from the Lord,
though he now _inquired of the Lord, yet the Lord answered him neither
by dreams, nor by Urim, nor by Prophets_. The Lord answered him not by
dreams; for the union and converse that had been betwixt him and the
Lord before, was now broken by reason of his Sins and Rebellion. Neither
did the Lord answer him by Urim, for the Urim was not in the possession
then of _Saul_, but of _David_, Chap. 23. 6, 9. Neither did the Lord
answer him by Prophets, for _Samuel_ had left him, after his last
denouncing judgment against him, and came no more at him until his
death. 5. He must needs be in a most fearful case, and a fit subject for
the most weak and simple Imposture of the World, because the
_Philistines_ were upon him with a potent and numerous Army, and he able
to gather but few and weak forces, the best and most of the people being
revolted from him, and were in their affections, or persons with and for
_David_. And from hence may easily be collected, how facile a thing it
was to delude, and deceive _Saul_, even by those that had far less craft
than this Woman, who doubtless was devilish cunning in her couzening
tricks.
4. There is much question who was the Penman of this first Book of
_Samuel_, but whosoever it was (for we cannot determine it) it cannot be
rationally supposed that he had the Story of this transaction betwixt
_Saul_ and the Woman from Divine Revelation, for then doubtless it would
not have been left so ambiguous and doubtful, but the whole truth, both
of the matter, manner and circumstances, would in all probability have
been fully set down: and have been declared whether it were a miracle
wrought by God, a delusive apparition of Satan, the Soul of _Samuel_, or
the Imposture of the Woman, the certainty of which had been mainly
profitable and expedient for the people of God and his Church to have
known. And if the Penman had it from the relation of _Saul_ or either or
both of his Servants, then it must needs have been according to their
deluded imaginations and their deceived apprehensions, as is most
rational to believe that it was; or if he had it from the Woman, or
those of her family, (which is not rationally probable) then it is sure
to have been represented for the most advantage, and credit of the
Womans skill and cunning. But the most learned persons do judge it to be
related, meerly according to the deceived opinion and apprehension of
_Saul_.
[Sidenote: Consid. about Witchcraft, p. 86.]
5. But to come more near the stress of the business, though Mr.
_Glanvil_ confidently say, that Mr. _Scots_ Tenent, that the Woman was
in one room and _Saul_ in another, when the feat was acted, is but a
pretty knack and contrivance, and but an invention without ground, and
not as much as intimated in the History: Yet we must soberly averr, that
nothing is more plain in the Text, than either that they were in diverse
rooms, or that _Saul_ saw nothing at all, but what he had was from her
relation, or the acting of a confederate, and this we shall prove by
these undeniable reasons. 1. After _Saul_ had pacified the pretended
fears of the Woman, who falsly counterfeited that she knew not _Saul,
who was taller by the head and shoulders than any man in Israel_, the
next thing we hear of in the Text is, _and when the Woman saw Samuel_:
Now if they were both in the same room, and _Samuel_ a visible object,
how comes it to pass that _Saul_ saw him not? for if they were both in
one room, and _Samuel_ visible, how is it that he did not or could not
see him? were his corporal eyes as blind, as the eyes of his
understanding? surely not. What fiction or invention must salve this?
surely Mr. _Glanvil_ must pump to find it out. 2. The next thing is,
that when the Woman saw (for blind _Saul_ saw nothing) _Samuel, she
cried with a loud voice, magna voce_, or (as the Hebrew hath it) _in
magna voce_. And (I pray you) if they had been both in one room, or near
together, what need she to have cried with a great voice, might not an
ordinary tone have made him to have heard her? What was he deaf as well
as blind? Or it might be it was the more to amuse and amaze the wretched
and deluded King, or to shew the wonderfulness of the apparition she
feigned that astonishment, the more to magnifie her skill and cunning.
Well, admit these were so, yet however it is manifest, notwithstanding
her great voice, that as yet _Saul_ saw nothing, but stood waiting like
a drown’d Puppet to hear what would be the issue, for all he understood
was from her cunning and lying relation. And so either thus far it is
manifest that they were in distinct rooms, or there was nothing that he
could see. 3. The next thing is, he saith, _be not afraid, what sawest
thou?_ that is, though I be _Saul_, yet be not afraid, I have sworn, and
thou shalt receive no harm, but _what sawest thou?_ As who should say, I
see nothing as yet at all, but I suppose thou hast seen something; for
otherwise his question doth not agree with the words the Woman spake
before. But however it is manifest that as yet he saw nothing, and
therefore rationally it must be supposed that they were in distinct
rooms, or that there was nothing visible, that he could see. Further,
his question is not in the present tense but of the time past, _what
sawest thou?_ or what hast thou seen? which could not be congruously
spoken, if they had been both in one room, but however do undeniably
conclude that as yet he saw nothing at all. 4. The next is the Womans
lying and forged answer, thereby to magnifie her own craft, and the more
to amuse and astonish poor deluded _Saul_, saying; _Behold I saw gods
ascending out of the earth._ Well, it is still apparent that as _Saul_
could not before see _Samuel_, now he neither seeth these Gods she
telleth him of, nor any such thing: So that all that he apprehended was
from her forged Stories, for he saw nothing as yet, either because he
was not in the same room with her, or that there was no visible
apparition. 5. Then he maketh another absurd question, like a distracted
Man in the house of _Bethlem_, saying, _what form is he of?_ when his
question should have been, what forms are they of? for she spoke of Gods
which are plural, and more than one, but he asketh in the singular,
_what form is he of_. By all which it is manifest, that he yet saw
nothing at all. For when we plainly see a thing, we do not usually ask
others what form it is of, because our eyes can inform us of that. So
that he saw nothing, either because he was not in the same room, or that
there appeared nothing that was visible. 6. Now after all these
ambiguous lies, and delatory cheats, the crafty quean doth begin to come
more near, to give satisfaction to the blinded expectation of _Saul_,
who all this while stood gaping to see the appearance of _Samuel_, and
so she tells him (who was fit to believe any thing, though never so
absurd, or impossible) _behold an old man comes up, and he is covered
with a mantle_. In the beginning of the action, the Text saith, _and
when the woman saw Samuel, she cried out_, then she said, _she saw gods
ascending out of the earth_, and now after all this discourse and
expence of time _Samuel_ is but coming up, all was lies and delayes the
more to blind and delude the poor credulous King. But yet thus far it is
plain that _Saul_ saw nothing at all, and so must needs all this while,
either be in another room, or else for certain there was no apparition
visible, and all the satisfaction that he had, was from the lying
stories the Woman told him. Now let Mr. _Glanvil_ consider and answer,
whether it be not only intimated, but clearly holden forth in the Text
that either they were in two distinct rooms, or that nothing visible did
appear before _Saul_. 7. Now after all this the Text saith, _and Saul
perceived that it was Samuel_, the Hebrew word doth signifie to know or
to perceive, and relates to the understanding: but how did he know, or
perceive that it was _Samuel_? not by the sight of his eyes, for we have
made it plain that he was either in another room, or that no visible
apparition presented it self before his eyes, but he only perceived it
by the description of the crafty Woman, who knew well enough what habit
or garments _Samuel_ wore in his life time, as one that was the most
publickly known Man in _Israel_: and therefore the subtil and crafty
quean, knowing that _Saul_ only required _Samuel_ to be brought up and
no other, doth at the last frame her tale agreeable to _Sauls_ desire,
and so describes him an old Man, covered with a mantle, and such an one
_Saul_ had known him to be, while he was living. But if _Saul_ had seen
any such thing as the shape or form of _Samuel_, then the Hebrew Verb
thrice used in that action, that properly signifieth to see with the
eyes, would have been used in this place (as well as when it relateth
what she saw) and not the verb for knowing or perceiving that relateth
to the mind, and _Samuel_ he saw not, but only believed the lies she
told him. For otherwise it would have been, And _Saul_ saw _Samuel_, and
not, _Saul_ perceived that it was _Samuel_, which he could not do but
only by her relation, and forged tales. 8. The last thing in this
action, is, that _Saul stooped with his face to the ground, and bowed
himself_: now to what did he stoop and bow, seeing he had seen nothing
with his own eyes, neither knew any thing that appeared, but as the
Woman told him? Could it be to any thing but to an imaginary _Samuel_
and such an one as she had described, whom he conceited in his Phantasie
to be _Samuel_ himself? Surely in rational consequence it could be
nothing else. For all that she had done and said before, being
undeniably lies and cheats, this also in just and right reason, must be
judged to be so also. So that it was either the Woman, that being in
another room, did change and alter her voice, and so plaid the part of
_Samuel_, or else that she had a confederate knave, whom she turned out
to act the part of dead _Samuel_.
6. The last thing that we shall handle concerning this controverted
subject, is the examination of the grounds and reasons of those that are
of a different judgment, which may be comprised in these three several
heads. 1. Some do conceive that it was the Body of _Samuel_ that was
raised up, and acted by his soul or by Satan. 2. Some hold that it was
_Samuels_ Soul that appeared in the shape and habit, that he had living.
3. Others do positively affirm that it was the Devil that assumed the
shape of _Samuel_, and so acted the whole business, by a compact betwixt
him and the Woman. These we shall confute in order.
[Sidenote: Philipp. 3. 21.]
[Sidenote: Matth. 27. 52, 53.]
[Sidenote: _Caten. Aur. Tho. Aquin. in_ Matth. 27.]
[Sidenote: Revel. 14. 13.]
1. That it was not the Body of _Samuel_ that was raised up, nor the Soul
joyned with it, that acted _Samuels_ part, is manifest from these
reasons. 1. Because _Samuels_ Body had lain too long in the grave, for
some account it near two years, and therefore must needs in a great part
be corrupted, wasted and disfigured, that none could have certainly
known that it was _Samuel_. 2. It must have been so putrified and
stinking, that none could have endured near it, for the noisome and
horrible smell. 3. Who should have covered it with the mantle, which had
it been buried with him, must in so long a time, have been rotten and
consumed? Surely there were no Taylors in the Grave, to make him a new
one, but (in reason and likelihood) if it had been his Body, it should
have appeared in Linnen, or a winding-sheet, if that had not been rotten
likewise. 4. To raise a Body, so long dead, must needs have required an
omnipotent power, for it is the Almighty power of Christ alone, that
raiseth up the vile Bodies of his Saints, and maketh them like his
glorious Body. And therefore neither the woman with all her Divinations,
nor all the Devils in Hell, nor any created power, but the Lord
Almighty, could have wrought this miracle, who would never have done it,
to gratifie the humour, or to magnifie the cheating craft of an
idolatrous, wicked and couzening Witch. And if the Devil or any created
power could raise up the Body of a departed Saint, then the rising out
of the Graves of many Bodies of Saints, that had slept, and their coming
into the holy City, and appearing unto many, after Christ was risen from
the dead, had been no certain, or convincing argument, of the undoubted
truth of the Divinity and Resurrection of our most Blessed Saviour. But
they were most infallible evidences of them both, as saith the Father S.
_Hierome_ in these words, _Sic multa corpora sanctorum resurrexerunt, ut
dominum ostenderent resurgentem, & tamen cum monumenta aperta sunt, non
ante resurrexerunt quàm resurgeret dominus, ut esset primogenitus
resurrectionis à mortuis_. 5. That it was not _Samuels_ Soul joyned with
the Body, that acted this, we thus argue: That Tenent that is flatly
contrary to the plain Doctrine of the Scripture, must needs be false.
But this tenent of _Samuels_ Soul acting in the Body after death, is
flatly contrary to the plain Doctrine of the Scripture, _ergo_ it is
false. The major (we suppose) no Orthodox Christian can justly deny; and
the minor is proved thus. The Scripture doth assure us, that _those that
die in the Lord_ (as without all doubt _Samuel_ did) _are blessed, and
rest from their labours_. Therefore must this Tenent be abominably
false: for if the Soul of _Samuel_, after his death had been brought
again to act in the Body, then he had not rested from his labours, but
had been disquieted, and brought to new trouble, to have been vexed to
have seen _Saul_ committing more wickedness than before, in taking
counsel from a cursed Idolatrous Woman, such as the Lord had commanded
to be destroyed. And there is no one point in all this transaction of
_Saul_ with the Witch, that speaketh her Imposture more apparently than
where this counterfeit _Samuel_ saith, _Why hast thou disquieted me?_ As
though the Saints of God after death could be disquieted by a Devil, or
a Witch, who (according to Gods infallible truth) are blessed, and rest
from their labours, and are in the hands of the Lord, where no Torments
can touch them. And therefore none would have spoken those lying words,
but a devilish cheating quean, or a damnable suborned confederate.
6. If _Samuels_ Soul was again joined to his body so long after
separation, and so performed vital actions, who was the author of this
conjunction or union? could the Witch or the Devil or any created power
effect that union? Surely not, none but the almighty power of Jehovah,
who breathed into _Adam_ the breath of life. And therefore we are bold
to assert (with all the company of learned Christians) that this opinion
is erroneous, impious and blasphemous.
[Sidenote: 1 Sam. 15. 33.]
[Sidenote: Verse 29.]
2. The second opinion, that it was _Samuels_ Soul that appeared in his
wonted shape and habit, that he wore while he lived, hath been
strenuously maintained by the Popish party, and as strongly confuted by
the reformed Divines. But we shall not trouble our selves and our
readers with them all, but only urge two or three that are most cogent,
thereby to answer Mr. _Glanvils_ fopperies, and they are these. 1. If it
were _Samuels_ Soul that appeared, it cannot be supposed to come
contrary, or whether God would or not, for hardly any rational Man (we
believe) will affirm that, because God doth whatsoever he will, both in
Heaven and Earth, and who hath resisted his will? 2. And it cannot be
rationally thought that _Samuel_, who whilst he lived, was so punctually
careful to do nothing (especially in his prophetick office) but what he
was commanded of God, would after his death run an errand without his
consent or licence. 3. And that his Soul did not come by the command of
God is most certain: Though Mr. _Glanvil_ ask the question, who saith
that happy departed Souls were never imployed in any ministeries here
below? To which (though we have answered it before) we now again reply,
that all learned Divines of the reformed Churches have said, and
maintained it, and so do we both say and affirm, that they never were
nor are imployed in ministeries here below, because never created, nor
ordained of God, for any such end or purpose, but there are legions of
Angels, that are ordained to be ministring Spirits, and not the Souls of
the Saints departed this life. But Mr. _Glanvil_ goeth further, and
saith, that _Samuel_ was not raised by the power of the Witches
inchantments, but came on that occasion on a Divine errand. And though
we have before unanswerably proved in the general, that no Souls of
those that are dead do after death appear, or wander here below, nor
come such sleveless errands, as he supposeth: yet we shall add one or
two here in particular, to prove that _Samuels_ Soul came not on a
Divine errand as sent by God, without which mission it could not have
come at all. 4. For fourthly, if Mr. _Glanvil_ had proved by any
argument, or colour of reason, that his Soul had come upon such a Divine
errand it had been something, but he hath only laid down an affirmation,
without either proof, reason or authority, and we may with as good
reason deny it, as he affirm it, for bare affirmations prove nothing at
all. 5. It is manifest that God in all his ordinances of providence,
especially in the order of his miracles, doth work chiefly to confirm
and witness truth, for that (as the worthy and learned _Stillingfleet_
hath observed) is the most proper _criterium_ of a miracle; and to send
a Soul from the dead must needs be miraculous. Now if the chief end in
Gods working of miracles (for none else but he can work them) be to
establish truth, and settle his own Divine and pure worship, then it
cannot be to uphold lies and Idolatrous courses. But if God should have
sent _Samuels_ Soul on a Divine errand, when the Witch was practising
her Diabolical Divinations and cheating tricks, it had been to have
countenanced and confirmed both _Saul_, and the Witch, in their wicked
wayes, and to have contradicted his own law and command, which did
positively order, that all that used Divinations should be put to death,
and all those that sought for counsel from them to be severely punished.
Now let Mr. _Glanvil_, or any other prove, that God orders that to be
done by the dead, which he forbad to be done by the living. 6. If it had
been the true _Samuel_ that appeared, it is not rational, nor credible
to imagine, that he would neither rebuke _Saul_ for consulting with a
Woman that practised those things, that were forbidden by the law upon
pain of death; nor that he would either reprove, or punish so wicked a
Woman, finding her in the very act. We say it is not credible, unless we
suppose _Samuel_ less zealous for the law and commands of God, being
dead, than he was for them being living. Surely he that living _hewed
Agag in pieces_, only because God had commanded he should be slain,
would (if it had been the true _Samuel_, which without all question it
was not) have done as much or worse, to the cursed and Idolatrous
cheating Witch, though after his death, if he had come upon a Divine
errand. 7. God should have shewed himself very mutable, if he had
answered _Saul_ in a miraculous way by a dead Prophet, that had refused
to answer him by one living. And _Samuel_ while living knew certainly
that the Lord had rejected _Saul_ from being King over _Israel_, and had
testified unto him, that _the strength of Israel would not lie, and that
he was not like a man that he should repent_. But if it had been the
true _Samuel_ that had been sent to speak to _Saul_, he knowing both by
his own knowledge and relation of _Saul_ himself, that God had refused
to answer him by Prophets, must in that conference both have made God a
liar, and mutable, and also himself, who living had testified the
contrary, and therefore it could not be either the true _Samuel_ nor his
Soul. 8. It is manifest that the Lord had before withdrawn his good
Spirit from _Saul_, and an evil one from the Lord was come upon him, and
therefore it was no way probable, that the Lord would in a miraculous
manner answer such a wicked person, whom he had utterly rejected as a
reprobate. Neither is it like that God would shew him an extraordinary
favour by a dead Prophet, that would not vouchsafe him his Spirit in an
ordinary way. And _Samuel_ that came not at him for a long time (though
but a little distance asunder) while he lived, was not like to make so
long a journey in a Divine errand to visit him after his death. 9. And
if _Abraham_ at the request of the rich Man _would not send Lazarus to
warn his brethren, lest they should come into that place of torment_,
which bore with it a fair shew both of Charity and Piety; much less
would God give way (or _Samuel_ be desirous to come) to send a blessed
Soul from its rest for such a frivolous matter, and in no wise to
connive at the wickedness of both _Saul_ and the Witch, and never move
either of them to the amendment of their lives. 10. Where doth Mr.
_Glanvil_ find it mentioned in any part of Scripture? or where is it
recorded in the writings of any reformed or Orthodoxal Divines? or where
in any of their works is it declared, that ever any blessed Soul after
death, was either sent, or did come upon a Divine errand to any here
below? Is it not monstrous confidence (not to say impudence) to utter
such groundless assertions, without any proof, reason, or authority at
all? Let all learned and judicious persons consider and judge.
3. That the Devil assumed the shape of _Samuel_, and acted the whole
business, is the opinion of all, or the most of the learned Divines of
the reformed Churches, of whom we shall crave pardon, if we dissent from
them, it being no fundamental of Religion, nor any Article of the Faith.
And this we profess is not done out of the spirit of contradiction, nor
for singularity, but only because (as we conceive) the Tenent hath no
sufficient grounds neither from Scripture nor sound reason, to support
it, and therefore we shall labour its confutation, by these ensuing
arguments.
1. Because this opinion, that the Devil should perform this apparition,
doth beg two suppositions, never yet sufficiently proved, and that have
in them no certain truth. For first they take for an Hypothesis, that
Devils are meerly and simply incorporeal Spirits, which we shall prove
hereafter to be false. Secondly they take for another Hypothesis, that
Spirits and Devils can assume what bodies they please, and appear in any
figure or shape, which is a meer figment invented by the doating
Schoolmen, as we shall sufficiently make good hereafter.
2. We are not of their opinion, that think, that the Devils do move, and
rove up and down in this elementary world at their pleasure, to act what
they list, and appear when, how and in what shapes they please, for then
the World would be full of nothing almost but apparitions, and every
corner replenished with their ludicrous tricks, as formerly in the times
of blind Popery and ignorance, there was no discourse almost, but of
Fairies, Hobgoblins, apparitions, Spirits, Devils and Souls, ranting in
every house, and playing feats in every Town and Village, when it was
nothing but the superstitious credulity, and ignorant fancies of the
people, joined with the Impostures of the Priests and Monks. And if this
were true, then how should Men know a true natural substance or body,
from these fictitious apparitions? Nay how could a Man have known his
Father or Mother, his Brethren or Sisters, his Kinsmen or Neighbours?
might they not as well have believed them to be Phantasms, and assumed
bodies, as real and true creatures?
[Sidenote: 1 Kings 22.]
[Sidenote: Isa. 37.]
3. But though faln Angels in respect of their malice, wicked wills, and
envious desires whereby they seek (as much as in them lies) the ruine of
all mankind both in Soul and Body, may in that particular end and
regard, be said to be like roaring Lions going about and seeking whom
they may devour, and compassing the earth and walking to and fro in it:
yet we must affirm that in respect of executing their wicked, envious
and malicious wills and desires, they are restrained, nay kept in the
chains of everlasting darkness, from which fetters and chains they go
not out, but when and so far as they are sent, ordered, licensed (or as
some would have it worded) permitted, by the purpose and decree of the
Divine and Almighties providence. So that it is most certain, that the
faln Spirits cannot go forth of their chains, when they list, to act
what mischief they would, contrary to the will of the Almighty, who hath
fettered, and still keeps them in those chains: but when they are at any
time let loose, it is only by the will, decree, licence and order of
Jehovah, who sends them forth to accomplish his will, either for
punishment to the wicked to inflict upon them his just judgments, for
which they are the appointed ministers and executioners, and in the
performance of these offices of his wrath, they are limited and bounded
how far they shall proceed, and no further; or else they are sent forth
to tempt, or afflict the godly for the trial of their faith, and herein
they are so restrained and bounded by the power of the Almighty as they
cannot act one jot beyond the limit of his commands or Commissions, as
is manifest in the case of _David_, who was tempted by Satan to number
the people, and in the affliction of _Job_, wherein he was bounded how
far he should act, and no further. And when the evil Angels are thus
sent forth, and limited by God, what, and how far they shall act, it is
always for just and righteous ends, as in the case of _Ahab_, when a
lying Spirit was sent by God into the mouths of his Prophets, that he
might be persuaded to go up to _Ramath Gilead_ that he might be slain
there, or as it was for a judgment and destruction upon _Sennacheribs_
Army, that _Jerusalem_ might be saved and freed, and he sent back with
shame and confusion into his own countrey, or it is to manifest his
glory, goodness and mercy to his Saints, so _David_ was moved to number
the people, that falling under that temptation, and he and the people
therefore plagued, might be brought to a greater degree of repentance,
and to know that their defence stood not in the multitude of men, but in
the benignity of Jehovah, who was their strength and their defender, and
so _Job_ was so sore afflicted, that his Faith and Patience might be
made manifest, and remain for an example to all succeeding posterities.
But it is utterly irrational and incredible that God would send the
Devil (without whose mission he could not have done it) to appear in the
shape of _Samuel_, either to magnifie the skil, or practice of a lewd,
wicked, and Idolatrous Woman, which thing he had forbidden by his plain
and open law, nor to gratifie the curiosity of a wretched Reprobate,
such as was _Saul_, whom he had denied to answer by living Prophets, and
therefore would not answer him by the apparition of a Devil, to have
committed a counterfeit Imposture, in the shape of holy _Samuel_. And
therefore we conclude, that it was no apparition of the Devil, but
meerly the Imposture of the Woman, either alone, or with a Confederate.
There is also a fourth opinion concerning the transaction of this Woman
of _Endor_, that holds, that it was neither the Body, or Soul of
_Samuel_ that was raised up, neither the Devil that appeared in his
shape, nor that it was the Imposture of the Witch alone, or with a
Confederate, but that it was the Sydereal, or Astral Spirit (as they are
pleased to term it) of _Samuel_ that was made to appear, and speak by
the art and skill of the Woman. But because this Tenent is not of much
Antiquity, nor hath many assertors of it, as also because it taketh that
for an Hypothesis, to wit, that there are three parts in Man, the Body,
Soul, and Spirit; and that the Soul goeth immediately after death either
to Heaven or Hell, the Body to the grave, and that the Spirit doth for a
certain time after death wander in the air, and may be (by a certain
kind of art) brought to appear visibly, and to give answers of all
things that it knew living, which as yet hath never been sufficiently
proved, therefore we shall pass it over here, having (perhaps) occasion
to speak of it more largely hereafter.
We shall now come to mention some places in the New Testament that are
produced by some, thereby to prove the great power of Devils and Witches
in transferring and carrying bodies in the air, as is that of our
Saviours temptation, where it is said that the Devil took him into an
exceeding high Mountain, and that he set him upon the pinnacle of the
Temple in _Jerusalem_, from whence they thus argue: That if the Devil
had power to carry our most blessed Saviour in the air into an high
mountain, and to set him upon the pinnacle of the Temple, that much more
hath he power to carry the bodies of Witches who are his sworn vassals
in the air, whither he pleaseth, or they desire. To annul the force of
which objection we give these reasons.
[Sidenote: _Reas. 1._]
[Sidenote: Matth. 3. 16.]
[Sidenote: Luke 3. 22.]
[Sidenote: Judg. 15. 15.]
1. If it were granted that the Devil did transport our Saviour in the
air, yet it will not follow that he can at any time when he pleaseth
carry the Bodies of Men or Women so likewise, for no particular
proposition will, according to the rules of art, infer a general or
universal conclusion, nor one example or instance inductively prove a
general practice; one Swallow doth not make a Summer. For though once
when our blessed Saviour was baptized, the Holy Ghost did descend like a
Dove, and light upon him, it will not follow, that in all other of his
actions of preaching, or working of miracles, the holy Spirit should
appear also in the form of a Dove, nor when other Saints are Baptized
will it follow that it doth, or should alwaies appear in the same form.
And though _Samson_ did once slay a thousand of the _Philistines_ with
the jawbone of an Ass, it doth not follow, that either he did so in like
manner in every battel, or that every Man may do the like.
[Sidenote: _Reas. 2._]
2. If it were granted that the Devil did carry Christs Body in the air,
it will not follow that he can do so at any other times, when he
pleaseth, because in the temptation of Christ there was an extraordinary
dispensation of God for the same, which cannot be presupposed in the
ordinary transportation of Witches, and therefore the argument falls
quite to the ground.
[Sidenote: _Reas. 3._]
3. In the actions of Satan (especially in elementary things, for we
speak not of the acts of his will) the will, order and licence of God is
chiefly to be considered, because his power (in respect of execution) is
under the power of the Almighty, so that he can do nothing in this
respect but what he is ordered and commanded to do. And therefore the
end of the action is principally to be regarded; for if God should have
given way that Christ should be carried by Satan in the air, it was for
a glorious and good end, that the obedience of his will to the Father
might be shown, and that his victory over the Devil might be made
manifest: but in carrying the Bodies of Witches in the air, there can be
no good, just or pious end wherefore the Devil should be licensed, or
permitted to carry them in the air, except it were to promote filthiness
and abominable wickedness, which were absurd and blasphemous to imagine.
And therefore we may rationally and plainly conclude, that the carrying
of the Bodies of Witches in the air, by the power of the Devil, is a
false, wicked and impious opinion.
[Sidenote: _Reas. 4._]
[Sidenote: Ezek. 8. 3.]
[Sidenote: _Beza in Luc._ 4. 5.]
[Sidenote: Matth. 4. 1.]
[Sidenote: Mark 1. 12.]
[Sidenote: Luke 4. 1.]
[Sidenote: _Caten. Aur. Tho. Aquin. in_ Luke 4.]
4. Some are of opinion that this whole transaction was visible, sensible
and corporeal, as _Theophylact_, and many others. Some are of opinion
that it was wholly in a Vision. And some take a middle way that it was
partly sensible and visible, and partly mental, and by way of vision. Of
which opinion the great _Cameron_ seems to be, who compares it with that
of _Ezekiel_ who saith: _And the spirit lifted me up between the earth
and the heaven, and brought me in the visions of God to Jerusalem_: And
sheweth that the word Ἀνήχθη doth agree with the Hebrew word נשא,
which is as applicable to lifting up or carrying in a vision, as to
bodily transportation. And that it was either altogether, or partly in a
vision, the learned _Beza_ gives us this note: _Hoc videtur satis
ostendere hæc omnia per visionem quandam, non corporali transvectione &
ostensione esse gesta, quomodo nempe humanitus videre potuisset omnia
regna orbis, & gloriam eorum in momento?_ But though it be the more
sound and rational opinion that the whole transaction was mental, and in
a vision, yet we shall not altogether stand upon that, but if it be
granted that it was corporeal and visible, yet it doth not appear that
our Saviour was in his Body carried by the power of the Devil in the
air, either to the top of an high mountain, nor set upon the pinnacle of
the Temple in _Jerusalem_, and that for these reasons. 1. Our Saviour
did not go to undertake this combat with Satan unwillingly, that he need
be constrained, or carried to try the utmost power and malice of the
Devil, but readily and willingly by the conduct and leading of the holy
Spirit, for the Text saith in _Matthew_; _Then was Jesus led up of the
spirit into the wilderness, to be tempted of the Devil_: And S. _Mark_
saith; _And immediately the spirit driveth him into the wilderness_. And
S. _Luke_ saith: _He was led by the spirit into the wilderness_. _Beza_
saith, _subductus fuit in desertum_, and _Tremellius_ saith, _ductus
fuit_, upon the place in S. _Matthews_ Gospel. And in S. _Luke_
_Tremellius_ saith; _Et duxit eum spiritus in desertum_, and _Beza_,
_actus est ab eodem spiritu in desertum_. And in S. _Mark_ _Tremellius_
saith, _deduxit eum spiritus in desertum_, and _Beza_ rendreth it,
_expellit eum spiritus in desertum_. And because of the Greek word which
is there ἐκβάλλει, he addeth this note, _Non significatur expulsio
violenta, sed vis divina, quæ Christum, (qui ad illud usq; tempus ut
privatus vixerat) nova persona induit, ac luctæ proximæ & ministerio
præparatur_. Therefore saith _Origen_: _Sequebatur planè quasi athleta
ad tentationem sponte proficiscens, & quodammodo loquebatur: Duc quo
vis, & invenies me in omnibus fortiorem_. So that it is most plain that
he was no otherwise led or carried by Satan, but as he was led by the
Holy Ghost, so that he went whithersoever Satan would desire him of his
own mind and accord, and needed not to be carried by the Devil, for S.
_Luke_ useth the same Greek word both for the Holy Spirit leading of
him, and Satans leading of him, so that Satan did not carry his body in
the air, as Men vainly conceive. 2. Though S. _Matthew_ use the word
παραλαμβάνει, which may signifie _assumpsit_, he took him, and set him
upon a pinnacle of the Temple, and took him into an high mountain; yet
it cannot be understood thereby that he took him, and carried his Body,
but that he went before, and led Christ to those places, that he thought
most fit for him to prevail in his temptations, to which places Christ
went not by an unwilling constraint or hurried and carried in the air,
but by a ready willingness, as one that certainly knew, and was assured,
that he should win the Victory where ever, or how great soever the
combat and temptations were. And therefore S. _Luke_ useth the same word
from ἄγω, _duco_, both for the Spirits, and Satans leading, as
signifying no more, but to go before, and lead the way, or to draw one
to such or such a place by persuasion and desire, and not to be carried
in the air, which appeareth to be a vain and forged interpretation, and
not the true meaning of the places.
[Sidenote: Acts 8. 9.]
Concerning _Simon Magus_ we have before in this Treatise sufficiently
proved that he was only a deceiver and Impostor, and what strange feats
he had done to astonish, and stupifie the _Samaritanes_, were only
jugling knacks, or deceits by confederacy, and no supernatural things,
so that here we will say no more, but only add: That though our English
translation say that he bewitched the people of _Samaria_ with
sorceries, and that he himself, when he beheld the miracles and signs
that were done, wondered; yet the word that they translate in the one
place bewitching, and in the other wondered, are both from one _Thema_
which is Ἠξίστημι, _de statu mentis dejicio, facio ut aliquis mente non
constet, perterrefacio, obstupefacio_. And therefore either it ought to
be that the _Samaritanes_ were astonisht at the feats that _Simon_
wrought, and that he himself was astonisht at the miracles of _Philip_,
or that they were both bewitched, for they were both under the same
amazement, and there is no reason at all to give it one sense in one
place, and a different one in the other.
[Sidenote: Acts 13. 10.]
[Sidenote: Acts 19. 13, 16.]
We need not here say any thing of _Elymas_ who is stiled a Magician,
because it is manifest that he was a false Prophet, full of all
subtilty, and all mischief, a Child of the Devil, and an enemy of all
righteousness: which character truly given to him by the unerring
sentence of S. _Paul_, may be really ascribed to the whole tribe and
profession of such kind of seducers and deceivers. Like unto whom were
those _seven Sons of Sceva a Jew_, who are called _exorcists_, that
_took upon them to call over them that had evil spirits, the name of the
Lord Jesus, saying, We adjure you by Jesus, whom Paul preacheth_, but
were soundly beaten for their pains, a fit reward for such vagabonds;
And if all that profess or practise such wicked, vain and lying things
were duely punished, the poor ignorant people would not be so much
abused as they are.
The other places in the New Testament we have handled, and answered, and
also have touched upon that Text in the _Galathians_ where we spoke of
Fascination, but lest it be not sufficient, we shall handle it fully
here. The words are, _O foolish Galathians, who hath bewitched you, that
you should not obey the truth?_ From whence they use thus to argue: If
Witchcraft in the Apostles time had not been known, and practised, he
would not have made use of that Phrase then; concerning which we return
these responsions.
[Sidenote: _Delrio._ _l._ 3. _q._ 4. _sect._ 1. _Concl._ 2.]
1. If we consider natural Fascination was by the Philosophers and Poets
only taken to be contagious steams flowing from the eyes, or breaths of
malevolent and envious persons, that had some infectious diseases, as we
see in the Plague, Small-pox, _Lues Venerea_, soreness of Eyes, Tinea’s,
and the like, which are contagious to others that lie with them, or
converse near them, the infected atomes or steams issuing in a certain
Sphear of activity, are received by the pores, or mouths of the sound
persons, by which they come to be infected also. And this the Poet
witnessed: _Nescio quis teneros oculus mihi fascinat agnos_. Now this
being the common opinion, the Apostle taketh the metaphor from thence,
as who should say, who with their virulent and poysonous opinions have
infected you, that you should not obey the truth. And this is the
genuine meaning of that metaphorical phrase, and no other sense can
rationally and congruously be put upon the place, and this conduceth
nothing to that opinion of Witchcraft that we oppose. For _Philosophica
seu Physica fascinatio non nisi impropriè dici potest fascinatio,
propriè verò est contagio, seu infectio_. And therefore did the learned
_Vallesius_ to the same purpose speak this. _Sed neq; si quis pestilenti
affectus febri, aut etiam sine febre deferens secum seminaria pestis
alium intuens intuentem inficiat, dicetur fascinasse, sed peste
affecisse._
[Sidenote: _Vid. Jo. Lazar. Guttier. de fascino._]
2. Some of the fathers (which may be offered for an objection) do seem
to hold that S. _Paul_ here meant of diabolical fascination, and so
_Tertullian_ in English thus: For there is also something amongst the
Gentiles to be feared, which they call fascination, being a more
unfortunate event of praise, and great glory: this we sometimes
interpret of the Devil. And S. _Hierome_ saith upon this place:
Fascination is when some things by Magical illusions are shewed to the
eyes of Men, otherwise than they are. Also Fascination is vulgarly
called that, which doth hurt Children, for the eyes of certain persons
are said to burn with looking, and this act of theirs is called
Fascination, and it may be that the Devils are subservient to this Sin.
And _Thomas Aquinas_ saith: And this also may be done by Devils, who
have power of moving false imaginations, and bringing them to the
principles of the Senses, by changing the Senses themselves. From whence
we may note these things. 1. That _Tertullian_ saith that they sometimes
interpret this of the Devil, but how truly or upon what grounds he
sheweth not, and it seemeth that sometimes they did interpret it of
something else, for so his words must needs imply. 2. Secondly, S.
_Hierome_ sometime calleth fascination Magical illusions, and sometime
that which doth hurt Children, by the burning of some eyes; and then
comes in with a may be that the Devils are subservient to this sin. So
that he is not certain in his opinion, nor truly knows what fascination
is, but according to vulgar opinion, or blind conjectures. 3. And all
that the Angelical Doctor saith, doth but amount to the delusion of the
Senses, by false imaginations, so that here is no proof either of the
Devil, or his instruments, to cause any real fascination.
[Sidenote: _Vid. Guttier. passim._]
[Sidenote: _Galen. de Incantat._]
3. Those that hold that _Paul_ did allude unto natural, or diabolick
fascination, do but mean magical illusions, whereby the senses are
abused and deceived, to take things to be that which really they are
not, and so are but cheating Incantations and delusory Juglings, for as
_Galen_ (if that piece be truly his) saith: _Incantationes verba sunt
decipientia rationales animas secundum spei inceptionem, aut secundum
timoris incisionem_. So that though S. _Paul_ had taken the metaphor
from that which was commonly accounted fascination, there is no
necessity, that therefore the metaphor must in all points be true: it is
sufficient that the common opinion was so, from whose usage of such
terms the Apostle useth the word, to fascinate, or inchant. And of this
opinion was S. _Hierome_ himself who saith thus much: _Dignè Paulum, qui
etsi imperitus est sermone non tamen & scientia, debemus exponere non
quod scierit esse fascinum, qui vulgò putatur nocere, sed usus sermone
sit trivii, & ut in cætero, ita & in hoc quoq; loco verbum quotidianæ
sermocinationis assumpserit_. So that from hence it is most evident,
that the using of the word fascination by the Apostle, doth not inferr
the being of the thing, but only the opinion of the vulgar, that
believed things that were not. And of the same judgment is _Thomas
Aquinas_ in these words: _Propriè dicit Apostolus, quis vos fascinavit?
quasi dicat, vos estis sicut homo ludificatus qui res manifestas aliter
accipit quàm sint in rei veritate_. Therefore we shall conclude this
point with the sentiment of S. _Hierome_: _Nunc illud in causa est, quod
ex opinione vulgi sumptum putamus exemplum, ut quomodo tenera ætas
noceri dicitur fascino, sic etiam Galatæ in Christi fide nuper nati, &
nutriti lacte, & solido cibo velut quodam fascinante sunt nociti_.
[Sidenote: _Vid. Valles. de sacr. Philosoph._]
[Sidenote: _Galen_ _l._ 8. _de compos. medic._]
4. But howsoever fascination might be understood, yet it is plain, that
except the _Effluvia_ or steams of Bodies that had contagious diseases,
entring into other sound Bodies, and thereby infecting them with their
noysome vapours, or Atomes, there is nothing, but what was vain belief
and credulous superstition, as the learned _Vallesius_ tells us in these
words, thus rendered in English: “But if this be the way or reason of
fascination, any one may easily understand, that fascination is a
certain superstitious fear, arising from foolish credulity, of which
sort are many other things in the life of Man, as for argument, that
this opinion is more approved of by Women than by Men, and far more of
the unlearned than of the learned. Although (he saith) I also see that
there are those amongst the learned that are rather lovers of subtilty
than verity, who take care to defend those things that the vulgar do
admire. By which they would be accounted judicious magical Juglers, and
Men skilful of secrets.” And therefore he thus concludeth: “Therefore
the name of fascination is ancient, and according to the ancient
signification, it doth not signifie any natural disease, but a vain
superstition, arising from vulgar opinion, and therefore neither
_Hippocrates_, nor _Galen_, nor any of the ancient Physicians, that I
know of do mention fascination, neither amongst the differences nor
causes of Diseases. From whence again is taken no small argument of its
vanity.” Therefore we shall conclude this point with that remarkable
saying of _Galen_. “_Falsæ etenim opiniones animas hominum
præoccupantes, non solum surdos, sed & cæcos faciunt, ita ut videre
nequeant, quæ aliis conspicua apparent._”
5. The Angelical Doctor with the consent of the most part of all the
learned do affirm that the Devil by his own power cannot change
corporeal matter, unless he apply proportionate actives to fit passives,
to produce those effects he intendeth; As for instance, he can cause
burning, because there is a combustive agent in nature; but if that were
awanting, or if there were no combustible matter, how should he cause
any ignition? But if he be supposed to work diabolical fascination, for
which there is no agent in nature, it being but an imaginary thing in
the heads of the deluded vulgar; then it will necessarily follow, that
he can work no fascination at all, and so the whole opinion of the
Witchmongers falls to the ground. For it is manifest that there is
contagion, by the infected _Effluvia_ or steams issuing from a diseased
Body to another by which it may be contaminated, but otherwise there is
no natural fascination, nor any agent in nature to produce that effect,
and therefore there can be no Diabolical fascination at all.